Each year, we are required under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act (WSIA) to have an external firm review the cost, efficiency, and effectiveness of one or more WSIB programs through a value-for-money audit (VFMA). The latest audit focused on our Second Injury and Enhancement Fund.
Findings
The found that the program no longer supports it’s intended purpose of removing employment barriers for people with pre-existing disabilities or supporting the return-to-work and recovery outcomes injured people need.
The audit also found the program no longer provides meaningful or equitable cost relief to businesses as it has not kept pace with changes to how claims and premiums are managed as it has not been meaningfully updated since its introduction in 1945.
For these reasons, we are phasing out the Second Injury and Enhancement Fund and have amended the Second Injury and Enhancement Fund (SIEF) policy as of June 16, however, we will continue to accept new requests submitted before July 16, 2026.
All businesses currently receiving Second Injury and Enhancement Fund will continue to receive relief for the duration of their existing applicable claims. We will review all Second Injury and Enhancement Fund requests received before July 16, 2026 and follow our streamlined process to make relief eligibility decisions.
What this means for people
People with a current or past claim will continue to be supported through WSIB's standard claims process, with the same access to health care, benefits, and return-to-work planning they have today.
Ending the Second Injury and Enhancement Fund will enable us to provide more value for the premiums businesses pay by focusing on activities that deliver the best return-to-work and recovery outcomes for people who need us.
This includes working with businesses to identify suitable and sustainable modified work for people as part of the return-to-work process, as well as finding the right resources to help them make lasting changes to make their workplace safer, such as joining our Health and Safety Excellence program. Through the program, businesses can build health and safety habits that can help reduce risks and strengthen their business, while earning rebates on their premiums.
Questions and answers
What were the key findings of the value-for-money audit?
The auditors found that the SIEF program delivers “no or little value.” They concluded that the program, first set up in 1945 to help break down barriers for wounded war veterans looking for work, is severely outdated. It no longer supports its intended purpose of removing employment barriers, does nothing to help people recover and return to work after an injury or illness, and does not actually offer cost relief consistently (if at all) since the premium rate setting process was disconnected from the program in 2020.
Did the program incentivize employment for people with disabilities?
No. The recent value-for-money audit found no link between SIEF decisions and employment outcomes. Employment and human rights legislation and regulation has changed significantly since the program was first developed in 1945.
Does the SIEF help people recover and/or return to work any faster?
No. There is no relation between the ‘cost relief’ applied to employer detailed claim statements and care and support someone with an injury receives.
Do businesses pay less for claim costs as a result of SIEF decisions?
No. Schedule 1 businesses do not pay claim costs directly. SIEF ‘cost relief’ shows up as a line item on detailed claim statements, but businesses pay their assessed premium rates, not individual claim costs.
Do SIEF decisions impact premium rates for businesses?
The value-for-money audit found that only few businesses who had SIEF claims identified experienced any relief on their premium rate as a result. This is because the rate setting model put in place in 2020 is decoupled from SIEF decisions.
Have there ever been calls to end the SIEF program before?
Yes. Three different expert reports prior to the value-for-money audit called out disparities, ineffectiveness and unfairness in the outdated SIEF program. For example, the Harry Arthurs’ Funding Fairness report concluded that the WSIB should “abolish the SIEF”.
Were any stakeholder consultations held?
Yes. Over 200 stakeholders were invited to participate in 12 consultations held between October 22 and December 12, 2025, as part of the value-for-money audit. The original timeline to provide feedback was also extended during the consultation period.
Participants were able to join virtual focus groups or provide written feedback. Participants included businesses who had used the SIEF program previously, businesses with no previous use of SIEF, employer representatives, labour groups and individuals who had provided feedback on SIEF during our rate setting model update consultations.
How many businesses file SIEF applications?
Approximately 2,400 businesses had SIEF cost relief in 2024, out of over 318,000 businesses covered by the WSIB. This means the program was utilized by 0.75 per cent of businesses.
Is there anyone who financially benefits from SIEF applications?
Yes. There are firms and consultants who market themselves as SIEF experts and are paid for their service, either by commission or otherwise.
Updated: