Local News
Despite JNF Canada losing its latest appeal in the Federal Court of Canada to have its charitable status restored, it will continue the appeal process all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada, if necessary
By BERNIE BELLAN (June 17, 2025) Readers may recall that last August, in what was a shocking decision by the Canada Revenue Agency, JNF Canada lost its charitable status, which meant that it could no longer issue tax receipts for charitable donations. Further, JNF Canada was facing the prospect of having to wind down its operations and disburse all its assets by November 13, 2024, or face a 100% tax.
At the time, Canadian Jewish News reporter Ellin Bessner wrote a detailed examination of what had happened and why it happened.
Bessner noted the following reasons that the CRA had revoked JNF Canada’s charitable status:
“The agency’s findings in the audit ranged from where the charity’s books and records had been kept in 2011 and 2012 (mostly in Israel, which was a no-no), to what language the paperwork and receipts were kept in (mostly in Hebrew, which is not illegal but makes work difficult for auditors), to the conclusion that JNF Canada’s founding charitable purposes of relieving poverty in Israel by paying the salaries of indigent labourers, were not being met.”
Why would the CRA not enter into negotiations with JNF Canada over a new compliance agreement?
In an email received from Lance Davis, CEO of JNF Canada, on June 6, 2025, however, Davis addressed the particular concern to which Bessner referred in her August 2024 article – that JNF Canada was not meeting its “charitable object.”
Davis wrote: “The revocation is based on the CRA’s belief that our current charitable objective is no longer an acceptable charitable objective (after being acceptable for almost 60 years). It is not that the objective isn’t being met. It should be noted that we offered 10 new charitable objectives, which were previously approved for other charities, but the CRA never acknowledged these new objectives and continued to reject our requests for a compliance agreement. “
The CJN article offers more reasons for the CRA decision to revoke
Bessner’s article continued: “Another major issue was that because of missing paperwork and superficial oversight on the ground in Israel, it was felt the Montreal-based JNF Canada hadn’t been in control of or directing its own operations overseas. CRA believed the charity was acting merely as a funnel of money to the Jerusalem-based agency, the Jewish National Fund/Keren Kayemeth LeIsrael, which ran the projects.
“A further red flag for auditors were several projects in 2011 and 2012 that benefited the Israel Defence Forces, such as construction of buildings and green areas on IDF military bases. Registered charities are not permitted to support a foreign military financially, under Canadian laws. Some other projects were located in the West Bank and on other disputed land, the CRA found, something which Canada’s foreign policy frowns on.
Bessner further noted that “JNF Canada disagreed with the CRA’s view of that last category—and still does. But in 2019, the charity assured the public that it had stopped funding both kinds of projects after 2016, in order to comply with CRA requirements in good faith.”
A 2019 internal CRA memo says JNF Canada’s charitable status would not be revoked until the appeals process was exhausted
Immediately upon learning that the CRA had revoked JNF Canada’s charitable status, representatives of JNF Canada launched a series of legal appeals to have that decision reversed.
What is even more perplexing, however, notwithstanding the various reasons the CRA may have given for revoking JNF Canada’s charitable status, is why the CRA took that step when apparently, in August 2019, senior administrators within CRA had decided not to revoke JNF Canada’s charitable status until such time as JNF Canada had exhausted all its appeals including going so far as appealing to the Supreme Court of Canada.
In an internal email circulated among three CRA employees in August 2019 (shown here), and which was written by Melissa Shaughnessy, who is currently listed as the “Acting /Manager, Charities Directorate, Compliance Division | Canada Revenue Agency,” Ms. Shaughnessy wrote: “I confirmed that our process would then be to await the decision of the objection and any possible subsequent FCA (Federal Court of Canada)/SCC (Supreme Court of Canada) appeals before taking any further steps toward revocation.” (emphasis ours)
As Lance Davis noted in an email sent to me on June 6, JNF Canada had already begun an appeal process to avoid having its charitable status revoked by the CRA. When the August 2024 decision to revoke its status was suddenly issued, notwithstanding the decision among CRA administrators, evident in the memo seen here, to await the results of the entire appeals process to which JNF Canada was entitled before revoking its charitable status, JNF Canada was blindsided.
Davis noted, with reference to what was written in that August 2019 CRA memo: “This approach was consistent with past practice of the CRA as reflected in its policies, publications and internal communications, and we relied on this assurance in our decision-making. Nonetheless, in 2024, the CRA published our revocation despite our Appeal 1 being active. …Appeal 2 is the appeal that we’ve now had two hearings on, both of which ruled on jurisdiction but not yet on the merits of revoking our status. We are currently determining with our leadership if we will proceed with another hearing to rule on the merits of our case, which we still believe are strong.”
We asked the CRA why that August 2019 memo which said revocation would not take place until JNF Canada’s appeals process in the courts was exhausted was reversed?
We contacted the CRA media department on June 10 to ask why, if the August 2019 memo gave clear indication that the CRA was not going to revoke JNF Canada’s charitable status until such time as all appeals by JNF Canada in the courts had been exhausted, the CRA had gone ahead in August 2024 and revoked JNF Canada’s charitable status? (We attached a screenshot of that August 2019 memo in case the CRA would take the position that there had never been any decision to await the results of JNF Canada’s appeals process.)
It took six full days for a media representative of the CRA to respond. In a typically Kafakaesque manner the CRA media representative simply entirely avoided dealing with the question about the memo, writing instead:
“The confidentiality provisions of the Act prevent the CRA from commenting on specific cases; however, we can provide you with the following general information.
“As mentioned in our response of August 30, 2024, we can confirm that the charitable status of the Jewish National Fund of Canada Inc. / Fonds National Juif du Canada Inc. (the Organization) was revoked effective August 10, 2024, in accordance with the Act.
“The CRA’s decision to revoke an organization’s charitable status is not taken lightly. Every organization facing revocation has the right to seek recourse.
“For more information about revocations, please visit: Revoking registered status – Canada.ca.
“The courts provide Canadians with an independent review of disputed issues, and court decisions serve to clarify the law or resolve disputes between the CRA and taxpayers. The CRA does not comment on the specific details of court cases to respect the confidentiality provisions of the Acts we administer. Publicly available information on this case may be obtained from the courts.”
However, as we noted in a previous article on our website, the CRA did release 358 pages of documents to us pertaining to its decision to revoke JNF Canada’s charitable status, following its decision to revoke. As Jonathan Rothman, writing on the CJN website, noted: “The communications branch of the CRA recently provided 358 pages of its correspondence with JNF Canada. Officials said that due to confidentiality restrictions in the Income Tax Act, the CRA can release this material only after revoking a charity’s status. ”
So, it is somewhat specious for the media spokesperson to claim that “The CRA does not comment on the specific details of court cases to respect the confidentiality provisions of the Acts we administer” when, in fact, the CRA was quite willing to release 358 pages of documents explaining why it had suddenly revoked JNF Canada’s charitable status in August 2024. The question remains: What changed from the time that memo was circulated in August 2019 among CRA administrators and August 2024, when JNF Canada’s charitable status was revoked, without any prior notice given to JNF Canada that was about to happen?
The appeals process continues to take its course
It is somewhat confusing to follow the appeals process which JNF Canada undertook. One was an appeal through the Federal Court and another was an appeal through the Federal Court of Canada.
As Ellin Bessner explained in a November 10, 2024 article which appeared on the CJN website,
in November 2024 the Federal Court turned down JNF Canada’s request that the CRA’s decision to revoke its charitable status be reversed. Bessner wrote that “Jewish National Fund of Canada has lost its first major legal battle to stop the tax department’s revocation of its charitable status, which came into effect three months ago.
“Late in the afternoon of Friday, Nov. 8, a Federal Court judge dismissed JNF Canada’s application for a judicial review—and the judge also dismissed a request for an injunction to force the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) to remove the official revocation notice that was printed in the Canada Gazette on Aug. 10.”
But, as Lance Davis noted in his June 6 email to me, “the November decision was not on the merits of our case. It was simply that the Federal Court was not the correct court to rule on our case and so the motion was dismissed and we were advised to take our case to the Federal Court of Appeal.”
However, early in June, JNF Canada lost its appeal to the Federal Court of Canada to have its charitable status restored.
Again though, as Davis explained to me, “This recent ruling was again only on jurisdiction. We appealed the Federal Court’s first decision that it did not have jurisdiction. The reason our lawyers chose this route was we truly believed the Federal Court was the correct place to start our judicial review. Time is of the essence as we do not want to operate as a non-profit indefinitely. Both CRA and JNF agreed that since the FCA was hearing our case, they should rule on the merits and not on whether or not the FC had jurisdiction. They declined to rule on the merits and instead, simply upheld the FC ruling that the FCA is the correct court to hear our case.”
Letter sent to JNF Canada supporters on June 4 about the most recent court decision
However, with that most recent court decision going against JNF Canada, a letter was sent to JNF Canada supporters on June 4 by Lance Davis, and Nathan Disenhouse, President, JNF Canada. That letter noted that “This week, the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed our appeal, concluding that the Federal Court did not have jurisdiction over our claim that the Canada Revenue Agency’s (CRA) actions deprived JNF Canada of procedural fairness.
“The merits of our case – our arguments as to why the process afforded to us lacked procedural fairness – have still not been ruled on.
“While we are, of course, disappointed by this result, and while it is not the result we had expected, we always knew it was a possibility. For this reason, we have been actively planning next steps.
“When the revocation of our charitable status was published in the Canada Gazette on August 10, 2024, we indicated that we had been blindsided. This is because in 2019 the CRA clearly and explicitly assured JNF Canada that the CRA ‘would not proceed with a revocation until JNF had exhausted their appeals process in Federal Court of Appeal or Supreme Court of Canada.’ (emphasis ours) This approach was consistent with past practice of the CRA as reflected in its policies, publications and internal communications and we relied on this assurance in our decision-making.
“It is also important to emphasize that over the past decade JNF Canada has attempted to engage without success with the CRA in the hope of finding a mutually acceptable path forward. Approximately two weeks ago, JNF Canada made a settlement offer in advance of this hearing, which was rejected without a counteroffer or any type of dialogue. We urge the CRA, under the leadership of the newly appointed Honourable Wayne Long Secretary of State, Canada Revenue Agency and Financial Institutions, to engage with us in the hope of our arriving at a mutually satisfactory agreement.
“In looking ahead, JNF Canada will continue to challenge the CRA’s revocation of JNF’s charitable status and its decision to publish notice of the revocation when it did in 2024. We have a multi-pronged strategy in place which will ensure that all reasonable legal processes are engaged to protect JNF Canada’s rights.
“While the court ruling was surprising and disappointing, please rest assured that we remain committed to helping address the needs of Israelis during these troubling times and to pursuing justice through the judicial process.”
Davis added this, in his June 6 email to me:
“While we are disappointed with the outcome of our appeal, it is important to clarify that our main/underlying appeal is still in the court system at the Federal Court of Appeal. While we do not have a set date yet, we are expecting our case to be heard in late 2025 or early 2026.”
What has the impact of the CRA decision been on JNF Canada the past 10 months?
So, how have JNF Canada’s operations been affected since that August 2024 decision by the CRA to revoke its charitable status?
Davis wrote, in his email to
“JNF Canada has certainly experienced difficulties since we were revoked on August 10, 2024. It is evident that our revenue has diminished. For example, major gifts from charitable foundations cannot be donated to JNF Canada as these gifts can only be sent to a registered charity. However, we are pleased to share that thousands of Canadians from coast to coast have made contributions to JNF Canada without a charitable receipt. They believe in our mission and mandate so much that they forgo the benefits of a charitable receipt. To us, this demonstrates strong support from our community, and we are as motivated as ever to find a resolution.
“In the meantime, JNF is continuing to proudly operate as a non-profit and support the projects and programs we know are of deep importance to our community here in Canada. Thankfully, we have collaborated with like-minded charities. We are pleased to support three critical projects right now: the rehabilitation of Canada Park’s forests, the Ashdod Rehabilitation & Therapy Centre and the Sderot Resilience Centre. “
Manitoba/Saskatchewan division of JNF Canada carrying on
We also contacted David Greaves, Executive Director, JNF Canada, Manitoba/Saskatchewan, to ask him what impact the CRA August 2024 ruling has had on the Winnipeg office?
Greaves was upbeat in his response. He noted, for instance, that rather than laying off employees in the Winnipeg office, the number of positions there had increased from 3 1/2 to 4.
As well, Greaves observed that the Manitoba/Saskatchewan division was coming off a very successful Negev Gala – despite not being able to issue tax receipts for attendees at the Gala or donors who did not attend the Gala but still wanted to support JNF Canada, and that the office here was already planning next year’s Gala.
Finally, Greaves explained that JNF Canada was now working with a charitable organization called the Israel Magen Fund (which is also known as “Zaka”) to continue working on two projects that JNF Canada had already initiated within the past couple of years and had not been completed: the Ashdod Rehabilitation Centre and the Sderot Rehabilitation Centre.
Greaves advised that anyone wanting to donate to either of those two projects contact the Israel Magen Fund of Canada.
Local News
Winnipegger liver recipient Mark Kagan now in need of new kidney
By MYRON LOVE About a year ago, Winnipegger Mark Kagan reached out to the Jewish community through the pages of the Jewish Post (and jewishpostandnews.ca) in his efforts to find a liver donor. At the time, his liver and his health were rapidly failing and he was quickly running out of time.
Back then, the former Best Western Hotels manager – who is in his mid-60s – reported that there is no cure for his condition (a non-alcohol related rare liver disease called Nodular Regenerative Hyperplasia).
“My only hope for survival is a liver transplant,” he said.
The good news is that he was able to get a liver transplant this past April in Toronto and his recovery went well. Within a short time, he was able to eat normally and resume exercising. He spent three weeks post-op in the hospital in Toronto and another two weeks at the Health Sciences Centre before being cleared to go home again.
The bad news was that once his liver failed, in turn, it caused his kidneys to fail. “My doctors originally hoped that my kidney function would return on its own once the liver was transplanted,” he notes.
That didn’t happen. Now Kagan has to have dialysis three times a week while trying to find a kidney donor.
On Tuesday, December 9, Kagan’s quest for a kidney donor will be the focus of a program at the Rady JCC hosted by Renewal Canada, a Toronto based organization that works within the Jewish community to find kidney donors and facilitate transplants. The event – that begins at 7:30 pm – is described as a Kidney Donation Awareness and Swab Drive with the hope that a donor can be found for Kagan. Speakers will include Rabbis Carnie and Kliel Rose – both discussing the mitzvah of organ donation, Penny Kravetsky representing Renewal Canada, and past donor Esther Dick, as well as Kagan.
Kagan adds a special thank you to Rebbitzen Bracha Altein for her role in directing his mother to Renewal Canada.
Comments that Kagan made last year in the Post article still ring true:
“Your support means everything to me and my family,” Kagan said. “Even if you cannot donate, sharing my story could connect me with someone who can. Thank you for taking the time to read and consider helping in this crucial time.”
Interested readers can register by going online at https://www.renewalcanada.org/
Local News
Manitoba trained Jewish physician now living in US laments state of medical care in Canada
By BERNIE BELLAN (Nov. 27, 2025) Introduction: We received a comment this morning from a former Winnipegger who had something to say about the state of medical care in Manitoba. Once you read her message you will be able to read an exchange of emails into which we entered that give more information about her:
I’m a physician who graduated from the University of Manitoba medical school (class of 1999). After training, I moved to Arizona to practice as a gastroenterologist. During my training in Winnipeg, I was always told how bad the American health care system was. I am here to tell you that this is incorrect. The poorest American who can’t afford health insurance and qualifies for state funded insurance has better health care than ALL of you.
I work in private practice. Yes, I’m busy. Yes, it takes many weeks to see me. However , if a family physician calls me and asks me to see a patient urgently, I will. If a patient needs a procedure urgently, I will get it done. If a patient needs to speak to me after my office hours or on weekends and holidays, I call them back. I am not the exception to the rule. I am practicing standard of care.
My niece has been in an out of the children’s emergency room (in Winnipeg) for several weeks because of kidney stones. She has been told numerous times by numerous physicians that her case is not “urgent”. Apparently, you can only get care if you become “urgent”. Urgent means that you are really sick and have developed complications. So, my niece has to end up in the ICU with sepsis (infection) and in renal failure for her to have the procedure she needs? What she was given was a prescription for morphine. Great, getting a teenager hooked on opiods as a way to treat kidney stones , that’s the answer? Her urologist told her mother (my sister) that the system is broken. Finally, an honest answer but in no way a solution.
The American health care system is not perfect but it’s significantly better than what you have. I’m appreciative of my excellent training I received in Winnipeg however, I could never work in your broken system as now I know better.
Good luck to you all.
Dr. Elisa Faybush
In response to Dr. Faybush’s comment, we sent her the following email:
Hi Dr. Faybush,
I read your message about the state of health care in Manitoba with great interest.
I wear 2 hats: I’m both an editor at the Jewish Post newspaper, also the publisher of a website called jewishpostandnews.ca
I would consider printing your message, but I’m curious: Is there a particular reason that you sent it to a Jewish publication?
For instance, are you Jewish yourself? It might put things into some sort of context which would explain why the letter was sent to us – or perhaps you sent the same message to other publications.
It would be helpful if you could elaborate on why you sent your message to us.
Regards,
Bernie Bellan
Dr. Faybush responded:
Hi Bernie
Yes I’m Jewish. Raised in garden city. My grand parents were Ann and Nathan Koslovsky
I sent the letter to the Winnipeg free press and was contacted for an interview but they wanted to interview my sister as well. Unfortunately my sister didn’t want to be interviewed.
I read your publication on line regularly to keep up with the Jewish community in Winnipeg.
My family still lives in Winnipeg and I was home this past summer for my niece’s graduation
I will always consider Winnipeg my home.
I’m so frustrated with the Canadian health care system and wanted the people from Winnipeg to know they deserve better.
Elisa Faybush
We wrote back:
Thanks for the speedy reply Elisa. I’ll add something to the end of your message about your roots.
And, for what it’s worth, I agree totally with you about the state of health care in Canada. It’s a sacred cow but this cow should be put out to pasture.
She responded:
100% agree
Feel free to call if you would like
(number redacted)
We wrote:
Well, if you’d like me to do a profile of you – which we do quite often of doctors who left Manitoba, usually written by Gerry Posner, I’d be glad to do that.
But it would be a full-on profile, not just a lament for the Canadian health care system. By the way, I searched your name in the History of Jewish Physicians in Manitoba, which was authored by Eva Wiseman a few years ago. I didn’t see your name in there, but one of the criteria for inclusion in that book was someone must have practised in Manitoba for at least 5 years after graduating. I assume you left before 5 years had elapsed. Is that right?
Elisa responded:
You are correct. I left after residency to complete my fellowship in gastroenterology in Arizona and never left.
I went to garden city collegiate graduated in 1991 and then went on to complete my bachelor of science at the u of w.
I’m not looking for a profile but thank you for the offer. I just need to express my opinion and I appreciate you giving me an outlet to do so.
We wrote:
When did you graduate from medical school?
Elisa responded:
1999
We wrote:
And did you go to Arizona immediately upon graduating?
Elisa responded:
After graduating u of m medical school in 1999 I completed my internal medicine residency at the u of m from 1999-2002. I then left to go to the university of Arizona in Tucson for my gi fellowship from 2002-2005. I then moved to Phoenix and started private practice. I just completed 20 yrs in practice this year.
We wrote:
ok great – I think it’s important to provide a fuller description of your career to lend some further significance to your original comment. By the way, you must have studied under Chuch Bernstein – right?
She responded:
Yes. He is the reason I did my fellowship in the USA. He encouraged me to do so. He probably thought I would come back to work in Winnipeg like he did!
We wrote:
He’s a great guy. I bet I know a lot of your schoolmates from med school. It’s too bad the Canadian medical system has alienated so many talented people. I still have lots of friends who were doctors and who still live here, but they’re all so embittered about our system.
Elisa responded:
I never practiced in Winnipeg but I hear about the problems with it as family members have to navigate through this broken system.
If I lived and practiced in Winnipeg I would know the doctors and specialists that I could call to help my family members but I’ve been gone for so long I don’t have any relationships with anyone anymore:
Local News
Simkin Centre shows accumulated deficit of $779,426 for year end March 31, 2025 – but most personal care homes in Winnipeg are struggling to fund daily operations
By BERNIE BELLAN The last (November 20) issue of the Jewish Post had as an insert a regular publication of the Simkin Centre called the “Simkin Star.”
Looking through the 16 pages of the Simkin Star I noticed that three full pages were devoted to financial information about the Simkin Centre, including the financial statement for the most recent fiscal year (which ended March 31, 2025). I was rather shocked to see that Simkin had posted a deficit of $406,974 in 2025, and this was on top of a deficit of $316,964 in 2024.
In the past month, I had also been looking at financial statements for the Simkin Centre going back to 2019. I had seen that Simkin had been running surpluses for four straight years – even through Covid.
But seeing the most recent deficit led me to wonder: Is the Simkin Centre’s situation unusual in its having run quite large deficits the past two years? I know that, in speaking with Laurie Cerqueti, CEO of the Simkin Centre, over the years, that she had often complained that not only Simkin, but many other personal care homes do not receive sufficient funding from the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority.
At the same time, an article I had read by Free Press Faith writer John Longhurst, and which was published in the August 5, 2025 issue of the Free Press had been sticking in my brain because what Longhurst wrote about the lack of funding increases by the WRHA for food costs in personal care homes deeply troubled me.
Titled “Driven by faith, frustrated by funding,” Longhurst looked at how three different faith-based personal care homes in Winnipeg have dealt with the ever increasing cost of food.
One sentence in that article really caught my attention, however, when Longhurst wrote that the “provincial government, through the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, has not increased the amount of funding it provides for care-home residents in Manitoba since 2009.”
Really? I wondered. Is that true?
As a result, I began a quest to try and ascertain whether what Longhurst claimed was the case was actually the case.
For the purpose of this article, personal care homes will be referred to as PCHs.
During the course of my gathering material for this article I contacted a number of different individuals, including: Laurie Cerqueti, CEO of the Simkin Centre; the CEO of another personal care home who wished to remain anonymous; Gladys Hrabi, who wears many hats, among them CEO of Manitoba Association for Residential and Community Care Homes for Everyone ( MARCHE), the umbrella organization for 24 not-for-profit personal care homes in Manitoba; and a representative of the WRHA.
I also looked at financial statements for six different not-for-profit PCHs in Winnipeg. (Financial statements for some, but not all PCHs, are available to look at on the Province of Manitoba website. Some of those financial statements are for 2025 while others are for 2024. Still, looking at them together provides a good idea how comparable revenue and expenses are for different PCHs.)
How personal care homes are funded
In order to gain a better understanding of how personal care homes are funded it should be understood that the WRHA maintains supervision of 39 different personal care homes in Winnipeg, some of which are privately run but most of which are not-for-profit. The WRHA provides funding for all personal care homes at a rate of approximately 75% of all operational funding needs and there have been regular increases in funding over the years for certain aspects of operations (including wages, benefits, and maintenance of the homes) but, as shall be explained later, increases in funding for food have not been included in those increases.
The balance of funding for PCHs comes from residential fees (which are set by the provincial government and which are tied to income); occasional funding from the provincial government to “improve services, technology, and staffing within personal care homes,”; and funds that some PCHs are able to raise on their own through various means (such as the Simkin Centre Foundation).
But, in Longhurst’s article about personal care homes he noted that there are huge disparities in the levels of service provided among different homes.
He wrote: “Some of Winnipeg’s 37 personal-care homes provide food that is mass-produced in an off-site commercial kitchen, frozen and then reheated and served to residents.” (I should note that different sources use different figures for the number of PCHs in Winnipeg. Longhurst’s article uses the figure “37,” while the WRHA’s website says the number is “39.” My guess is that the difference is a result of three different homes operated together by the same organization under the name “Actionmarguerite.”)
How does the WRHA determine how much to fund each home?
So, if different homes provide quite different levels of service, how does the WRHA determine how much to fund each home?
For an answer, I turned to Gladys Hrabi of MARCHE, who gave me a fairly complicated explanation. According to Gladys, the “WRHA uses what’s called a global/median rate funding model. This means all PCHs—regardless of size, ownership, or actual costs—are funded at roughly the same daily rate per resident. For 2023/24, that rate (including the resident charge) was about $200+ (sorry I need to check with WRHA the actual rate) per resident day.”
But, if different residents pay different resident charges, wouldn’t that mean that if a home had a much larger number of residents who were paying the maximum residential rate (which is currently set at $37,000 per year) then that home would have much greater revenue? I wondered.
Laurie Cerqueti of the Simkin Centre provided me with an answer to that question. She wrote: “Residents at any pch pay a per diem based on income and then the government tops up to the set amount.” Thus, for the year ending March 31, 2025 residential fees brought in $5,150,657 for the Simkin Centre. That works out to approximately $27,000 per resident. I checked the financial statements for the five other PCHs in Winnipeg to which I referred earlier, and the revenue from residential fees was approximately the same per resident as what the Simkin Centre receives.
Despite large increases in funding by the WRHA for personal care homes in recent years, those increases have not gone toward food
I was still troubled by John Longhurst’s having written in his article that the “provincial government, through the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, has not increased the amount of funding it provides for care-home residents in Manitoba since 2009.”
These days, when you perform a search on the internet, AI provides much more detailed answers to questions than what the old Google searches would.
Thus, when I asked the question: “How much funding does the WRHA provide for personal care homes in Winnipeg?” the answer was quite detailed – and specific:
“The WRHA’S total long-term care expenses for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2024 were approximately $632.05 million.” There are approximately 5,700 residents in personal care homes in Winnipeg. That figure of $632.05 million translates roughly into $111,000 per resident.
“The budget for the 2024-2025 fiscal year included a $224.3 million overall increase to the WRHA for salaries, benefits, and other expenditures, reflecting a general increase in health-care investments.” (But, note that there is no mention of an increase for food expenditures.)
But, it was as a result of an email exchange that I had with Simkin CEO Laurie Cerqueti that I understood where Longhurst’s claim that there has been no increase in funding for care-home residents since 2009 came from.
Laurie wrote: “…most, if not all of the pchs are running a deficit in the area of food due to the increases in food prices and the government/wrha not giving operational funding increases for over 15 years.” Thus, whatever increases the WRHA has been giving have been eaten up almost entirely by salary increases and some additional hiring that PCHs have been allowed to make.
Longhurst’s article focused entirely on food operations at PCHs – and how much inflation has made it so much more difficult for PCHs to continue to provide nutritious meals. He should have noted, however, that when he wrote there has been “no increase in funding for care home residents since 2009,” he was referring specifically to the area of food.
As Laurie Cerqueti noted in the same email where she observed that there has been no increase in operational funding, “approximately $300,000 of our deficit was due to food services. I do not have a specific number as far as how much of the deficit is a result of kosher food…So really this is not a kosher food issue as much is it is an inflation and funding issue.
“Our funding from the WRHA is not specific for food so I do not know how much extra they give us for kosher food. I believe years ago there was some extra funding added but it is mixed in our funding envelope and not separated out.”
So, while the WRHA has certainly increased funding for PCHs in Winnipeg, the rate of funding increases has not kept pace with the huge increases in the cost of food, especially between 2023-2024.
As Laurie Cerqueti noted, in response to an email in which I asked her how the Simkin Centre is coping with an accumulated deficit of $779,426, she wrote, in part: “The problem is that the government does not fund any of us in a way that has kept up with inflation or other cost of living increases. If this was a private industry, no one would do business with the government to lose money. I know some pchs are considering out (sic.) of the business.”
A comparison of six different personal care homes
But, when I took a careful look at the financial statements for each of the personal care homes whose financial statements I was able to download from the Province of Manitoba website, I was somewhat surprised to see the huge disparities in funding that the WRHA has allocated to different PCHs. (How I decided which PCHs to look at was simply based on whether or not I was able to download a particular PCH’s financial statement. In most cases no financial statements were available even to look at. I wonder why that is? They’re all publicly funded and all of them should be following the same requirements – wouldn’t you think?)
In addition to the Simkin Centre’s financial statement (which, as I explained, was in the Simkin Star), I was able to look at financial statements for the following personal care homes: West Park Manor, Golden West Centennial Lodge, Southeast Personal Care Home, Golden Links Lodge, and Bethania Mennonite Personal Care Home.
What I found were quite large disparities in funding levels by the WRHA among the six homes, either in 2025 (for homes that had recent financial statements available to look at) or 2024 (for homes which did not have recent financial statements to look at.)
Here is a table showing the levels of funding for six different personal care homes in Winnipeg. Although information was not available for all homes for the 2025 fiscal year, the figures here certainly show that, while the WRHA has been increasing funding for all homes – and in some cases by quite a bit, the rate of increases from one home to another has varied considerably. Further, the Simkin Centre received the lowest percentage increase from 2024 to 2025.
Comparison of funding by the WRHA for 6 different personal care homes
We did not enter into this project with any preconceived notions in mind. We simply wanted to investigate how much funding there has been from the WRHA for personal care homes in Winnipeg in recent years.
As to why some PCHs received quite large increases in funding, while others received much smaller increases – the WRHA response to my asking that question was this: “Due to the nature and complexity of the questions you are asking regarding financial information about PCHs, please collate all of your specific questions into a FIPPA and we can assess the amount of time needed to appropriately respond.”
Gladys Hrabi of MARCHE, however, offered this explanation for the relatively large disparities in funding levels among different PCHs: “Because funding is based on the median, not actual costs, each PCH must manage within the same per diem rate even though their realities differ. Factors like building age, staffing structure, kitchen setup, and resident complexity all influence spending patterns.
“The difference you found (in spending between two particular homes that I cited in an email to Gladys) likely reflects these operational differences. Homes that prepare food on-site, accommodate specialized diets (cultural i.e. kosher), or prioritize enhanced dining experiences (more than 2 choices) naturally incur higher total costs. Others may use centralized food services or have less flexibility because of budget constraints.
“The current model doesn’t adjust for inflation, collective agreements, or true cost increases. This means many homes, especially MARCHE members face operating deficits and have to make tough choices about where to contain costs, often affecting areas like food, recreation, or maintenance. The large differences you see in food spending aren’t about efficiency —–they’re a sign that the current funding model doesn’t reflect the true costs of care.”
But some of the disparities in funding of different personal care homes really jump off the page. I noted, for instance, that of the six PCHs whose financial statements I examined, the levels of funding from WRHA for the 2024 fiscal year fell between a range of $63,341 per resident (at Golden Links Lodge) to $78,771 at the Simkin Centre – but there was one particular outlier: Southeast Personal Care Home, which received funding from the WRHA in 2024 at the rate of $98,321 per resident. Not only did Southeast Personal Care Home receive a great deal more funding per resident than the other five PCHs I looked at, it had a hefty surplus to boot.
I asked a spokesperson from the WRHA to explain how one PCH could have received so much more funding per capita than other PCHs, but have not received a response.
This brings me then to the issue of the Simkin Centre and the quite large deficit situation it’s in. Since readers might have a greater interest in the situation as it exists at the Simkin Centre as opposed to other personal care homes and, as the Simkin Centre has reported quite large deficits for both 2024 and 2025, as I noted previously, I asked Laurie Cerqueti how Simkin will be dealing with its accumulated deficit (which now stands at $779,426) going forward?
Now, as many readers may also know, I’ve been harping on the extra high costs incurred by Simkin as a result of its having to remain a kosher facility. It’s not my intention to open old wounds, but I was somewhat astonished to see how much larger the Simkin Centre’s deficit is than any other PCH for which I could find financial information.
From time to time I’ve asked Laurie how many of Simkin’s 200 residents are Jewish?
On November 10, she responded that “55% of residents” at Simkin are Jewish. That figure is consistent with past numbers that Laurie has cited over the years.
And, while Laurie claims that she does not know exactly how much more the Simkin Centre pays for kosher food, the increases in costs for kosher beef and chicken have outstripped the increases in costs for nonkosher beef and chicken. Here is what we found when we looked at the differences in prices between kosher and nonkosher beef and chicken: “Based on recent data and long-standing market factors, kosher beef and chicken prices have generally gone up more than non-kosher (conventional beef and chicken). Both types of meat have experienced significant inflation due to broader economic pressures and supply chain issues, but the kosher market has additional, unique cost drivers that amplify these increases.”
In the final analysis, while the WRHA has been providing fairly large increases in funding to personal care homes in Winnipeg, those increases have been eaten up by higher payroll costs and the costs of simply maintaining what is very often aging infrastructure. If the WRHA does not provide any increases for food costs, personal care homes will continue to be squeezed financially. They can either reduce the quality of food they offer residents or find other areas, such as programming, where they might be able to make cuts.
But, the situation at the Simkin Centre, which is running a much larger accumulated deficit than any other personal care home for which we could find financial information, places it in a very difficult position. How the Simkin Centre will deal with that deficit is a huge challenge. The only body that can provide help in a major way, not only for the Simkin Centre, but for all personal care homes within Manitoba, is the provincial government. Perhaps if you’re reading this you might want to contact your local MLA and voice your concerns about the lack of increased funding for food at PCHs.