highlights · 2019-03-27 · highlights 2016 coordinated point-in-time count of homelessness in...
TRANSCRIPT
HIGHLIGHTS2016 COORDINATED POINT-IN-TIME COUNT OF HOMELESSNESS IN CANADIAN COMMUNITIES
ISSD-044-02-16E
HOMELESSNESS Partnering Strategy
2016 coordinated point-in-time count of homelessness in Canadian communities
This publication is available for download at
publicentre.esdc.gc.ca.
It is also available upon request in multiple formats (large print,
Braille, audio cassette, audio CD, e-text diskette, e-text CD, or DAISY),
by contacting 1 800 O-Canada (1-800-622-6232). By teletypewriter (TTY),
call 1-800-926-9105.
© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2017
For information regarding reproduction rights:
PDF Cat. No.: Em12-25/1-2016E-PDF
ISSN: 978-0-660-07166-4
ESDC Cat. No.: SSD-177-01-17E
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION 1Acknowledgements 2
BACKGROUND 3Acommonapproach 5
CONDUCTINGTHE2016COORDINATED 7 POINT‑IN‑TIMECOUNTPreparingforthecount 7
Launchingthecount 8
WHOWASINCLUDEDIN 9 THECOORDINATEDCOUNT?Howmanypeoplewereidentifiedasexperiencing 10homelessnessduringthePiTCount?
Howmanypeopleparticipatedinthesurvey? 11
THEEXPERIENCEOFHOMELESSNESS 12Chronicandepisodichomelessness 12
Peoplenotusingthesheltersystem 14
Newtocommunity(withinthepastyear) 15
GENDERANDAGE 16Ageandreasonsforhousingloss 17
POPULATIONS 18Youthhomelessness 18
Familyhomelessness 20
Indigenousidentityandhomelessness 21
MilitaryandRCMPVeterans 23
Newcomers(recentimmigrantsandrefugees) 24
CONCLUSIONS 25Populations 25
Thenextcoordinatedcount:2018 26
1
INTRODUCTION
Thisreportprovidesafirstlookatthekeyfindingsofthe2016Coordinated
Point‑in‑Time(PiT)Count.Thesefindingsincludethebasicdemographicsofparticipants
surveyed,aswellastheirreportedexperiencesofhomelessness,theirincomesources
andtheirreasonsforlosingtheirhousing.
Theresultshighlightedinthisreportarebasedonthesurveysconductedacross
the32participatingcommunities.Thesesurveysweredoneinlargeandsmallurban
communities,aswellasinrelativelyruralandremotecommunities.
InJune2016,theGovernmentofCanadaannouncedthatasecondcountwouldtake
placeduringMarchandApril2018.Informationfromthissecondcount,whencompared
with2016countfindings,willhelpcommunitiesunderstandchangesinlocalhomeless
populationsovertime.
Asmorecommunitiesparticipateinfuturecoordinatedcounts,findingsfrom
theCoordinatedPiTCountcanhelptodevelopatrulynationalunderstanding
ofhomelessnessinCanada.
2
Acknowledgements
ThisreportwaspreparedbyDr.PatrickHunter,PolicyAnalystforEmploymentand
SocialDevelopmentCanada,andreflectstheworkbythePiTCountImplementation
team,theNationalPiTCountWorkingGroupandallofthefollowing32communities
thatparticipatedinthe2016Count:
WEST ONTARIO EAST
British Columbia
n Victoria
nNanaimo
nNelson
n Kelowna
n PrinceGeorge
n Comox
Yukon
nWhitehorse
Saskatchewan
n Regina
n PrinceAlbert
Manitoba
n Brandon
n Thompson
Ontario
n Brantford
nGuelphandWellington
County
n Halton
n Hamilton
n Kingston
n London
nNipissing/NorthBay
n Peterborough
n Sault‑Ste‑Marie
n St.Catharines/Niagara/
Thorold
n ThunderBay
nWindsor
n YorkRegion
New Brunswick
n Fredericton
nMoncton
n SaintJohn
n Bathurst
Nova Scotia
n Halifax
n CapeBreton
Prince Edward Island
n Charlottetown
n Summerside
3
BACKGROUND
BetweenJanuary1andApril30,2016,theGovernmentofCanadaprovidedsupport
to32communitiesacrossCanadathatparticipatedinacoordinatedcountofhomeless
populationsintheirrespectiveareas.ThesecommunitiesusedthePoint‑in‑Time(PiT)
Countmethod(describedbelow)inordertobetterunderstandthenatureandscope
oflocalhomelessness.
SomecommunitiesinCanadahavebeenconductingtheirownhomelesscountsfor
morethanadecade.However,theyhavebeendoingsoatdifferenttimesofyearand
usingdifferentapproaches.The2016CoordinatedPiTCountmarkedthefirsttime
thatcommunitiesacrossprovincesandterritoriesinCanadahaveusedacommon
approachwhendoingahomelesscount.Thisapproachwasdevelopedbyanational
workinggroupthatincludedexpertsfromcommunitiesthathaveexperience
conductingcounts.
4
WHATISA“POINT‑IN‑TIME”COUNT?
APoint‑in‑Time(PiT)countisaone‑daysnapshotofhomelessnessinshelters
andonthestreetswithinacommunity.APiTcountestimateshowmanypeople
areexperiencinghomelessnessinemergencyshelters,intransitionalhousingand
inunshelteredlocationsonthedayofthecount.Itcanalsoincludepeoplewhoare
inhealthorcorrectionsfacilities—suchashospitals,detoxcentres,detentioncentres
orjails—whodonothaveaplacetogowhentheyarereleased.
ThePiTcountisnotjustacount;itincludessurveyquestionsaimedatgetting
informationtobetterunderstandthepopulationofpeopleexperiencinghomelessness.
Thisinformationcanhelpdeterminewhatinterventionsareneededtohelpmove
peopleexperiencinghomelessnessintoastablehousingsituation.
PiTcountscanberepeatedoversubsequentyearstoevaluateprogressinreducing
homelessness,trackdemographicchangesandmonitorevolvingserviceneedsinorder
tobetterallocateresources.
LimitationsofaPiTcount
APiTcountcannotreachallofthepeoplewhoarehomelessinthecommunityover
aperiodoftime.Peopleoftencycleinandoutofhomelessness,sosomepeoplewill
notbehomelessduringthecountbutmayhavebeenthedaybefore,ormaybecome
homelessthedayafter.Moreover,itcannotreachallpeopleregardedas“hidden”
homeless—thosewhoaretemporarilystayingwithfriendsorfamilybecause
theyhavenoplaceoftheirown.
Forthesereasons,PiTcountsshouldbecomplementedbyotherinformationgathering
approaches,suchasperiodprevalencecounts,whichcollectadministrativedataover
thecourseofayear,orthecreationofaby‑namelist,areal‑timeregistryofpeople
whoenterandexithomelessnesswithinacommunity.
5
A common approach
Theapproachusedforthe2016CoordinatedPiTCountwasdesignedsothateach
communitywouldhaveacommonbaselinewithwhichtoassesslocalhomelessness.
Itincludedadefinitionofthecorepopulationsexperiencinghomelessness,corescreening
andsurveyquestionsandthebasicmethodologyfortheenumeration.Itallowedthe
resultsofindividualcommunitiestobecombinedintoabroaderpicture,helpingto
improvetheunderstandingofhomelessnessacrossthecountryandthesupports
neededtoaddressit.
Communitiescanpotentiallybuildonthiscoreapproachtobetteraddresslocal
priorities.Thiscanmeanincludingotherpopulationsconsideredtobehomeless
(e.g.,peoplewithinthecorrectionssystemwithoutapermanentaddress).Itcanalso
meanaddingsurveyquestionsthataddresslocalinformationneeds.Forexample,
severalcommunitiesconductedajointPiTCountandRegistryWeek,whichcreates
aby‑namelistofpeopleexperiencinghomelessnessinthecommunityandhousing
interventions.
Corepopulations:Whowassurveyed?
PiTcountcore populationsincludedpeoplewhoweresleepinginunsheltered
locations(e.g.,alleys,parksandotherpublicspaces,abandonedbuildings,cars,etc.),
emergencyshelters,coldweathershelters,transitionalfacilitiesandshelters
forwomenfleeingviolence.
Somecommunitieswerealsoabletosurveypeoplewhowereinhealthor
correctionsfacilities(e.g.,hospitals,detoxfacilities,jails,prisonsordetentioncentres).
Manycommunitiesalsochosetoconductsurveyswithpeopleexperiencing“hidden
homelessness”(stayingtemporarilywithsomeoneelsebecausetheyarewithout
aplaceoftheirown).Inmostcases,theywereencounteredinoutdoorlocations,
inservicelocationsorat“magnetevents”intendedtoengagethispopulation.
6
Corequestions:Whatwasasked?
Thecore questionssolicitedthefollowinginformation:
nwhetherrespondentshadapermanentresidence;
nwheretheywerestayingonthenightofthecount;
nwhetherrespondentswereexperiencingfamilyhomelessness;
nwhattheiragewas;
nwhatgendertheyidentifiedwith;
nwhethertheyidentifiedasIndigenousorAboriginal;
nwhethertheyhadservedintheCanadianArmedForcesorRoyalCanadian
MountedPolice;
nwhethertheycametoCanadaasanimmigrantorrefugeeinthepastfiveyears;
nwhethertheymovedtothecommunityinthepastyear;
nwhatlengthoftimetheyspenthomelessoverthepastyear;
nwhatnumberofdistincthomelessepisodestheyhadoverthepastyear;
nwhethertheyusedashelteroverthepastyear;
nwhatthereasonswerefortheirmostrecenthousingloss;and
nwhatsourcesofincometheyhad.
Thefulllistofcorequestionsandresponseoptionsusedin2016canbefoundinthe
Guide to Point-in-Time Counts in Canada of the Homelessness Partnering Strategy.
7
CONDUCTINGTHE2016COORDINATEDPOINT‑IN‑TIMECOUNTPreparing for the count
ThiswasthefirstPiTcountfor28ofthe32communities.Inthemonthsleadingupto
thecount,implementationguidelinesandtoolsweredevelopedforthecommunities
withthesupportoftheGovernmentofCanada’sHomelessnessPartneringStrategy(HPS)
Program.Theseincluded:
n TheGuide to Point-in-Time Counts in Canada of the Homelessness Partnering
Strategy–TheguideprovidedthecoremethodologyforthePiTcount,thecommon
corequestions,andguidelinesandadviceforplanningacount.Itwasdevelopedto
supportthecoordinatedcount,butcanserveasageneralguidetoanycommunity
wishingtoconductaPiTcount.
n ThePoint-in-Time Count Toolkit–ThiswasdevelopedbytheCanadianObservatory
onHomelessnesswiththesupportoftheHPS.Itprovidedpracticaltipsandtools
thatcouldbedownloadedandadaptedforusebyparticipatingcommunities.
n PiTCountCoordinatorTrainingSessions–Participatingcommunitieswereprovided
withatrainingworkshopforplanningandconductingacount.Theworkshopincluded
simulationsandquestionandanswersessions.Workshopattendeesbenefittedfrom
theexperienceofexpertsfromcommunitiesthathadpreviousexperienceconducting
PiTcounts.
n ThePiTCountsectionontheCommunity Workspace on Homelessness–Inorder
tofostercollaborationandknowledgesharingamongcommunities,theHPSProgram
supportedthedevelopmentofaPiT Count sectionontheWorkspace—anonline
collaborativespacewherepractitionersandexpertscanshareinformation
andresources.
8
Launching the count
ThecommunityPiTcountstookplaceacrossCanadabetweenJanuary16
andApril25,2016,withmostcountsoccurringbetweentheendofFebruary
andmid‑April.
Ontario13 Communities
32 Participating Communities 2,000+ Volunteers 250+ Shelters and transitional facilities 350+ Community partners
East8 Communities
West1 1 Communities
9
WHOWASINCLUDEDINTHECOORDINATEDCOUNT?
Forthe2016PiTCount,homelessnesswasdefinedbywherepeoplewerespendingthe
night.Thecore populations includedbyallparticipatingcommunitiescomprisedpeople
stayinginunshelteredlocations,insheltersandintransitionalfacilities.Communities
couldalsoopttoincludepeopleexperiencinghomelessnessinhealthandcorrections
systems,andpeopleexperiencing“hidden”homelessness.
Sleeping rough on the street, in parks, camps, vehicles or abandoned buildings
Staying in emergency shelters, shelters for women escaping violence, or provided with hotel vouchers in lieu of a shelter bed
Staying in transitional facilities that provide longer stays than shelters, but are not permanent housing interventions
Corrections: prisons, jails, detention centres with no fixed address
Health: hospitals, detox, other treatment facilities with no fixed address
Staying with someone else because the person is without a place of his or her own
Unsheltered (Core)
Sheltered (Core)
Transitional (Core)
Systems (Optional)
Populations included in the point-in-time count
Hidden (Optional)
10
How many people were identified as experiencing homelessness during the PiT Count?
Acrossthe32participatingcommunities,atotalof5,954peoplewereidentified
asexperiencinghomelessnessinthecorepopulations(i.e.inemergencyshelters,
intransitionalfacilitiesandonthestreets).Betweencommunities,countsvaried
from12to1,201people.Intotal,1,417people(24%)wereenumeratedinunsheltered
locations,2,832people(47%)wereenumeratedinsheltersand1,705people(29%)
wereenumeratedintransitionalfacilities.
Anadditional245peoplewereenumeratedwhowereexperiencinghomelessness
anddidnotknowwheretheywouldspendthenight.Manycommunitiesalsoincluded
otherpopulationsintheircount.In17communities,478peopleenumeratedhad
nofixedaddressandweresleepinginhealthandcorrectionsfacilities.
Sheltered
47%
Transitional
29%
Unsheltered
24%
Enumeration by population
11
How many people participated in the survey?
Acrossthe32communities,4,579peoplewhowereexperiencinghomelessnesswere
surveyed.Thisnumberincludes3,543peopleinthecore populations.Italsoincludes
1,036peoplewhodidnotknowwheretheyweregoingtostaythatnight,peoplewho
weresurveyedinhealthandcorrectionalsystems,andpeoplewhowereexperiencing
hiddenhomelessness.
HIDDENHOMELESSNESS
Noteveryonewhoishomelessisstayinginashelteroronthestreet.Manyare
livinginprecarioussituationswithfriendsorrelativesonatemporarybasis.Because
theytendnottointeractwiththehomelessnessservingsystems,thisisreferred
toas“hidden”homelessness.
Becausethoseexperiencinghiddenhomelessnessstayinhomes,itisnotpossible
foraPiTcounttodeterminehowmanypeopleareexperiencinghiddenhomelessness
duringthecount.Acertainnumbermaybeencounteredandsurveyedonthenight
ofthecount,butthislikelyonlyrepresentsafractionofthetotalhiddenhomeless
population.IncommunitiesthatincludedhiddenhomelessnessintheirPiTcount,
itaccountedforbetween1.1%and49.8%ofthesurveyedpopulation,withhigher
numbersincommunitiesthatconducteda“magnetevent”toreachouttopeople
experiencinghomelessness.Insomecases,magneteventswereassimpleas
acommunitymeal.Inothers,theyincludedarangeofservices,fromhaircuts
andclothingbankstorésuméworkshops.
APiTcountcanhelptoshedsomelightonwhoisexperiencinghiddenhomelessness
andwhatservicesareneededtohelpthem.
12
THEEXPERIENCEOFHOMELESSNESSChronic and episodic homelessness
Thesurveyusedforthe2016PiTCountaimedtoidentifythenumberofpeople
experiencingchronic or episodichomelessness.Respondentswereaskedtoestimate
howmuchtimetheywerehomelessoverthecourseofthepastyearandhowmany
differenttimestheyexperiencedhomelessness.Forthepurposesofthecount,chronic
homelessnesswasdefinedasanexperienceofsixormoremonthsofhomelessness,
andepisodic homelessness wasdefinedasthreeormoredistinctepisodesaddingup
tolessthansixmonths.Temporary homelessnesswasdefinedaslessthansixmonths
andfewerthanthreeepisodesofhomelessnessoverthepastyear.
Accordingtothesedefinitions,56.7%ofrespondentswereexperiencingchronic
homelessnessand9.0%wereexperiencingepisodic homelessness.Theremaining
respondentshadeitherrecentlybecomehomelessorhadexperiencedoneor
twoshorterepisodesofhomelessness.Chronichomelessnessvariedbycommunity,
rangingfrom25.0%to91.7%,withhigherlevelsinwesternandnortherncommunities
comparedtocommunitiesinOntarioandtheEast.
13
Chronic and episodic homelessness by region
East
Chronic68%
Temporary40%
Episodic14%
Episodic7%
Temporary25%
Chronic46%
West
Chronic50%
Episodic10%
Temporary40%
Ontario
14
Unsheltered
Perce
ntag
e of r
espo
nden
ts wh
o did
not
use
a she
lter i
n th
e pas
t yea
r
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%Transitional Systems Hidden
38%
52%
60%
52%
People not using the shelter system
APiTcountcanalsoindicatewhatproportionofthehomelesspopulationdoesnot
usethesheltersystem.Morethanonequarterofrespondentsindicatedthattheyhad
not usedashelterinthepastyear.Manywereeitherinunshelteredlocations,in
transitionalhousing,inhealthorcorrectionssystemsorwereexperiencinghidden
homelessnessonthenightofthecount.
Non-shelter users by location
Respondentswhohadexperiencedlongerperiodsofhomelessnessweremore
likelytohaveusedashelter.Itisparticularlyimportanttoknowthenumberofpeople
experiencinglongperiodsofhomelessnesswhoarestayingonthestreetorwhoare
experiencinghiddenhomelessness.Theseindividualsmayormaynotinteractwith
homelessnesssupportsystemsandtheytendtobehardertoreach.Amongrespondents
whohadbeenhomelessforsixormoremonths,36%ofthosestayinginunsheltered
locationsand47%ofthosewhowereexperiencinghiddenhomelessnesshadnot
usedashelter.
15
0–2 Mos
Perce
ntag
e of r
espo
nden
ts wh
o did
not
use
a she
lter i
n th
e pas
t yea
r
Length of homelessness over the past year
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%3–5 Mos 6+ Mos
Non-shelter users by duration of homelessnessfor unsheltered and hidden populations
68%
43% 47%
36%35%
46%
UnshelteredHidden
New to community (within the past year)
Approximately30%ofsurveyrespondentshadarrivedinthecommunitywithinthe
pastyear.Thosewhohadarrivedrecentlytendedtobeyoungerandwerelesslikelyto
beexperiencingchronichomelessness.Therewerenodifferencesbetweenthegroups
intermsofgender,Aboriginalidentityorveteranstatus.
16
GENDERANDAGE
Inthe2016PiTCountsurvey,respondentswereaskedwhatgendertheyidentified
with.Morethan60%ofthesurveyrespondentsweremale,withwomenaccounting
fornearly40%.Lessthan1%ofrespondentsprovidedanothergenderidentity.1
ConsistentwithfindingspublishedintheHighlights of the National Shelter
Study 2005–2014,mostrespondentswereadults(aged24–49),withfewer
olderadults(50–64)andunaccompaniedyouths(aged14–24).Veryfewwere
seniors(aged65+).Respondentsalsoreporteddependentchildren(aged0–16)
aswellasolderdependants(aged17+).
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
Nu
mb
er
of
ind
ivid
uals
Age
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
PiT count enumeration by age and gender
Male
Female
Malesandfemaleswereequallyrepresentedamongchildrenandyouths,butmales
weremoreprevalentamonghomelessadults,olderadultsandyoungerseniors,with
thedifferencesdisappearingforindividualsagedintheirearly70s.Thiswaslargely
duetoadownwardtrendinfemalehomelessnessoveradulthood.Bycontrast,male
homelessnesswassteadyuntilthe50s,whereitbegantoshowasharpdecline.
1 Lessthan1%ofsurveyrespondentsself‑identifiedastransgenderorgaveanotherresponse.Becausethesurveyquestionwas,“Whatgenderdoyouidentifywith?”peoplewhoaretransgenderwhoidentifyasmaleorfemalemayhaveresponded“male”or“female”.Therefore,thisnumbercannotbeinterpretedasthetotalnumberofpeoplewhoaretransgenderinthepopulation.
17
Malesmadeupthemajorityofrespondentsinmostsurveylocations,including
unshelteredlocations(73.7%)andemergencyshelters(65.5%),whereasfemales
representedmorethanhalf(53.4%)ofrespondentsintransitionalhousing.Thismay
bedueinparttotheavailabilityofsheltervs.transitionalhousingunitsformen
andwomen.
Age and reasons for housing loss
Respondentswereaskedwhathappenedthatledtotheirmostrecenthousingloss.
Thefivemostcommonlycitedresponsesbyeachagegrouparelistedinthetablebelow.
34% Conflictwith a parentor guardian
18% Addictionor substance use
12% Eviction: non-financial reasons
12% Unsafe housing
11% Eviction: unable topay rent
24% Addictionsor substanceuse
16% Eviction:unable topay rent
14% Eviction: non-financial reasons
13% Abuse bya partner or spouse
13% Conflict with a partneror spouse
20% Eviction: unable to pay rent
20% Eviction: non-financial reasons
17% Addictions or substance use
16% Job loss
14% Unsafe housing
24% Eviction: unable to pay rent
15% Illness or medicalcondition
14% Eviction: non-financial reasons
11% Job loss
10% Addictions or substance use
Youth(14–24)
Adult(25–49)
Older Adult
(50–64)Senior(65+)
Five most common reasons indicated for housing lossby age group
18
Somedifferencesacrossagegroupsarenoticeable:
nAddictionsandsubstanceusewascitedacrossagegroups,althoughitwas
lesscommonlyindicatedbyseniors.
n Financialfactorsbecomemoreprevalentwithage,includinganinabilitytopay
rentandjobloss.Thismaycomefromolderadultsthatlosetheiremployment
andhavedifficultyfindinganewjob.
n Evictionfornon‑financialreasonsisprevalentacrossagegroups.
n Interpersonalfactorswerenotedbyyouthandadultsintheformofabuse,
conflictorboth.
POPULATIONSYouth homelessness
Asharpincreaseinhomelessnesswasseenbetweentheagesof16and20forboth
genders.Maleandfemaleyouthwererepresentedacrosssurveylocations,although
menweresomewhatmoreprevalentinsheltersandhealthandcorrectionssystems.
Amongadults,womenstillmadeuphalfofthoseintransitionalfacilitiesbutwerethe
minorityinmostothersurveylocations.Thisisparticularlyevidentinunshelteredlocations,
wheretheproportionofwomenfallsfrom52%amongyouthto23%amongadults.
Amongyouth,morethanathird(34%)saidthatconflictwithparentsorguardians
contributedtotheirmostrecenthousingloss.Abusebyaparentorguardian
wasmentionedby7%ofsurveyrespondents.
19
Unsheltered
Yo
uth
(14
–2
4)
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%TransitionalSheltered Systems Hidden
52% 44% 55% 41%
48%
56%
45%
59%
47%
53%
Unsheltered
Ad
ult
s (2
5+
)
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%TransitionalSheltered Systems Hidden
23% 32% 53% 31%
77%
68%
47%
69%
37%
63%
Gender by location and age group
Male Female
20
Family homelessness
Inordertoestimatetheextentoffamilyhomelessness,respondentswereaskedwhether
theywerestayingwithanyoneelse.Intotal,14%ofrespondentsindicatedthattheyhad
oneormorefamilymemberswiththem.Oftheserespondents,approximately86%were
singleparents(mostlyfemale),6%werecoupleswithdependants,and9%werecouples
withoutdependants.
Couplestendedtohavemoredependants,withanaverageof2.2dependantsper
couplecomparedto1.9forsingleparents.Dependantsweremostlychildrenunderthe
ageof17(91.5%),butincludedanumberofdependentyouthsandadultsaswell(8.5%).
Comparedtorespondentswithoutdependants,fewfamilieswithdependantswere
unsheltered.Themajorityofthesefamiliesweresurveyedinsheltersortransitional
housing(81%).
Overnight locations for respondentswith and without dependants
With dependants
Transitional18%
Systems3%
Sheltered50%
Unsheltered9%
Hidden10%
Systems<1%
Sheltered39%
Unsheltered14%
Hidden15%
Transitional42%
Without dependants
21
Indigenous identity and homelessness
NearlytwoinfiverespondentsidentifiedasAboriginalorIndigenous(37%).This
proportionvariedbycommunityfrom7%to97%.Bycomparison,only4%ofpeople
inthegeneralCanadianpopulationidentifyasAboriginal.Thismeansthatpeople
whoidentifyasAboriginalareninetimesmorelikelytoexperiencehomelessness
thanthosewhodonot.
Percentage of respondents who identify as Indigenous
Indigenous37%
Non-Indigenous63%
FirstNations24%
Métis5%
Inuit<1%
Non-Statusor Ancestry
8%
Demographically,Indigenousrespondentswereyoungerandweremorelikelytobe
femalethannon‑Indigenousrespondents.Indigenousrespondentswerealsoless
likelytobeinsheltersortransitionalfacilities,andmorelikelytoreporthidden
homelessness,particularlyamongthosewhoidentifiedasFirstNations.
22
Indigenousrespondentsweremorelikelytoreportlongerdurationsofhomelessness
(sixormoremonths)andmoredistinctepisodesofhomelessness(threeormore)
overthepastyear.ThiswasparticularlytrueofrespondentswhoidentifiedasFirst
NationsandInuit.
Indigenous
Number of months ofhomelessness in the past year
Number of episodes ofhomelessness in the past year
Non-Indigenous
62%
17%
21%
52%
19%
30%
Indigenous Non-Indigenous
39%
14%
47%
25%
17%
58%
Duration and number of episodes of homelessnessby Indigenous identity
Six or moreThree to fiveZero to two
Three or moreTwoOne
23
Military and RCMP Veterans
Nearly5%ofrespondentsindicatedthattheyhadservedintheCanadianArmed
Forces,whilelessthan1%indicatedthattheyhadservedintheRoyalCanadianMounted
Police(RCMP).Bycontrast,theproportionofveteransintheCanadianadultpopulation
isapproximately2.4%.Thisresultsuggeststhatveteransareapproximatelytwiceas
likelytoexperiencehomelessnessasnon‑veterans.Theproportionofrespondents
thatidentifiedasaveteranvariedbycommunityandrangedfrom0%to13%.
Veteransweremorelikelytobemaleandolderthannon‑veterans,morelikelyto
useashelterinthepast12months,andmorelikelytoreportexperiencingchronic
homelessnessacrossagecategories.
Age by veteran status
Non-veterans
Adults(25–49)
46%Adults
(25–49)55%
Older Adults(50–64)
23%
Seniors(65+)3%
Youth(14–24)
19%
Youth(14–24)
4%
Seniors(65+)9%
Older Adults(50–64)
41%
Veterans
Maleveteransweremorelikelythanmalenon‑veteranstobeinunshelteredlocations
andinemergencyshelters,andlesslikelytobeintransitionalfacilitiesorbeexperiencing
hiddenhomelessness.Fewfemaleveteranswereidentified.Theyweremorelikelythan
femalenon‑veteranstobeinsheltersandlesslikelytobeintransitionalfacilities.
24
Newcomers (recent immigrants and refugees)
Fourpercentofrespondentsindicatedtheywerearefugeeorimmigrantwhocame
toCanadawithinthepastfiveyears(2011–2016).Thisrangedfrom0%to16%among
theparticipatingcommunities.Theproportionissimilartothatofnewcomers
inthegeneralpopulation.
Newcomersweremorethantwiceaslikelyasnon‑newcomerstobeintransitional
facilities(45%vs.19%).Nobroaddemographicdifferenceswereseenbetweengroups,
althoughnewcomersweremorelikelytoreportbeinghomelesswithadependant
(40%vs.13%).
Family composition by newcomer status
Non-newcomer
One-parent33%
Single56%
Two-parent1%
Single87%
Two-parent7%
Couple3%
Couple2%
One-parent11%
Newcomer
Whenaskedaboutfactorsthatcontributedtotheirmostrecenthousingloss,nearly
oneinthreenewcomers(31%)citedfactorsdirectlytiedtotheirreasonformigration
(e.g.,“war”or“forcedtoleavecountry”).Femalenewcomersweretwiceaslikelyas
non‑newcomerfemalestocitedomesticabuseasacontributingfactor(40%vs.22%).
25
CONCLUSIONS
ThefindingsfromthesecommunityPiTcountsbuildonwhatisknownabout
homelessnessinCanada.WhiledataisavailableonshelterusersinCanada,PiT
countscanbeusedtoengagethosewhodonotaccessservicesforthoseexperiencing
homelessness,includingshelters.Itisnotablethatwhilehalfofthoseenumeratedin
thisstudywereinashelter,halfofthosewhowereexperiencinghiddenhomelessness
andathirdofthoseinunshelteredlocationsindicatedthattheyhadnotusedashelter
inthepastyear.
Populations
Overhalfofrespondentsindicatedtheywerehomelessforsixormoremonthsinthe
pastyear.TheHighlights of the National Shelter Study 2005–2014showedthatthe
majorityofthosewhobecomehomelesshaveonlyabriefexperienceofhomelessness.
Relativelyfewpeopleexperiencehomelessnessacrossyears.Andyet,peopleexperiencing
chronichomelessnessappeartomakeupthemajorityofthosewhoarehomeless
onagivenday.
Inrecentyears,manycommunitieshaveadoptedaHousing Firstapproachtosupport
peopleexperiencingchronichomelessness.Generallyspeaking,underthisapproach,
individualswithhighneedsaremovedasrapidlyaspossiblefromthestreetorshelters
directlyintopermanenthousingwithsupportsthataretailoredtotheirneeds.Asthis
approachisadoptedbymoreCanadiancommunities,morepeoplemaybereceiving
thehelptheyneedtobecomestablyhoused.
Thefindingsalsopointtopopulationsthatareinparticularneedofsupport.Indigenous
peopleareover‑representedinthehomelesspopulationacrossthecountry.Thehigh
incidenceofchronichomelessnessamongthispopulationsuggestsaneedforaHousing
Firstapproachthatisculturallysensitive,aswaspilotedinWinnipegaspartofthe
At Home/Chez Soiproject.Similarly,thehigherincidenceofchronichomelessness
amongveteransandfamilyhomelessnessamongnewcomersindicatesaneed
fortargetedsupports.
26
Otherfindingsinthisreporthighlightaneedfortargetedsupportsorfurther
investigation:
nNearlyonequarterofallwomenciteddomesticabuseasafactorleadingtotheir
mostrecenthousingloss.Thenumberwashigherfornewcomerwomen.Domestic
violencesheltersplayanimportantroleinaddressingtheneedsofthispopulation.
nOlderadultsandseniorsweremorelikelytocitefinancialfactorsfortheirmost
recenthousingloss,includinganinabilitytopayrentandthelossofemployment.
Financialinterventionsmaybeeffectiveatpreventinghousinglossbypeople
intheseagegroups.
n Evictionfornon‑financialreasonsiscommonacrossagegroups.Withoutfurther
information,itisnotclearwhatthesereasonsare.
The next coordinated count: 2018
Thefindingsofthe2016Countprovideasnapshotofhomelessnessin
winter‑spring2016.ThetruevalueofPiTcountscomeswiththerepetitionof
thesecountsovertime.Thenextcountwillprovideapointofcomparisonagainst
thisfirstcounttoidentifychangesindistinctpopulations.Inparticular,itmaybe
possibletoseechangesinchronicandepisodichomelessnessincommunities
withastronghousingfirstapproach.
Withmorecommunitieslikelytobeparticipatingin2018,itwillbepossibletosee
abroadernationalpictureofhomelessnessinCanada.Certainpopulations,suchas
newcomers,arelikelytobemorerepresentedincertaincommunities.Withdatafrom
thesecommunities,itmaybepossibletobetterunderstandwhatleadstohomelessness
andwhatsupportscanbeeffectiveinreducingit.