Said, Not Shown: Ontario School Boards Say They Deal With Bullying. What They Publish Says Less.

Boards say they take bullying seriously, and publish documents to show it. Read against the memorandum that sets the standard, those documents are not the plan the Education Act requires boards to post, not the policy the memorandum describes, and not a path a parent can follow.

Summary

All 72 of Ontario’s district school boards publish a document that says the board deals with bullying: a policy, an administrative procedure, a code of conduct, or a policy that names one of these. The question this review asked is not whether a board says so, but whether what it publishes is what the province requires. Every Ontario school board must have two documents under Policy/Program Memorandum 144 (PPM 144): a bullying prevention and intervention plan for its schools, which the Education Act requires the board to post on its website, and a bullying prevention and intervention policy, which the memorandum says “must include” a set of parent-facing content. The memorandum was reissued on 25 November 2021. School Board Research read what each of the 72 district school boards publishes, as it stood on board websites on 23 September 2026 and on follow-up reviews on 8, 9 and 12 October 2026, and tested the two documents against fourteen requirements taken from the memorandum.

1. No board met all fourteen requirements. The highest result was seven of fourteen, at one board. Twenty-five boards met none, because neither document could be credited. The typical board met two.
2. The plan the Education Act requires every board to post was found at 28 of 72 boards. The policy was found at 29. Ten boards publish both.
3. At 40 of the 43 boards without a credited policy, the board’s bullying rules are written in an administrative procedure, directive or guideline. At 28 of those boards a document titled as the policy exists, but it places no duty on bullying prevention or intervention; the duties are in the procedure beneath it.
4. The parent’s path added in 2021 is largely absent. No board sets out the communication and outreach strategy the memorandum requires. One board names whom a parent contacts with a question. Five say where a parent files a report and with whom. Five say what steps will be taken after a parent reports. Two set out a process a parent can follow if not satisfied with the school’s response.
5. Two boards carry the rule, in force since 2021, that principals must suspend a junior kindergarten to Grade 3 pupil for bullying in the two cases the memorandum names. Thirty-nine boards’ documents are silent on it. Three state that pupils in those grades cannot be suspended.

Results for each board are in the Ontario School Board Report Card.

1. Introduction

No Ontario school board says it tolerates bullying. Board websites carry statements of commitment, safe schools pages, codes of conduct that prohibit it, and procedures for dealing with it. Bullying is the safety concern parents raise most often, and it is the one Ontario has legislated most specifically. The Education Act requires every board to “establish a bullying prevention and intervention plan for the schools of the board and require its schools to implement the plan” (Education Act, s. 303.3(1)), and to make that plan “available to the public by posting it on the board’s website” (s. 303.3(4)). It also requires every board to “establish policies and guidelines with respect to bullying prevention and intervention in schools” (s. 302(3.4)). The province sets the standard for both in PPM 144, a policy of the Minister of Education.

The memorandum was reissued on 25 November 2021. The reissue added what it calls a clear path for parents: the policy “must include” a strategy for getting the policy and plan to parents, “information on who to contact if parents have questions or concerns”, “where a parent can file a report and with whom”, “what steps will be taken following a report made by a parent”, and “a process a parent can follow if they are not satisfied with the school’s response” (Ontario Ministry of Education 2021). It added a sentence stating that bullying is a serious student incident, and a rule that principals must suspend a junior kindergarten to Grade 3 pupil for bullying in two named cases.

This article reports what the boards’ own published documents say, almost five years later. It describes the sector as a whole and does not name boards. Each board’s results, with the wording relied on and a link to the document, are in the Board Report Card.

2. The two documents, and what was tested

PPM 144 names two documents by what they do. The first is the plan: “a plan for schools that integrates all the board’s requirements and guidelines regarding bullying prevention and intervention into a comprehensive and achievable plan”, which “Every board must require that all schools implement” (Ontario Ministry of Education 2021). The second is the board’s bullying prevention and intervention policies, which “must include” the statements, strategies and paths the memorandum lists. In this article, and in the Report Card, they are called the Bullying Prevention and Intervention Plan and the Bullying Prevention and Intervention Policy.

The review identified each document first by what the board calls it on its face, and then by what it does. Only a document the board designates a plan can be the Plan, and only a document the board designates a policy can be the Policy. A document the board designates an administrative procedure, directive, guideline or regulation is neither, whatever it contains. A procedure that says it outlines the board’s plan, or that supplies a template for school plans, is still a procedure. A policy that carries none of the board’s bullying requirements is not the Policy, and a code of conduct that prohibits bullying and nothing more is not the Policy either. One file may carry both documents as separately designated parts, and an appendix that is itself a plan is the Plan even where it is attached to a procedure.

The memorandum says its components “must be incorporated as part of each school board’s plans, policies and guidelines” (Ontario Ministry of Education 2021), so the content requirements are scored on the credited Plan and Policy read together. Only those two documents count. Where the board’s website also carries a reporting page, an online form, a code of conduct or a procedure, it is recorded for parents and earns no credit.

Fourteen requirements were tested, in five parts. The first four concern the documents themselves. The other ten concern what the documents say.

	Requirement	What was tested	In the memorandum since
1	Plan: Public Accessibility	The board’s Bullying Prevention and Intervention Plan is publicly available on the board’s website, and is a Plan	2018 or earlier
2	Policy: Public Accessibility	The board’s Bullying Prevention and Intervention Policy is available to the public, on the board’s website or on a stated request route, and is a Policy	2018 or earlier
3	Currency of the Documents	The Plan and the Policy each carry an internal date on or after 25 November 2021, the date PPM 144 (2021) was issued	2021 reissue
4	Accessible Format	The Plan and the Policy each clear the four measured conformance criteria: a real text layer, a declared language, a tagged structure, and a title of its own	2018 or earlier
5	School Implementation and Publication	The board requires every school to implement the Plan, and directs schools to make a plan available to the public	2018 or earlier
6	Cyber-bullying in the Definition	The documents adopt the Education Act definition of bullying with cyber-bullying inside it	2012
7	Bullying as a Serious Student Incident	The documents state that bullying is a serious student incident	2021
8	Parent Outreach Strategy	The documents set out an accessible, culturally relevant strategy for getting the Policy and Plan to parents	2021
9	Contact and Information Routes	The documents say whom a parent contacts with questions or concerns, and where to read more	2021
10	Where and With Whom to Report	The documents say where a parent files a report of bullying and with whom	2021
11	Steps After a Report	The documents say what steps will be taken after a parent reports	2021
12	Escalation	The documents set out a process a parent can follow if not satisfied with the school’s response	2021
13	Parental Notification and Support	The documents require the principal to notify the parents of the students involved and to invite them to discuss supports	2018 or earlier
14	JK to Grade 3 Suspension	The documents carry the two mandatory JK to Grade 3 suspension triggers and the investigation precondition	2021

Each requirement is scored met or not met, with every element needed for a pass. Where neither document could be credited, every requirement is not met, because there was nothing to read. Where one document was credited and the other was not, the missing document is counted once, at Requirement 1 or 2, and the content requirements are scored on the document that was found.

3. What the 72 boards publish

Figure 1. The fourteen requirements tested at 72 district school boards, and how many boards met each. Source: School Board Research, 2026 Board Report Card, PPM 144 review, documents read 23 September and 8 to 12 October 2026.

Requirement	Boards meeting it	Per cent
3. Currency of the Documents	31	43.1
2. Policy: Public Accessibility	29	40.3
1. Plan: Public Accessibility	28	38.9
6. Cyber-bullying in the Definition	25	34.7
13. Parental Notification and Support	12	16.7
5. School Implementation and Publication	5	6.9
10. Where and With Whom to Report	5	6.9
11. Steps After a Report	5	6.9
4. Accessible Format	4	5.6
12. Escalation	2	2.8
14. JK to Grade 3 Suspension	2	2.8
7. Bullying as a Serious Student Incident	1	1.4
9. Contact and Information Routes	1	1.4
8. Parent Outreach Strategy	0	0.0

Twenty-five boards met none of the fourteen requirements, two met one, 16 met two, 11 met three, 10 met four, six met five, one met six and one met seven. No board met eight or more. Across the 47 boards at which at least one document was credited, the typical board met three.

4. Six patterns

4.1 At 25 boards, neither document could be credited

All 72 boards publish something about bullying. At 25 of them the review reached no document the board designates its bullying prevention and intervention plan and no document the board designates a policy that places a duty on bullying prevention or intervention. Those boards are not without bullying rules. At 23 of the 25 the rules are written in an administrative procedure or directive, and at many of them a document titled as a policy sits above it that names the procedure or commits the board to safe schools without placing any duty on bullying prevention or intervention. At the other two, the only document reachable carries none of the board’s bullying requirements. Under the memorandum none of these is the plan the Education Act requires a board to post, and none is the policy that “must include” the parent’s path.

The consequence for the results is blunt. A board whose rules sit only in a procedure fails all fourteen requirements, however complete the procedure, because the two documents the memorandum describes do not exist on its website. Twenty-five of the 858 results not met at each requirement, and 350 of the 858 in all, arise this way.

4.2 The rules are in the procedure, not the policy

Requirement 2 asks whether the board’s own Bullying Prevention and Intervention Policy is available to the public and is a Policy: a document the board designates a policy, which states the board’s requirements on bullying prevention and intervention. Twenty-nine boards meet it.

At 40 of the 43 boards that do not, the board’s bullying rules are written in a document the board designates an administrative procedure, directive, guideline or regulation. At 28 of those 40 the website also carries a document titled as a policy, but it places no duty on bullying prevention or intervention: it states a commitment to safe schools, names the procedure, or lists PPM 144 in its references, and the rules themselves are in the procedure. At 10 boards only the procedure exists, and at two a policy is named in the procedure or elsewhere but is not published. At the remaining three boards the only document reachable, a code of conduct or a safe schools policy, carries none of the board’s bullying requirements.

Ontario’s own governance guide for trustees draws the line the memorandum relies on: a policy “articulates what must be done”, and a procedure “provides the details of how policies are to be implemented” (OESC 2022, 46). The memorandum places the parent’s path in the policy. Where the board’s bullying rules sit in a procedure, the document the memorandum says “must include” that path does not carry it, and the document that does carry the rules is one the memorandum does not name. The difference between the two documents, and who is responsible for each, is explained in School Board Research’s guides on policies, procedures and plans.

4.3 The plan is the document most often missing

Requirement 1 asks whether the board’s Bullying Prevention and Intervention Plan is publicly available on the board’s website and is a Plan: the board’s own plan for its schools, integrating the board’s requirements and guidelines, which the board designates a plan. The Education Act says a board “shall make its bullying prevention and intervention plan available to the public by posting it on the board’s website” (s. 303.3(4)). Twenty-eight boards meet it.

At the 44 boards that do not, the reasons recorded are these. At 21 boards the documents direct each school to write its own plan and the board publishes no plan of its own. At 20 the plan is named or promised in another document and is not published. At 10 the document reached is not the board’s plan: a blank template carrying no board requirements, a school’s plan, or the Ministry’s model plan. At five nothing could be reached. At three the only candidate is a procedure that describes itself as the plan. At one the plan exists and opens, but no page of the board’s website links to it. Several boards carry more than one of these.

The decentralized model deserves a word. The memorandum does say that principals are “responsible for making their school’s plan available to the public” (Ontario Ministry of Education 2021). It also says, in the sentence before, that “Every school board must establish a plan for schools” and “Every board must require that all schools implement this plan”, and the Act requires the board to post its plan. A school’s plan is in addition to the board’s, not in place of it. At 21 boards the documents direct each school to write its own plan and the board publishes none.

4.4 A revised document is not an updated one

Of the 28 Plans found, 15 carry no internal date anywhere in the document: no approval, revision or effective line on any page. A parent reading one of them cannot tell whether it was written before or after the 2021 rules. The 13 that are dated are all dated after the reissue. Of the 29 Policies found, 27 are dated after the reissue and two are dated between the 2018 and 2021 versions of the memorandum.

The 2021 content was mostly not added. Of the seven requirements that entered the memorandum in 2021 (Requirements 7 to 12 and 14), the best met is five of 72. The two requirements that date from 2018 or earlier and that can be scored on content, the cyber-bullying definition and parental notification, are met by 25 and 12. The gap follows the age of the requirement, as it did in the code of conduct review.

4.5 The parent’s path is not written down

Component 3 of the memorandum, added in 2021, is the part written for parents. It requires the policy to include “a culturally relevant and accessible communication and outreach strategy taking into account linguistic, ethnocultural and accessibility considerations to help ensure parents have access to the board bullying prevention and intervention policy and plan”, and “a clear path for parents to follow should they need to report bullying” (Ontario Ministry of Education 2021). The review scored its five parts separately, because each is a different parent question.

The outreach strategy (Requirement 8) is met by no board. At 35 of the 47 boards with a credited document, no strategy is set out; a general undertaking to communicate policies, or the memorandum’s own sentence repeated, is not a strategy. At every one of the 47, the strategy does not address all three of linguistic, ethnocultural and accessibility considerations with something the board does.

Contact and information routes (Requirement 9) are met by one board. At 45 boards no role or office is named for a parent’s questions or concerns, as distinct from filing a report. At 33 the documents say nothing about how parents can access more information about bullying prevention and reporting.

Where and with whom to report (Requirement 10) is met by five boards. At 26 the documents say nothing on where a parent can file a report and with whom. At nine they name a role without a method, or a method without a role. At six what is stated is for students only, or names a tool that cannot be reached on the public site. Six boards have a reporting page or online form elsewhere on their websites that the credited documents do not name, and the review does not count it.

Steps after a report (Requirement 11) are met by five boards. At 18 the documents say nothing on what steps will be taken following a report made by a parent. At 23 the steps are vague or discretionary: “appropriate action will be taken”, “as required”, a menu of options with no sequence.

Escalation (Requirement 12) is met by two boards. At 44 no process is set out for a parent who is not satisfied with the school’s response. Some boards have a general concerns or complaints policy elsewhere on the site; the bullying documents do not point to it, and the review does not count it.

Taken together: at the 47 boards whose documents could be read, a parent who finds the board’s bullying policy or plan will, at nearly all of them, not learn from it whom to call, how to report, what will happen next, or where to go if nothing does.

4.6 The statutory response duties

Two requirements turn on duties the Education Act places on principals and the memorandum repeats.

Parental notification and support (Requirement 13) is met by 12 boards. The memorandum says “the principal must notify parents of the involved students, except in certain circumstances, and must invite the parents to discuss supports for their child” (Ontario Ministry of Education 2021). At 30 boards the documents do not require the notification. At 30 they do not require the invitation to discuss supports; at 25 of these, both are missing.

The junior kindergarten to Grade 3 suspension rule (Requirement 14) is met by two boards. Since 2021 the memorandum has said: “Principals must suspend students in junior kindergarten to grade 3 for incidents of bullying if: their continuing presence in the school creates an unacceptable risk to the safety of another person; the bullying is motivated by bias, prejudice, or hate”, and may do so only after “an investigation respecting the allegations” (Ontario Ministry of Education 2021). At 39 boards the documents do not say when a principal must suspend a pupil in those grades for bullying: they are silent, refer only to the Act or a regulation, or leave it to another document. Three boards state that pupils in those grades cannot be suspended. Two attach a condition, that the pupil was suspended before, which the memorandum does not attach for these grades. Three do not require the investigation first.

The cyber-bullying definition (Requirement 6), in the memorandum since 2012, is the content requirement most often met: 25 boards. Sixteen boards write a definition of their own in place of the Education Act’s, and six credited documents carry no definition of bullying at all.

5. Does it differ by kind of board?

Less than the headline suggests, with one exception. English public boards met an average of 2.4 requirements of fourteen, English Catholic boards 2.3 and French public boards 2.0. Regional averages run from 1.6 to 2.7.

The exception is the French Catholic boards, which met an average of 0.1. At seven of the eight, neither document could be credited, because the board’s bullying rules are written in a directive administrative and the policy, where one exists, places no duty. That is the same pattern as at the English boards described in section 4.2, and it is near-universal in this group. On the memorandum’s own terms those boards have published neither the plan nor the policy it requires. A board that published either document on its website on the date of the review can show this through the board response form, with the route from the board’s home page by which a parent would have reached it.

No group of boards is doing well. The outreach strategy is met by no board in any group, and the escalation process, the serious-student-incident sentence and the junior kindergarten to Grade 3 rule are met by one or two boards in the province.

6. What a parent can do

1. Look up the board in the Board Report Card. Each requirement shows the result, the board’s own words and a link to the document.
2. Find both documents. Ask the board which document is its Bullying Prevention and Intervention Plan and which is its Bullying Prevention and Intervention Policy. If the answer is an administrative procedure, ask when the trustees adopted the rules in it, and where the board’s plan is posted.
3. Read the policy and ask four questions of it: whom do I contact with a concern, where and with whom do I file a report, what steps will be taken after I report, and where do I go if I am not satisfied? If the policy does not answer them, ask the principal and the trustee where that is written down.
4. If a result looks wrong, or a concern has been raised with the board before, use the public report form. Boards may use the board response form to ask for a review of a result.

7. Data, method and limitations

Scope. All 72 Ontario district school boards, 60 English-language and 12 French-language.

Dates. Each board’s website was reviewed from its home page on 23 September 2026. After the identity rule in section 2 was settled, 41 boards were reviewed again on 8 and 9 October 2026 to find any document the board designates a policy and to re-score the policy’s public accessibility, and one board on 12 October 2026. The results describe what was published on those dates. A document posted or changed after the date of the review does not change these results; it will be read in the January 2027 review.

Identifying the documents. For each board, the review identified the Bullying Prevention and Intervention Plan and the Bullying Prevention and Intervention Policy first by the designation on the document’s face and then by what it does. The title is recorded. A procedure, directive, guideline or regulation is neither document and earns no credit at any requirement. A document the board designates a policy is the Policy only where it places a duty on bullying prevention or intervention. A document counts as posted on the board’s website only where a page of that website links to it or the website’s own search finds it; a document reachable only through a link inside a file kept elsewhere is not posted, and a file that asks for a sign-in or a request for access is not public.

Scoring. Each of the fourteen requirements was scored met or not met, which gives 1,008 results: 150 met and 858 not met. Public accessibility was decided on the live website, not from a file. Currency was read from a date printed inside the document, never from a file name or a web page’s update line. The accessible-format result is derived from four measured checks on each document’s file. The reading was assisted by large language models working to a written method. Every result was then confirmed against written rules, or re-scored under a recorded ruling. Each result quotes the board’s own words. The method and criteria are available on request.

Rules of reading. Three rules are declared. Vague or ambiguous wording is read from the parent’s side and counted as not met. A requirement is not met by pointing to some other document; it must be in the Plan or the Policy. A promise to do something is not counted as having done it.

Limitations. This is a reading of published documents. It does not observe schools. A school may take reports, notify parents and follow a plan although the board’s documents do not say so. Fourteen requirements are not the whole memorandum; a board meeting all fourteen would have met the requirements tested, not PPM 144. The accessible-format result rests on four checks and is a floor, not a finding of conformance. Requirement 2 reads “available to the public” as published on the board’s website or obtainable on a stated request route, because neither the Act nor the memorandum states a posting duty for the policy in terms; a board may read it differently. The identity rule, that a procedure is neither the plan nor the policy, is the review’s reading of the memorandum’s functional definitions and the sector’s own distinction between a policy and a procedure; a board may dispute it, and the review recorded every procedure it reached so that a board can show what it holds. The findings are research observations about published documents and are not legal determinations.

Earlier review. An earlier preliminary review covered 29 boards on seven criteria. The instrument has since changed and the two sets of results are not comparable.

Board names. This article describes the sector and names no board. Board-level results are published in the Report Card, where each can be read with its evidence.

Media kit

For editors and reporters. Everything in this kit comes from the published Board Report Card and can be checked against it. This article names no board. The board-by-board view, a one-page crosswalk of all 72 boards with one square per requirement and the count met out of 14, is on the Report Card page at /board-report-card/2026-review/ and may be reproduced on the terms below.

Key facts

• 72 district school boards reviewed on 23 September 2026, with follow-up reviews on 8, 9 and 12 October 2026; 14 requirements per board; 1,008 results: 150 met, 858 not met.
• No board met all 14 requirements. Best result 7 of 14 (one board); the typical board met 2; 25 boards met none, because neither document could be credited.
• The Bullying Prevention and Intervention Plan was found at 28 boards; the Bullying Prevention and Intervention Policy at 29; both at 10.
• At 40 of the 43 boards without a credited Policy, the board’s bullying rules are written in an administrative procedure, directive or guideline.
• The parent’s path added to the memorandum in 2021: outreach strategy met at 0 boards; contact and information routes at 1; where and with whom to report at 5; steps after a report at 5; escalation at 2.
• Parental notification and support met at 12 boards. The junior kindergarten to Grade 3 suspension rule met at 2; 39 boards’ documents are silent on it; 3 state that pupils in those grades cannot be suspended.
• 15 of the 28 Plans found carry no date anywhere in the document. 4 boards’ documents pass the four basic accessibility file checks.

What the terms mean

• Met and Not met are the Report Card’s results for one requirement on one day. Not met means the Plan or Policy was not found on the board’s website, was not the document the memorandum describes, or did not carry what the requirement asks for on the day of the review. It is not a finding that a board has contravened the law.
• Plan and Policy are the two documents PPM 144 names: the board’s bullying prevention and intervention plan for its schools, and the board’s bullying prevention and intervention policy. Each is identified first by what the board calls it and then by what it does. A procedure, directive, guideline or regulation is neither and earns no credit.
• Accessible Format means the file passed four basic checks (real text, declared language, tag structure, identifying title). It is not a finding of conformance with WCAG 2.0 Level AA.
• Currency is measured against the memorandum’s date of issue, 25 November 2021, read from a date printed inside the document.

Where to look

• Board by board, with the document relied on for every result, the board’s own words, the route from the home page, and the crosswalk of all 72 boards: /board-report-card/2026-review/
• A board that disputes a result can respond at /board-report-card/respond/, showing that the document was published on its website on the date of the review, in a form that meets the requirement, and the route from the board’s home page by which a parent would have reached it. A document posted or changed after the date of the review is read in the January 2027 review. Corrections are noted on the page where they are made.

Using this material

• Figure 1, the crosswalk on the Report Card page and the figures in this kit may be reproduced with the credit “School Board Research, schoolboardresearch.ca”. Please cite the review dates with any result, because boards change their websites.
• Every figure in this kit can be checked against the Report Card entry for the board concerned.

References

Education Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.2, ss. 1(1), 1(1.0.0.2), 300.3, 302(3.4), 303.3 and 310(1). https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90e02

Ontario Ministry of Education. 2021. Policy/Program Memorandum 144: Bullying Prevention and Intervention. Issued 25 November 2021; effective until revoked or modified. https://www.ontario.ca/document/education-ontario-policy-and-program-direction/policyprogram-memorandum-144

Ontario Education Services Corporation (OESC). 2022. Good Governance: A Guide for Trustees, School Boards, Directors of Education, and Communities, 2022-2026. https://ontarioschooltrustees.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Good-Governance-Guide-2022-2026_en_aoda_final.pdf

O. Reg. 440/20, Suspension of Elementary School Pupils. https://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/r20440

School Board Research. 2026. Ontario School Board Report Card. https://schoolboardresearch.ca/board-report-card/

Legal disclaimer. School Board Research is not a law firm, its researchers are not lawyers, and nothing in this article is legal advice. The results are research findings about documents published on board websites, read against a written method, available on request, on the dates stated. They are not findings that any board has contravened the Education Act, Policy/Program Memorandum 144 or any other law; only a regulator, the Ministry or a court can make that finding. A reader who needs advice about their own situation should consult a lawyer.

School Board Research publishes independent analysis of Ontario school board data and policy. We are not lawyers, and nothing in this publication is legal advice. If you identify an error, please write to info@schoolboardresearch.ca. Corrections are noted on the page where they are made.