Business
The Health Research Funding Scandal Costing Canadians Billions is Parading in Plain View
Why Can’t We See the Canadian Institutes for Health Research-Funded Research We Pay For?
Right off the top I should acknowledge that a lot of the research funded by the Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR) is creative, rigorous, and valuable. No matter which academic category I looked at during my explorations, at least a few study titles sparked a strong “well it’s about time” reaction.
But two things dampen my enthusiasm:
- Precious few of the more than 39,000 studies funded by CIHR since 2011 are available to the public. We’re generally permitted to see no more than brief and incomplete descriptions – and sometimes not even that.
- There’s often no visible evidence that the research ever actually took place. Considering how more than $16 billion in taxpayer funds has been spent on those studies over the past 13 years, that’s not a good thing.
If you’ve been reading The Audit for a while, you know that I’ll often identify systems that appear vulnerable to abuse. As a rule though, I’m reluctant to invoke the “s” word. But here’s one place where I can think of no better description: the vacuum where CIHR compliance and enforcement should be is a national scandal.
Keep these posts coming: subscribe to The Audit.
I’ve touched on these things before. And even in that earlier post I acknowledged how:
…as a country, we have an interest in investing in industry sectors where there’s a potential for high growth and where releasing proprietary secrets can be counter productive.
So we shouldn’t expect access to the full results of every single study. But that’s surely not true for the majority of research. And there’s absolutely no reason that CIHR shouldn’t provide evidence that something (anything!) productive was actually done with our money.
Because a well-chosen example can sometimes tell the story better than huge numbers, I’ll focus on one particular study in just a moment. But for context, here are some huge numbers. What follows is an AI-powered breakdown by topic of all 39,751 research grants awarded by CIHR since 2011:
Those numbers shouldn’t be taken as anything close to authoritative. The federal government data doesn’t provide even minimal program descriptions for many of the grants it covers. And many descriptions that are there contain meaningless boilerplate text. That’s why the “Other – Uncategorized” category represents 72 percent of all award dollars.
Ok. Let’s get to our in-the-weeds-level example. In March 2016, Greta R. Bauer and Margaret L. Lawson (principal investigators) won a $1,280,540 grant to study “Transgender youth in clinical care: A pan-Canadian cohort study of medical, social and family outcomes”.
Now that looks like vital and important research. This is especially true in light of recent bans on clinical transgender care for minors in many European countries following the release of the U.K.’s Cass report. Dr. Cass found that such treatment involved unacceptable health risks when weighed against poorly defined benefits.
A website associated with the Bauer-Lawson study (transyouthcan.ca) provides a brief update:
As of December of 2021, we have completed all of our planned 2-year follow up data collection. We want to say thanks so much to all our participants who have continued to share their information with us over these past years! We have been hard at work turning data into research results.
And then things get weird. That page leads to a link to another page containing study results, but that one doesn’t load due to an internal server error.
Before we move on, I should note that I come across a LOT of research-related web pages on potentially controversial topics that suddenly go off-line or unexpectedly retire behind pay walls. Those could, of course, just be a series of unfortunate coincidences. But I’ve seen so many such coincidences that it’s beginning to look more like a pattern.
The good news is that earlier versions of those lost pages are nearly always available through the Internet Archive’s WayBackMachine. And frankly, the stuff I find in those earlier versions is often much more – educational – than whatever intentional updates would show me.
In the case of transyouthcan.ca, archived versions included a valid link to a brief PDF document addressing external stressors (which were NOT the primary focus of the original grant application). That PDF includes an interesting acknowledgment:
This project is being paid for by a grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). This study is being done by a team of gender-affirming doctors and researchers who have many years of experience doing community-based trans research. Our team includes people who are also parents of trans children, trans adults, and allied researchers with a long history of working to support trans communities.
As most of the participants appear to have financial and professional interests in the research outcome, I can’t avoid wondering whether there might be at least the appearance of bias.
In any case, that’s where the evidence trail stopped. I couldn’t find any references to study results or even to the publication of a related academic paper. And it’s not like the lead investigators lack access to journals. Greta Bauer, for example, has 79 papers listed on PubMed – but none of them related directly to this study topic.
What happened here? Did the authors just walk off with $1.2 million of taxpayer funding? Did they do the research but then change their minds about publishing when the results came in because they don’t fit a preferred narrative?
But the darker question is why no one at CIHR appears to be even mildly curious about this story – and about many thousands of others that might be out there. Who’s in charge?
Keep these posts coming: subscribe to The Audit.
Business
Vacant Somali Daycares In Viral Videos Are Also Linked To $300 Million ‘Feeding Our Future’ Fraud

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
Multiple Somali daycare centers highlighted in a viral YouTube exposé on alleged fraud in Minnesota have direct ties to a nonprofit at the center of a $300 million scam, the Minnesota Star Tribune reported Thursday.
The now-infamous videos from YouTube influencer Nick Shirley, posted Dec. 26, showed several purported Somali-run daycare centers receiving millions in taxpayer funds despite little evidence that children were actually present at the facilities. Now it turns out that five of the 10 daycare centers Shirley visited operated as meal sites for Feeding Our Future, the Minnesota-based nonprofit implicated in a massive fraud scheme that has already produced dozens of convictions, the outlet reported.
Between 2018 and 2021, those five businesses received nearly $5 million from Feeding Our Future, the outlet reported. While none of the centers in Shirley’s video have been legally accused of wrongdoing, the revelations underscore the sprawling web of fraud engulfing the state. (RELATED: Somalis Reportedly Filled Ohio Strip Mall With Potential Fraudulent Childcare Centers)
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
🚨 Here is the full 42 minutes of my crew and I exposing Minnesota fraud, this might be my most important work yet. We uncovered over $110,000,000 in ONE day. Like it and share it around like wildfire! Its time to hold these corrupt politicians and fraudsters accountable
We ALL… pic.twitter.com/E3Penx2o7a
— Nick shirley (@nickshirleyy) December 26, 2025
Federal prosecutors have charged over 70 individuals — mostly from the Somali community — with stealing more than $300 million from the Federal Child Nutrition Program through Feeding Our Future. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the program funded sites across Minnesota to provide meals to children. Prosecutors say leaders of Feeding Our Future, along with dozens of associates who ran sponsored “meal sites,” submitted false or inflated meal counts to claim reimbursements.
One facility featured in Shirley’s video, the Minnesota Best Childcare Center, received $1.5 million from Feeding Our Future, according to the Minnesota Star Tribune.
Minnesota Best Childcare Center, which has been licensed by the state since 2013, did not respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.
Other daycares featured in Shirley’s video have been cited dozens of times for rule violations while continuing to receive millions in state funding. The now-infamous Quality “Learing” Center was cited for 121 violations in the past three years, including for failing to report a “death, serious injury, fire or emergency as required,” according to the Star-Tribune.
The paper’s investigation found that six of the facilities featured by Shirley were either closed or employees did not open their doors.
Following that exposé, which has accumulated more than 135 million views on X, the Trump administration announced it would freeze all childcare disbursements to Minnesota while federal officials review how taxpayer dollars have flowed to licensed providers.
The fraud allegations extend beyond childcare, with prosecutors claiming millions in taxpayer funds were also stolen from Minnesota’s Housing Stabilization Services and autism treatment programs. Federal prosecutors also estimate that as much as half of the roughly $18 billion Minnesota has spent since 2018 on 14 Medicaid programs may have been siphoned off by fraudsters.
Even the state’s assisted living program has come under scrutiny, with Republican state Rep. Kristin Robbins warning that individuals connected to the Feeding Our Future scheme continue to receive millions in taxpayer funds.
Business
The great policy challenge for governments in Canada in 2026
From the Fraser Institute
According to a recent study, living standards in Canada have declined over the past five years. And the country’s economic growth has been “ugly.” Crucially, all 10 provinces are experiencing this economic stagnation—there are no exceptions to Canada’s “ugly” growth record. In 2026, reversing this trend should be the top priority for the Carney government and provincial governments across the country.
Indeed, demographic and economic data across the country tell a remarkably similar story over the past five years. While there has been some overall economic growth in almost every province, in many cases provincial populations, fuelled by record-high levels of immigration, have grown almost as quickly. Although the total amount of economic production and income has increased from coast to coast, there are more people to divide that income between. Therefore, after we account for inflation and population growth, the data show Canadians are not better off than they were before.
Let’s dive into the numbers (adjusted for inflation) for each province. In British Columbia, the economy has grown by 13.7 per cent over the past five years but the population has grown by 11.0 per cent, which means the vast majority of the increase in the size of the economy is likely due to population growth—not improvements in productivity or living standards. In fact, per-person GDP, a key indicator of living standards, averaged only 0.5 per cent per year over the last five years, which is a miserable result by historic standards.
A similar story holds in other provinces. Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, Quebec and Saskatchewan all experienced some economic growth over the past five years but their populations grew at almost exactly the same rate. As a result, living standards have barely budged. In the remaining provinces (Newfoundland and Labrador, New Brunswick, Ontario, Manitoba and Alberta), population growth has outstripped economic growth, which means that even though the economy grew, living standards actually declined.
This coast-to-coast stagnation of living standards is unique in Canadian history. Historically, there’s usually variation in economic performance across the country—when one region struggles, better performance elsewhere helps drive national economic growth. For example, in the early 2010s while the Ontario and Quebec economies recovered slowly from the 2008/09 recession, Alberta and other resource-rich provinces experienced much stronger growth. Over the past five years, however, there has not been a “good news” story anywhere in the country when it comes to per-person economic growth and living standards.
In reality, Canada’s recent record-high levels of immigration and population growth have helped mask the country’s economic weakness. With more people to buy and sell goods and services, the overall economy is growing but living standards have barely budged. To craft policies to help raise living standards for Canadian families, policymakers in Ottawa and every provincial capital should remove regulatory barriers, reduce taxes and responsibly manage government finances. This is the great policy challenge for governments across the country in 2026 and beyond.
-
Energy1 day agoRulings could affect energy prices everywhere: Climate activists v. the energy industry in 2026
-
Digital ID1 day agoThe Global Push for Government Mandated Digital IDs And Why You Should Worry
-
Bruce Dowbiggin1 day agoThe Rise Of The System Engineer: Has Canada Got A Prayer in 2026?
-
International1 day agoMaduro says he’s “ready” to talk
-
International1 day agoLOCKED AND LOADED: Trump threatens U.S. response if Iran slaughters protesters
-
International5 hours ago“Captured and flown out”: Trump announces dramatic capture of Maduro
-
International4 hours agoTrump Says U.S. Strike Captured Nicolás Maduro and Wife Cilia Flores; Bondi Says Couple Possessed Machine Guns
-
Business5 hours agoVacant Somali Daycares In Viral Videos Are Also Linked To $300 Million ‘Feeding Our Future’ Fraud

