We raised this issue many years ago, and certainly we did when there were some political decisions to try to restrict access to those programs. We included it this year, thanks to you, because we knew there was Library of Parliament research that was conducted on this that was consistent with our own findings. We took the time to reflect on it.
We found that were certainly things like it's very difficult, and the service has a poor ability to track the number of participants. The data we have shows an extremely low participation rate. The criteria are, as you said, too restrictive and of a discriminatory nature when it comes to indigenous women. There are inconsistencies across the country and across the five different regional facilities for women. Also, we know that there has been very little done about the impact upon the children who are part of those programs.
The program, as it's set up now, is limited to minimum security institutions, and there are very few indigenous women who make it to minimum security. The bulk of them are in maximum or medium security. In maximum security, my annual report states that 60% of those who are in the secure units, which are maximum security for women, are indigenous. It prevents mothers of indigenous ancestry from having access to the program. That's why we think there's a need to review the program.
I'm going to turn it over to Hazel to speak from her perspective, because she has an awful lot of experience with women's institutions.