SHA reprimanded for not following information access request rules

The Saskatchewan Health Authority has had its wrist slapped after blowing past legislated deadlines for three Access to Information Requests.

The first report was from April. The health authority had gotten a COVID-19 related access to information request under LA FOIP – legislation which governs the release of information to the public – in March 2023.

The applicant didn’t get their fee estimate until the following November and didn’t get their response and records until January. The legislated time for a response is 30 days, with a provision for another 30 days to be added if needed.

The second case was from the end of March 2023 and was also a COVID-related request. In his report, Information and Privacy Commissioner, Ronald J. Kruzeniski, noted that it took 257 days for a response after the extended due date, and that there was no reason given.

“The SHA did not provide any explanation as to why it did not respond to the Applicant’s access request within the legislated timeline. I recommend that the SHA provide an explanation to both my office and to the Applicant as to why it did not respond to the access request within the legislated timeline,” wrote Kruzeniski.

In the April case, he recommended the records fee be refunded. In the June case, Kruzeniski the health authority make sure it has the resources in place to respond to access requests within the timelines.

In the third case, the health authority went three weeks past the legislated deadline for another COVID-related request.

• READ MORE:
  Sask. privacy commissioner critical of LifeLabs, SHA over ransomware attack
  Emerald Park doctor reprimanded again over privacy breach
  Privacy commissioner finds doctors snooped in Humboldt Broncos patient records

Diane Aldridge, Deputy Commissioner at the Information and Privacy Commissioner’s Office, said it’s important to note that the SHA is the largest local authority in the province and the largest trustee organization, so it’s captured by both LA FOIP legislation and HIPA legislation.

“There’s a lot of work that has to go into finding those records and because it is such a large organization, it takes quite a bit of organization, education and understanding and having the right people in the right positions to make sure that those timelines are met,” said Aldridge.

She also noted that these three reports were the first time this year that the commissioner had found such problems with the SHA’s responses.

The health authority couldn’t provide anyone to answer questions by deadline and instead issued a written response.

It said accountability is core for the SHA and that it gets a lot of FOIP requests that deal with sensitive information and they require a high level of scrutiny.

“We recognize that in limited circumstances our processing times have not met the associated timelines,” read the statement.

The SHA didn’t give a reason why the second FOIP request took so long.
“We acknowledge the recommendations from the OIPC and endeavour to process all LA FOIP requests within the associated time frames. We continue to work on creating more efficient ways to respond to these requests,” said the health authority.