3. Applying the HRBA Framework
3. Applying the HRBA Framework
3. Applying the HRBA Framework
To effectively apply the HRBA in the public education system, education duty-holders should use practical tools that strengthen accountability and continuous improvement. These include collecting and analyzing disaggregated data, developing structural,[9] process,[10] and outcome[11] indicators, publishing accessible reports, and embedding participation and accountability mechanisms. Together, these tools help establish baselines, monitor progress, and integrate findings into a comprehensive evaluation of human rights compliance. Applying these mechanisms across all stages ensures transparency, community engagement, and measurable progress toward substantive equality.
The focus of the first six stages of the HRBA is about embedding human rights principles into organizational systems, ensuring resource allocations reflect commitments to address systemic discrimination, and designing initiatives that are measurable, and outcomes focused. During these early stages, structural, process and outcomes indicators should be developed to ensure monitoring and accountability are embedded before implementation begins.
Stage seven: monitoring and evaluation draws on the indicators developed in the earlier stages to assess whether duty-holders’ initiatives are producing substantive equality outcomes. This stage integrates qualitative and quantitative findings from earlier stages to provide a holistic assessment of progress, identifying successes, gaps, and next steps.
Education duty-holders are encouraged to align the implementation of this Guide with their existing strategic planning, performance measurements, and accountability processes.
Applying the HRBA Framework
 |
| Figure 1: Seven stages of the HRBA |
Throughout all stages, education duty-holders are encouraged to use diverse data sources, engage affected communities, and apply HRBA principles such as participation, accountability, transparency, and non-discrimination. This approach enables a comprehensive, evidence-based assessment of progress and areas
for improvement.
If duty-holders have not utilized the OHRC’s HRBA tool prior to developing and implementing their initiatives, the OHRC encourages them to review the Human Rights-Based Approach (HRBA) Framework.
3.1. Stage one: Context analysis
During stage one of the HRBA, education duty-holders should identify human rights issues, systemic barriers and historical factors affecting Black students, and staff. Duty-holders are encouraged to consider the intersectional impacts of other Code grounds (e.g., race, creed, place of origin, disability, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation). Duty-holders must ensure their initiatives are grounded in human rights principles and designed to meet their legal obligation under the Code and other related legislation.
This may include examining:
- Historical and ongoing disparities in informal streaming, discipline (suspension, expulsion, exclusion), graduation rates, and special education placements or Individual Education Plans (IEP).
- Underrepresentation of Black staff in leadership roles.
- Under-enrollment of Black prospective students in teachers’ college programs.
- Experiences of anti-Black discrimination and harassment in classrooms (work environment).
- The intersectional impacts of other Code grounds for both Black staff and students.
At this stage, education duty-holders are encouraged to begin identifying structural, process, and outcome indicators to guide accountability. Outlining early indicators will assist duty-holders to clarify baselines and help identify what meaningful outcomes may look like.
3.2. Stage two: Undertaking research & analysis
During stage two, education duty-holders are encouraged to collect and analyze qualitative and quantitative data to identify examples of anti-Black discrimination and harassment within their organization or institution. Effective data collection is critical for an accurate and comprehensive evaluation of human rights obligations. Duty-holders are encouraged to collect quantitative and qualitative data, disaggregated by relevant factors such as race, creed, gender, age, disability, and other Code grounds to identify disparities and systemic barriers.
Examples of data may include:
- Unions examining grievance data related to racial harassment, discrimination in hiring, promotion and retention, and poisoned work environment.
- Faculties of Education reviewing admission, retention, and practicum placement experiences of Black teacher candidates.
- School boards reviewing hiring, retention, and promotion data.
- Ontario College of Teachers examining complaints data related to anti-Black racism and discrimination.
At this stage, the drafted indicators should be refined based on disaggregated quantitative and qualitative evidence.
 |
| Image 4 |
3.3. Stage three: Planning engagement
During stage three, education duty-holders should design and implement an inclusive and meaningful consultation process that centers Black communities, particularly Black students, and staff. Duty-holders should facilitate consultations with Black students, staff, families, and community groups to identify policy gaps and co-design solutions. Communications material development should be inclusive, culturally responsive, and resourced adequately to meet the needs of the communities.
Engagement may include:
- The Ministry engaging with Black education advocacy organizations.
- School boards engaging with Black education advocacy organizations, Black student associations, and parent/guardian groups.
- Unions consulting with internal equity resource groups and/or external Black caucuses or affinity groups. Drafted indicators should be shared and refined through engagement to ensure the outcomes meet the needs of the affected communities.
 |
| Image 5 |
3.4. Stage four: Developing options & recommendations
During stage four, education duty-holders should develop options and recommendations that address the root causes of anti-Black discrimination and harassment and promote substantive equality. Recommendations should consider systemic reforms and include strategies for data collection to monitor progress. Duty-holders should ensure that recommendations are measurable, and outcomes focused, and actionable. At this stage, indicators should be finalized and be explicitly tied to each recommendation. Duty-holders are encouraged to review the Calls to Action in Dreams Delayed (see Appendix C: Dreams delayed calls to action).
3.5. Stage five: Seeking approvals
During stage five, education duty-holders should document the processes of initiative(s) adoption and implementation, including risk assessments, decision rationales, and mitigation strategies. Identifying risks is essential to ensuring that initiatives achieve their intended outcomes in practice, not just in principle. Potential risks may represent factors that impede duty-holders from meeting their obligations under the Code and may also negatively impact relationships with the affected communities.
Without identifying risks, such as decisions being perceived as symbolic or performative, initiatives developed without meaningful consultation and collaboration, or gaps in data collection, analysis may result in efforts that undermine trust and exacerbate systemic barriers. Risks can be mitigated with clear actionable strategies such as establishing standards for meaningful engagement and co-development, ensuring accessible and inclusive communication, allocating adequate and sustainable resources, and requiring transparent, public reporting to strengthen accountability, credibility and evidence-based decision making.
The legal obligations under the Code should inform and drive the approval process. Duty-holders are encouraged to ensure clear accountability and transparency mechanisms along with the measurable indicators developed in the earlier stages are in place before proceeding to the next stage.
3.6. Stage six: Implementing programs & services
During stage six, education duty-holders should implement approved recommendations into concrete institutional changes. During this stage, duty-holders should also include monitoring compliance, and provide communications and trainings that will ensure the intended outcomes of the recommendations are achieved and meet the needs of those affected.
3.7. Stage seven: Monitoring & evaluation
During stage seven, education duty-holders will integrate quantitative and qualitative findings from all the earlier stages to assess whether their initiatives are leading to substantive equality. Where constraints or barriers are identified that impede progress toward meeting legal obligations, duty-holders will share these findings with affected communities and work with them to co-design corrective actions and next steps.
This stage also emphasizes transparency and continuous improvement. Duty-holders are encouraged to publicly report on evaluation findings. Where the evaluation identifies gaps or limitations, duty-holders are encouraged to revisit and redesign indicators in collaboration with affected communities. Baseline data should be updated as needed to reflect changes in initiatives and to support ongoing monitoring of outcomes over time.
 |
| Image 6 |
Example of key questions
Below is a non-exhaustive list of examples duty-holders in the education system may consider during stage seven. For profession-specific questions, duty-holders are encouraged to collaborate with affected communities.
- Based on policies, resources, and outcomes data, are your Black students and staff experiencing substantively equal treatment and opportunities?
- What external socio-economic, political, or cultural factors affect Black students and staff from the realization of their human rights in education?
- How are duty-holders ensuring accountability, transparency, and follow-through on commitments to combat anti-Black discrimination and harassment?
- What institutional or structural constraints limit progress (e.g., funding inequities, resistance to change, lack of culturally relevant resources) and what strategies can mitigate them effectively?
Examples of key activities
Below is a non-exhaustive list of examples duty-holders in the education system may consider during stage seven. For profession-specific activities, duty-holders are encouraged to collaborate with affected communities.
- Synthesize the data from the previous stages (e.g., policies, disaggregated outcome data, climate surveys, employee/member engagement surveys, community consultations) to form a comprehensive assessment.
- Identify systemic barriers (e.g., systemic bias in curriculum, funding inequities) and structural challenges with input from rights-holders.
- Develop an action plan assigning responsibility, timelines, and monitoring mechanisms.
- Engage Black students, staff, families, and community groups in interpreting findings, confirming conclusions, and shaping next steps.
- Publicly share findings in accessible formats and involve communities in the next steps.
- Review whether Black students and staff are safe reporting discrimination, harassment and whether remedies are timely, reasonable, and effective.
- Review and update monitoring mechanisms to improve future assessments.
Examples of data sources
Below is a non-exhaustive list of examples that may apply to education duty-holders across professions in the education system. Duty-holders are expected to identify primary and secondary data sources specific to their needs. Duty-holders and their institutions are encouraged to collect and analyze disaggregated data categorized by Code grounds.
- Integrated reports combining qualitative and quantitative data from earlier stages.
- Community feedback on draft assessments.
- External research or socio-economic data identifying barriers (e.g., poverty, housing insecurity, systemic over-policing) that intersect with education outcomes.
- Documentation of action plans and follow-up procedures.
 |