An Evaluation of the City of Toronto’s Emergency Homelessness Pilot Project

By Gloria Gallant, Joyce Brown and Jacques Tremblay

June 2004 Acknowledgements We wish to acknowledge the members of the Emergency Homelessness Pilot Project (EHPP) Steering Committee, landlords involved in the project, and representatives of community agencies, all of whom assisted us in gathering the data and provided feedback on our findings.

We are especially grateful to Kevin Lee, City of Toronto Shelter, Housing and Support Division, Michelle Haney-Kileeg, Toronto Community Housing Corporation and the WoodGreen Housing and Support Workers for their considerable contribution to this research.

Most of all we would like to thank the EHPP tenants, who agreed to participate in this study, offered their time, invited us into their homes, and shared with us their insights and experiences.

Graphic Design: Gumbo Design Co. I BACKGROUND

History of Tent City...... 2 The Creation of the Emergency Homelessness Pilot Project...... 3 Overview of the Rent Supplement Program...... 5

II SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION ...... 6 Contents Methodology ...... 7 of

III FINDINGS ...... 10 Observations Regarding Housing ...... 10 Interviews with Participants ...... 10 Housing Satisfaction...... 12 able Health Impact ...... 15 T Support Needs ...... 18 Quality of Life ...... 19 Tenant Turnover ...... 21 Eligibility Review Policy ...... 23 Interviews with Housing Support Workers ...... 24 Interviews with Landlords ...... 25 Input from other Stakeholders ...... 27 Input from Steering Committee Members ...... 28 EHPP Program Costs...... 30

IV CONCLUSION ...... 33 Recommendations ...... 37

V STORIES FROM THE RESPONDENTS...... 38

1 From Tent City to Housing: An Evaluation of The City of Toronto’s Emergency Homelessness Pilot Project

HISTORY OF TENT CITY

Over the past decade, the homeless population in Toronto has grown at an alarming rate.

Background Although the city has an extensive shelter attention for their efforts to build their own system, an increasing number of people do housing and remain self-reliant. However, the not use any of the available shelter services. community was always under the threat of Some find it difficult to adapt to hostel eviction. Various attempts by Home Depot, conditions or cope with the basic rules the City of Toronto, and social housing associated with shelter life, often because of providers to find and/or develop alternative mental health or addiction issues. Instead, housing options were ultimately unsuccessful. these people survive outdoors, living in ravines, open spaces, under bridges or On September 24, 2002, security guards in squats. hired by Home Depot forced the squatters to vacate the site. Some of the inhabitants were Tent City was Toronto’s first major squatter able to carry out a few belongings that day, settlement in recent history. It was formed in or were later escorted in by security to gather 1998 when a group of homeless individuals their possessions. However, many Tent City built shacks and lean-tos on a property on residents lost their valuables in addition to their the waterfront owned by Home Depot. The homes. Within a few days, the dwellings were settlement grew slowly as other homeless demolished and the site was razed. people heard about the small community. With the help of organizations such as the Toronto Disaster Relief Committee (TDRC), a few Tent City was Toronto’s first major squatter settlement in recent history.

portable homes and toilets were provided on site for the inhabitants. Various social service agencies including Street Health, Regent Park Health Centre, Street Patrol and Street Outreach Services offered health care and food.

This new community was the subject of much public debate and study. The settlement was built on land slated for development; land that was also contaminated by former industrial use. The group received considerable media Photo: John MacLennan

2 In order to address the situation brought on by the eviction of Tent City residents, an emergency response protocol that had been developed for the rooming house sector was implemented.

Working with the City, WoodGreen Community with the City to deliver rent supplements in Centre was the primary agency in the response. Toronto, was asked to deliver the pilot project. The Salvation Army, the Red Cross, the TDRC,

the Central Neighbourhood House Street City and TCHC staff worked quickly to develop Background Outreach Team and a variety of other agencies and implement this new rent supplement program. also provided assistance. Tent City residents A Steering Committee made up of representatives were initially offered emergency accommodation from the Shelter Housing and Support Division at the Community Centre itself. However, as of the City of Toronto, TCHC, WoodGreen the need for accommodation continued and Community Centre, Toronto Social Services (TSS) WoodGreen required the space for ongoing Ministry of Community, Family and Children’s programs, it became necessary to move Services (MCFCS), the TDRC, and former Tent people between WoodGreen and the Jimmy City residents was established to guide this Simpson Recreation Centre (across the street development and implementation process. Their from WoodGreen). The City’s Seaton House role was to developa plan for housing the Hostel provided additional staffing at the two evicted squatters as quickly as possible, to work centres. Couples were given the option of with the various housing, income and personal staying at motels under contract with the City support systems and services to ensure that or at a hotel in Parkdale. Tent City pets were services were in place and to problem-solve on initially boarded at WoodGreen and later at the an as needed basis. Toronto Humane Society. While many people accepted the temporary lodgings, others chose In many instances, members of this Committee to remain outside in the ravines, under bridges or facilitated changes to the normal process in wherever shelter could be found. As a result, the the way clients access services. For example, community became somewhat fragmented. TSS developed an expedited process that included a centralized support system through the THE CREATION OF THE EMERGENCY Client Services Unit, and TCHC provided a HOMELESSNESS PILOT PROJECT ‘Letter of Guarantee’ to landlords. TCHC streamlined its eligibility application process In an effort to address the needs of those evicted (waiving its requirement to verify identification from Tent City, the City of Toronto took immediate at the outset and providing last months rent). At action initiating the Emergency Homelessness the Steering Committee meetings, WoodGreen Pilot Project (EHPP) on September 26, 2002. staff provided information on their negotiations The EHPP provides rent supplements to former with landlords and data on the availability of occupants of Tent City and assists them in finding apartments. The Tent City representatives were and maintaining housing. WoodGreen able to provide the Committee with information Community Centre was contracted to assist the about how the former squatters were coping participants of the program to access housing with the situation. They also conveyed new and facilitate relationships between landlords information from the Committee to other former and tenants. The Toronto Community Housing Tent City residents. Corporation (TCHC), already under contract

3 4 Background The letteralsooutlinedtheroleofWoodGreen andthemonthlymarketrent. tenant couldafford betweenwhatthe would paythedifference second andthirdmonthssubsequently market, guarantee100%oftherentfor last month’s intheprivate rentonanapartment letter stipulatedthatTCHCwouldpayfirstand project andgivena‘LetterofGuarantee’.This residents hadbeendeemedeligibleforthepilot TentBy October2002,mostoftheformer City held atWoodGreen onceaweek. urged toattendidentificationclinics,whichwere identificationwere People withoutnecessary Program(ODSP). Ontario DisabilitySupport program (OW)ortheMCFCSifeligiblefor be assessedforeligibilitytheOntarioWorks source ofincomewereputintouchwithTSS,to administered byTCHC).Thosewithoutany Connections (theco-ordinatedaccesscentre and completeanapplicationforSocialHousing the ageof16andhavelegalstatusinCanada) guidelines forsubsidizedhousing(e.g.beover evicted fromTent City, meetthegeneraleligibility program applicantshadtohavebeenrecently In ordertobeeligiblefortherentsupplement not stayingatoneoftheemergencyshelters. City andtoremainintouchwiththosewhowere whohadactuallybeenlivingatTentdetermine City residents.Theinitialchallengewasto WorkersSupport Tent toworkwiththeformer W Households Housedby Month 100 120 40 60 80 oodGreen quicklyhiredthreeHousing 0 period, wereextended. W and thecontractsofHousingSupport clear thatthisinitialassessmentwasunrealistic operation oftheEHPP. Overtime,itbecame upphaseandfirstfewmonthsof initial start Workers)Support wouldberequiredduringthe (Housing staff TCHC anticipatedthatsupport In planningtheprogram,bothCityand households hadobtainedhousing. By December2002,seventy-twoeligible directly tothelandlord. were alsomadeforthesefundstobepaid funds throughOWorODSP. Arrangements assisted theindividualorcoupletogetshelter Workers HousingSupport apartment, then acceptedan view theunit.Onceparticipant workers accompaniedprospectivetenantsto contacted TCHCdirectly. Oncelocated,the landlords throughoutthecity. Afewlandlords the unitsbycontactingandnegotiatingwith WorkersHousing Support identified94%of option offindingtheirownaccommodation, intheprogramhad Although participants budgeting andotherrelatedskills.” P the tenant’s responsibilities such as“attendingtheleasesigning,reviewing WorkersHousing Support tasks inundertaking rotection Act orkers, whichwereinitiallyforasix-month , andassistingtheTenant with under the T enant Households in EHPP

In housing Eligible for Households No longer in Total housing currently in program Households program

Single Men 64 9 73 4 77 Single Women 29 2 31 2 33 Couples 3 1 4 0 4 Total Households 96 12 108 6 114 Total Tenants 99 13 112 6 118

As of February 1, 2004, there were a total of 108 Under the program, landlords were guaranteed: Background eligible households (112 tenants) in the EHPP. > first and last month’s rent in full Of this group, 96 households were in housing and > 100% of the rent for the second and third months 12 were eligible but not in housing at the time1. > monthly rent supplement payments OVERVIEW OF THE RENT (the difference between what the tenant SUPPLEMENT PROGRAM can afford and the monthly rent up to the Maximum Market Rent Allowable) The Toronto Community Housing Corporation administers and manages the Rent Supplement The intent of covering the full rent for the first Program under contract with the City. The three months was to allow time for program program offers approximately 3,000 supplements participants to apply for Ontario Works and for to a variety of populations in need, including ‘direct deposit’ arrangements to be made with OW women who are escaping violence. The EHPP is and ODSP so that the shelter portion of these the latest rent supplement program to be added allowances could be paid directly to the landlord. to TCHC’s portfolio. In this program (which differs from most rent EHPP Participants pay a portion of the rent based supplement models) the rent supplement is on their income. Contributions from Ontario attached to the individual rather than to the Works (OW) and Ontario Disability Support apartment unit in order to provide flexibility. It Program (ODSP) are based on the legislated was anticipated that individuals who had been minimum monthly shelter allowances. TCHC then living on the street for extended periods of time pays the difference up to a maximum market rent might not easily fit into rental accommodation equal to the Canada Mortgage and Housing and that it might take more than one attempt Corporation established median rent for Toronto. before they would be successfully housed.

Monthly EHPP Rent TCHC provided a letter to all tenants outlining the Maximum Market program and their rights and responsibilities. All Size Of Unit Rent Allowable tenants, prior to occupancy of a unit, signed this letter. A tenant handbook was subsequently Room in house $519 developed to provide tenants with additional Bachelor or one bedroom $865 information2. Two bedroom $1020

1 The pilot allocation was for 105 rent supplement units that could be leased by roommates, couples or as single units for individuals. The number of eligible participants has fluctuated somewhat over time, but the take up of rent supplements units has never exceeded 105 at any point. Initially 103 households were approved to participate in the pilot, and participation was capped at this number. However, some people who had lived at Tent City for extended periods but had not been on site at the time of the eviction were not included in this initial approval, and they were put on an eligibility list. Over time, nine of the thirteen couples have separated, thereby increasing the number of eligible households. At one point, the eligibility list expanded to 114 households (for a total of 118 individuals). This has had an impact on program costs as it has increased the number of persons being supported by WoodGreen Housing Support Workers. Since then, some people have left the program. As of February 1, 2004 there were 108 households eligible to participate in the program, 96 of which were living in rent supplement units. 2 Under the rent supplement agreement, all tenants have the same responsibilities. These include the responsibility to report changes in household size or income, as well, any new household members must meet the program’s eligibility criteria. 5 6 Scopeof theEvaluation private rentalhousing. for in providingopportunities ness oftheEmergencyHomelessnessPilotProject(EHPP) The purposeoftheresearchistoevaluateeffective- the supports offered tobothlandlordandtenants. offered the supports landlord-tenant relations,andthesuitabilityof examines landlordsatisfactionwiththeprogram, arrangements withTCHC.Thestudytherefore willingness oflandlordstoengageinformal market rentalunits.Itisalsocontingentonthe depends toagreatextentontheavailabilityof The successofrentsupplementprograms on-going needforsupport. anassessmentoftheir as wellundertaking housing searchprocess,andoncehoused, beforebeinghoused,duringthe participants usedbythe the studyfocusonsupports community agencies.Consequently, aspectsof needscouldbeprovidedbyother their support andif tenants wouldrequireinthelongerterm It was,however, unclearhowmuchsupport tenants tobothfindandmaintaintheirhousing. would becriticalinassistingtheprospective Workers oftheHousingSupport that thesupport In settinguptheprogram,itwasanticipated and/or addictionissues. those whoareexperiencingmentalhealth homeless forextendedperiodsoftime,including a programcanassistpeoplewhohavebeen in Toronto, itiscriticaltounderstandhowsuch quality oflife.Giventheextenthomelessness their housingstability, needs,and theirsupport assessestheimpactofEHPPon It further homeless peopletoaccess recommendations. and Italsoassessesthefinancial on-going supports. the pilotmodelandoutlinesneedfor makesrecommendationstoimprove This report Program. Services Access andSupport oftheFredVictor Housing use theservices from anothergroupofhomelessindividualswho wasalsogathered the useofhealthservices, programs suchasshelters.Comparativedataon understanding ofthecostsinrelationtoother tohaveaclear itisimportant cost-effective, iftheprogram is In ordertodetermine other populationsofhomelessindividuals. to to doso,andthosewhoprovidesupport residents andinsomecaseswhoarecontinuing who hadbeenworkingwiththeTent City providers of otherstakeholderssuchasservice The researchprocessalsoconsiderstheviews administrative implicationsofthe

Photo: John MacLennan METHODOLOGY

The research was conducted between February Community Centre at local drop-ins, coffee 2003 and March 31, 2004. Both quantitative shops and the homes of some of the tenants. and qualitative measures were used to assess Where possible, interviews were scheduled Evaluation the impact of the EHPP on the individuals during the latter part of the month when it was involved in the program. Fifty of the eligible anticipated that people would be most in need program participants were selected for a series of money. of three interviews. Six couples were included

in the group of 50. The selection of fifty people The first set of interviews was conducted in April of the was seen as a representative sample of the total and May 2003. Second interviews took place group. The researchers assumed that some of the in November and December 2003. Final 50 would decide they did not want to participate interviews were carried out in February and in all three interviews and/or that it might not March 2004. be possible to reach all 50 people for each interview (given lack of telephones, mobility of The Housing Support Workers met with the some of the participants, ongoing willingness to prospective participants first and asked if they participate, etc.). were willing to take part in the study. Interested Scope participants were then introduced to the The purpose of conducting three interviews was researchers. Contact with the participants was to measure the degree to which the housing met at times difficult as few of the former Tent City the needs of the participants3, changes in the residents could afford telephones. For the participants’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction with second and third interviews, flyers were sent out their housing, and their ability to maintain it to invite participants to an interview session at over time. Working with WoodGreen staff, the the Open Door Centre or at WoodGreen. For researchers attempted to obtain a representative those unable to attend, follow-up was attempted sample of the geographic areas in which the and where possible arrangements were made tenants were housed as well as a variety in the to interview the tenants at a time that was size and type of building. The sample also convenient, either at WoodGreen or in the reflects the age and gender mix of the larger tenant’s home. The Housing Support Workers EHPP group. frequently provided assistance with the follow-up arrangements. Involvement in the evaluation process was entirely voluntary and participants in the sample were paid an honorarium of $25 for each interview. The researchers endeavored to conduct the interviews at venues that would be convenient for the participants – at the WoodGreen

3 The term participants is used to describe the 50 people included in the sample, unless there is specific reference to the total number of EHPP participants. 7 Forty-one people were re-interviewed during the second stage of the research. Of the nine people

Evaluation not re-interviewed, one was not interested in participating, two were in jail, one was said to be in the hostel system but could not be located, and five could not be reached for an interview

after repeated attempts. Photo: John MacLennan of the Forty-one people were included in the third set factors that were impacting on them, whether or of interviews. Three people who missed the not the result of the program. Whenever possible, second set of interviews (because they were in jail, the researchers followed the same participants on the street or otherwise unreachable) were throughout the process. This built up a relationship included in the final session while three others who between the interviewer and the respondent. participated in the first and second interviews Many of the respondents noted that the interviews could not be reached for the third session. offered them an opportunity to reflect on the Scope Respondents were encouraged to discuss their impressions of the program and how it affected their lives.

changes that had occurred in their lives after Interviews typically lasted up to one hour. being housed and they expressed disappointment During the initial interview, questions were when the process was completed. asked about housing history, the length of time the participants had been homeless, the events In order to determine if the health characteristics of that triggered the initial episode of homelessness, the former residents of Tent City were comparable household composition, satisfaction with the new to other homeless people, interviews were housing, relations with the landlord and other conducted with an additional twenty hard-to- tenants, physical and mental health, changes in house homeless individuals, who were using diet or eating habits, source of income, and shelters and support services. The twenty were quality of life issues. contacted through staff at the Fred Victor Housing Access and Support Services program. Subsequent interviews tracked changes in Attempts were made to gather a sample that participants’ lives and additional questions (such reflected the age and gender mix of the Tent as documenting changes in drug and alcohol City respondents. Staff at the Fred Victor use) were introduced. Although there were a Housing Access and Support Services program number of specific questions, the interviews set up the interviews at the Keith Whitney were open-ended. Respondents were encouraged drop-in, the Adelaide Women’s Resource to discuss their impressions of the program and Centre, and the Meeting Place Drop-In. how it affected their lives as well as any other 8 Interviews were conducted finally to present the initial findings and receive feedback from the Committee. Individual with nine landlords to discuss members of the Steering Committee were also Evaluation their experience with the interviewed to obtain specific information on the TCHC, ODSP and OW systems as they related program, including their to the EHPP. relationship with TCHC

Data from TCHC was reviewed to verify the of the staff, EHPP tenants and the number of people in the program, tenant turnover and ongoing costs. For purposes of Housing Support Workers. comparison, financial data was also gathered from the City of Toronto Hostel Services and a Representatives of social service agencies and supportive housing provider. community groups involved in the provision of services to the EHPP participants (during and

after Tent City was in operation) and other Scope populations of homeless people were also contacted. The service providers were asked to give their perspective on the program, in terms of access to appropriate housing and changes in quality of life for the former Tent City residents. Staff from Fred Victor Housing Access and Support Services and the Hostel Outreach Program provided general information and data on their clients.

The researchers met with the Steering Committee for the EHPP on five occasions: to discuss the scope of the research, to attend a de-briefing session on the start-up phase of the project, to receive an up-date on the work of the Committee in mid 2003 and early 2004, and Photo: John MacLennan

9 1 0 Findings Demographics INTERVIEWS WITHPARTICIPANTS to beinpoorrepair. Workers,and HousingSupport theseunitstended frombothparticipants core. Accordingtoreports rooming houseaccommodationinthedowntown obtained A fewoftheprogramparticipants downtown andthesuburbs. issituatedinanarea midwaybetween turnover) One ofthemostpopularbuildings(withlittle suburban areaexperiencedfarlessturnover. a well-managedhigh-risecomplexinanother tenants ultimatelyleftthiscomplex.Incontrast, maintenance inonesuburbansiteandmany and 1970s.Thereweresomeproblemswith these buildingswereconstructedinthe1960s in goodconditionandwellmaintained.Mostof and thatthebuildingswere,withafewexceptions, unitswererelativelyspacious, that theapartment downtown.Overall,itappeared the journey tomake areas astenantstherefounditdifficult visits weremadepredominantlyinthesuburban Tentformer Cityresidentsintheirhousing.The researchers visitedapproximately15ofthe During thecourseofevaluation, 10% ofthegroupwerevisible minorities. inToronto.nearly 40%wereborn Lessthan inCanadaand 90% ofthegroupwereborn men wereolder(45)thanwomen(32).Over was42.Onaverage, age oftheparticipants Ages rangedbetween17and62.Theaverage were sixcouplesinthesampleand38singles. session, 34weremaleand16female.There duringthefirst Of the50peopleinterviewed were conductedduringAprilandMay2003. Tent with50oftheformer Interviews Cityresidents OBSERVATIONS REGARDINGHOUSING Gender Birthplace % of Respondents orinCouples Single 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 Findings Although it was known that the majority of Tent Length of Time Homeless City residents had been homeless for many 60 years, the statistics related to length of time on the street were still startling. The average length of time that people reported being homeless 50 was 8.5 years. 50% of the respondents indicated that they had been homeless for between 5 and 10 years, 36% had been homeless between 10 40 and 20 years, while 12% had been homeless for over 20 years. 30

Thirty eight percent of the respondents reported % of Respondents initially becoming homeless because of major 20 trauma in their lives such as the death of a spouse or parent, physical abuse or divorce. 20% became homeless as a result of drug or 10 alcohol abuse. 14% lost their housing and could not find new accommodation, while 28% lost 0 their jobs, which in turn led to the loss of housing. < 5 yrs. 5 to 10 yrs. 10 to 20 yrs. > 20 yrs.

Prior to living at Tent City, over 54% of the Initial Reason for Homelessness respondents reported living on the street. 20% were in hostels and an additional 20% were in 40 rooming houses or private accommodation. Six percent moved to Tent City after being released 30 from jail. Most people were already homeless and came to Tent City after hearing about it from friends or acquaintances on the street. 20 Many people said that they didn’t like going to shelters. A significant number of the participants % of Respondents had pets, a factor which made it difficult for 10 them to use the shelter system.

0 Several people spoke about the sense of community Major Drug or Lost Lost at Tent City. When asked what if anything they Trauma Alcohol Abuse Housing Job missed about Tent City, people typically said the bonfires, the friends and the freedom.

11 HOUSING SATISFACTION

According to the results from all three interviews, over 90% of the respondents reported that their housing met

Findings their needs more appropriately than did their former dwellings at Tent City.

Tenants listed a number of aspects of their new Size of Housing Unit housing that had a significant impact on their Nearly all the respondents felt that their apartment lives. Perhaps not surprisingly, they were things offered adequate space. At the time of the first that people with housing typically take for interviews, 66% of the tenants had one-bedroom granted. Listed in declining order of frequency apartments, 26% had bachelor units and 8% they included: were sharing two bedroom apartments4. Perhaps › privacy a contributing factor to the high level of satisfaction is the fact that the rent supplement allows people › a kitchen to obtain one and two bedroom accommodations. safety or security › In contrast, the level of shelter allowances on quiet or peaceful space › OW or ODSP imposes a financial restriction that › having one’s own space often limits the selection to rooming house or › electricity bachelor units. People living out of the downtown › the location area tended to be in apartments that were more › a bathroom spacious than those downtown. › having a home By the time of the second and third interviews › heat or warmth one of the men had moved into rooming house › cleanliness accommodation. He was very satisfied with this arrangement. A woman who was evicted from › being away from downtown her initial apartment also spent some time in a a beautiful building › rooming house situation before becoming › comfort homeless again. › running water › laundry › the backyard › TV › stability

4 Under the City’s occupancy standards for Rent Geared to Income (RGI) housing, single persons are entitled to bachelor or one-bedroom units. Couples must share a bedroom but roommates are entitled to their own rooms.

12 Findings Issues in Buildings reduction methods to lessen his use of damaging substances. In some of the downtown buildings, During the initial interview, 50% of the there were small groups of men who ‘hung out’ respondents reported that there were no together and checked on each other every day. problems in their buildings. A few complained of maintenance issues while others identified Satisfaction with Neighbourhood issues with their superintendents. One high-rise complex has been fraught with problems. There During the first interview, 56% of the tenants have been difficulties with the building manage- reported that they were very satisfied with their ment, with drug dealing in the area and with neighbourhoods, i.e. met their needs for safety, violent incidents on the property. In some access to services, etc. Sixteen percent were instances, former Tent City residents contributed very dissatisfied. This statistic changed consider- to the problems in the complex. As a result, the ably by the time of the second interview when community as a whole was labeled and in some approximately 65% were very satisfied and only cases individuals faced discrimination from tenants one person was very dissatisfied. This change is who were not part of the Tent City group. The primarily due to the fact that a number of tenants vast majority of pilot participants housed at this moved to locations that they felt to be more particular location have chosen to move elsewhere. appropriate. At the third interview, 61% were very satisfied with their neighbourhood, 21% By the second interview, when several people reported that they were somewhat satisfied, and had moved, 75% reported that there were no 18% reported they were very dissatisfied. issues in their buildings. In the final interview 71% reported that there were no issues.

Housing with other Participants

Most of the people in the EHPP program are in buildings that accommodate other former Tent City residents. This arrangement appears to work well where the population of former Tent City residents is relatively small. The majority of respondents indicated that they did not want to be in buildings that house a large number of their old neighbours. Some people commented that they try to remain aloof from their neighbours so as not to revert to their former habits of drug and alcohol use. However, in one building, a few of the tenants banded together to look after an older man from Tent City and used harm Photo: Gloria Gallant

13 The majority of respondents indicated a preference Findings for living outside the downtown area, although it was important that there be access to transportation, stores and services, including food banks.

The desire to live away from the inner city Moves and Reasons for Moving depended to some degree upon age and family At the time of the first interview, 22% of those composition. Couples expressed more satisfaction interviewed indicated that they wanted to move when housed outside the downtown area, while to another apartment. Many said that their some older single men (45 to 55) preferred building was too far from downtown and/or accommodation that was near drop-ins and that there were drug problems in the building. health services in the downtown core. In the third and final interview 64% of the respondents Between the first and second interviews, 34% were living outside of the downtown area. Of (14) of the 41 people who were re-interviewed these respondents, 86% reported the location to did move, including two who relocated to larger be an advantage, largely because of the quiet units in the same building. Twelve of the 14 and the separation from ‘influences’ in the moved into new accommodation and ten were downtown area. Access to a warm and dry environment, electricity, running water, cooking and washroom facilities was reported to have had a positive impact on general health and hygiene.

happy with this new housing. People left their apartments for a variety of reasons. Several moved from a suburban high-rise with reported drug issues. One woman left her partner, one person was evicted, and one went to jail.

14 HEALTH IMPACT

The immediate impact of housing on the health of the former Tent City residents was considerable. Findings

At the time of the first interview, nearly half of While Tent City was in existence, the majority the respondents indicated that their health had of residents were connected to Street Health improved since becoming housed. Access to a and/or Regent Park Health Centre. These services warm and dry environment, electricity, running were rated highly by the former Tent City water, cooking and washroom facilities was residents and in many cases the connections to reported to have had a positive impact on these two health services have been maintained. general health and hygiene. A number of people Even among residents who moved to suburban noted that they experienced fewer colds and flu, areas, several travel downtown to see the and those suffering from chronic conditions such nurses at the street outreach service and the as arthritis observed that being indoors health centres. improved their health. Twenty homeless individuals were interviewed Surprisingly by the time of the second interviews, through the Fred Victor Housing Access and 24% of people indicated that some health Support Services program (a service that assists problems had worsened in the period between people who have been homeless for extended interviews. In many instances, this was related to periods to obtain and maintain housing) to an increase in the severity of chronic conditions compare the use of health services with the such as arthritis, heart problems, gallstones and EHPP sample group. kidney conditions. Those between the ages of 40 and 55 experienced the greatest decline in Interestingly, the participants in the EHPP group health status. This may in part be due to the were more likely to have health cards and have accumulated physical stress of years of home- seen a doctor in the past year than those in the lessness coupled in some cases with addictions. comparison group, but at the same time they A number of people also stated that for the first were less likely to have used emergency wards time in years they were attending to their health. and less likely to have been hospitalized for They were going to doctors’ appointments, medical or psychiatric services. This would following up on medical tests, and taking suggest that EHPP participants might have been prescription medication for a variety of able to seek medical intervention before their conditions. Thus, some medical conditions that health issues reach a critical stage. This is had previously been unidentified or ignored supported by reports from the Housing Support were now being treated. Workers who noted that the tenants were beginning to attend to health issues that had been long neglected.

15 Use of Health Services by EHPP Participants and Comparison Group Participants

EHPP Group Comparison (50 people) Group (20 people)

Had a Health Card 84% 70% Saw a doctor in the past year 33% 5%

Findings Used community health clinics in the past year 48% 95% Hospitalized in past year for medical reason 30% 40% Hospitalized in past year in a psychiatric facility 5% 10% Hospitalized more than once in the past year 14% 20% Used hospital emergency ward in the past year 12% 45% Received no medical care 19% Nil

Mental Health Changes in Substance Use

During the first interview, 50% of respondents One person noted, “The best method of harm indicated an improvement in their mental health. reduction is housing”. During the initial interview, They suggested that this was due in large part when people were asked how their lives had to a lessening of their stress levels as they no changed since moving into their housing, over longer had to worry about security issues, 20% volunteered that part of the change where they would sleep at night, or if there involved a reduction or cessation in drug or would be tensions with other Tent City residents. alcohol use. At the second interview, people were asked directly if they were using more, During the second and third interviews, the less, or the same amount of drugs or alcohol majority of respondents said that their mental as they had at Tent City. Nearly 50% of the health had been stable during the preceding respondents said that they were using less, one months and that they had settled into their person was using more and two had never used housing and their new lifestyles. Twenty percent either substance. By the third interview, 70% of One man reported: “Now I know people in the Variety Store, not the crack dealers.”

of the respondents indicated a continued the respondents reported that they were using improvement in their mental health, while 20% less. 21% of this group were or had been in felt that they were more depressed or stressed. drug rehabilitation programs. Many people For some of the latter group, depression was attributed the decrease in drug or alcohol use to reported to be due to a traumatic event, such the fact that their housing was stable. They also as the death of a spouse, death of a grandchild, indicated that living a distance from downtown death of a pet or serious illness (events that had helped them to break former patterns of occurred since the previous interview). substance use.

16 Findings Access to Food Even though people utilized food banks, nearly half of the respondents experienced times when One of the major determinants of health is a they did not have access to food, usually near nutritious diet. At the time of the first interview, the end of the month when their money was 80% of the respondents stated that their eating running low or on weekends when many food habits had improved. At Tent City, most people banks and drop-ins were closed. Ironically, this ate prepared donated food or cooked outdoors contrasted with their experience at Tent City, over campfires. In their new homes, respondents when most people said that they had access to were able to cook more (because they had an sufficient quantities of food through donations electric stove rather than a campfire), store fruits brought to the site or meal programs in the and vegetables (because they had refrigerators area. However, at Tent City there had been little and storage space), and freeze food. As well, variety in the donated food available. they did not have to worry about food disappearing. Many thought that they had Although most people said that their diets had improved, they still experienced difficulties in obtaining enough food, citing their low incomes as the reason.

gained weight because of their improved diet Approximately 75% of respondents spent between and because they did not have the same degree $20 and $50 per week on food. Those on ODSP of exercise, carrying water and gathering tended to spend more money on food and to firewood. experience fewer times without food. This may be related to the higher benefit levels of the program. Although most people said that their diets had improved, they still experienced difficulties in obtaining enough food, citing their low incomes as the reason. Only 10% of the respondents obtained all of their food from grocery stores. In addition to purchasing food, 90% relied on food banks and/or drop-ins to supplement their diet. Access to food banks was an important factor in rating satisfaction with building location.

17 1 8 Findings W providedbytheHousing ofthesupport importance Ninety-three percentofthetenantsstressed orkers thattheyreceivedthroughtheprogram. SUPPORT NEEDS W for work,whereupontheywould contactthe getting healthproblemsaddressed, andapplying other possibilitiessuchasgoing toschool, to retaintheirhousing,theybegan toexplore the workers)butastheseindividuals continued time forthemtotrusttheprogram(andhence occasions. Threepeoplenotedthatittooksome when Ineedthem”wasrepeatedonseveral problems arose.Thecomment,“Theyarethere contact theWoodGreen workersifandwhen more securebecausetheyknewthatcould percentindicatedthattheyfelt them”. Thirty As onewomanstated,“Icouldn’t doitwithout rely ontheworkersforsomedegreeofsupport. to decreased overtime,howevermostcontinued needshad respondents indicatedthattheirsupport that theyreceivedthroughtheprogram.54%of Workers providedbytheHousingSupport support ofthe of thetenantsstressedimportance do keepintouchwiththem.Ninety-threepercent Tent thatsomeoftheformer report CityResidents atbothservices andStreetPatrol,staff Services no longereligiblefortheStreetOutreach Althoughtheyare to utilizethehealthservices. to thesite.Manyoftenantshavecontinued and healthproviderswhomadeperiodicvisits Disaster ReliefCommittee,aswellchurches StreetPatrol,theTorontoOutreach Services, Centre, CentralNeighbourhoodHouseStreet included StreetHealth,RegentParkHealth at Tent City. Thosementionedmostfrequently whiletheywereliving services variety ofsupport accessinga reported The EHPPparticipants oodGreen staff forassistance. oodGreen staff tenancy arrangements. with to helpaddressadministrativedifficulties Workersrelied heavilyontheHousingSupport systems. BoththesystemsandEHPPtenants them tonegotiatetheirwaythroughthese for EHPP tenantsindicatedthatitwasdifficult Nearlyallofthe withfront-line staff. difficulties by thesesystems,andthattheyhadsome TCHC, OW, orODSP, thattheywereintimidated the abilitytounderstandletterssentby ODSP. Someclientssaidthattheydidnothave interactions withlandlords,TCHC,OWor relatedto Much ofthe“asneeded”support critical. needed” basistobebothappropriateand onan“as Theyidentifiedsupport supports. needs andthattheydidnotwantadditional theydidaccesswereadequatefortheir services indicatedthatthe (AA). Nearlyeveryone Anonymous (NA),andAlcoholics programs suchasEvergreen,Narcotics Yo Mission, EvangelHall,theSanctuary, 416,and drop-ins(theScott Employment Services), (Youthaccessing employmentservices Somealsomentioned and healthcareservices. fromfoodbanks accessing additionalsupport Once housed,mostrespondentsreported uthlink), anddrugalcoholtreatment QUALITY OF LIFE Findings

The move from Tent City into housing has ”I’m more self-reliant; I don’t have to deal had a profound impact on people’s general with soup kitchens. It’s good for your quality of life.Apart from improvements in mental health. In shelters your bed may health, people identified a variety of changes change from day to day. Now I have a in their lives: feeling of security.”

“I’m cleaner, I eat properly (not just “I get my kids on the weekends now.” sandwiches and soup), I look more “I can shower; do you know how that presentable when looking for a job, I can feels?” organize my time, buy things and keep them. No more squeegee-ing. I can “I’m going to school, eating better and structure my day. There are no cockroaches. housed.” It’s quiet. No crack-heads.” “I feel smarter. Don’t feel bummed out “I’m not on the street. I love it. I’m healthy, about where I’m going to eat and sleep. putting on weight, warm. I have a TV and I am hopeful and can concentrate. space to walk the dog.“ Big difference.”

“I’ve come a long way and my health is better, I have more respect for myself, I Some people noted that in spite of the like it inside. It’s not a life on the streets. program, they still face problems. This woke me up.” “I really wanted land to be able to build ”I’m involved in the community and in the my own place. Ownership is important. church next door.“ I’m now working full time, highly stressed and still poor.” “I love it; I know where to come home instead of going to shelters and moving around.” A few realized the value of the program, after they had lost their initial units. “Moving here was like a new start on life. I’ll be going into a drug program. I’m not “I’m back to the same place. Got evicted, out fighting every day.” lost everything. Really need to get back in the program.” “I feel much more secure.“

19 2 0 Findings less depressedandtheywereproudofthemselves. they hadmoreself-respect,feltlessstressed,were oftheEHPP.their self-esteemsincebeingpart They said Many peopleindicatedtherehadbeenanincreasein 5 having enoughmoneyforfood. about their income.Mostwereconcerned achangeinhowtheywerespending reported third andfinalinterview, 40%ofrespondents improved aftertheyobtainedhousing.Bythe indicated thattheirbudgetingabilitieshad alcohol. Duringthesecondinterview, 22% that theywerespendinglessondrugsor more moneyonfoodandanumberindicated statedthat theywerespending participants In thefirstinterview, nearly40%ofthe from WoodGreen orothercommunityagencies. activities ontheirownandsomeusedreferrals these Some oftherespondentsundertook basis. periodsonapart-time employed forshort 2% wereworkingfulltimeand11%hadbeen ment, drugrehabilitation,NAorAAmeetings, employment, 21%wereattendingdrugtreat- tofind toschool,11%were trying returned interview, 23% werevolunteering,16%had inthethird and final Among theparticipants longer panhandled. their incomehadgonedownbecausetheyno T panhandledwhileat although 20%reportedly acknowledged thattheywerestillpanhandling, were workingorlookingforwork.Onlyafew 18%werevolunteeringand12% apartments. ing friends,watchingTVorjuststayingintheir said thattheyspenttheirtimeatdrop-ins,visit- manypeople At thetimeoffirstinterview ent City. Ofthisgroup,manycommentedthat These categories are not mutually exclusive. Some tenants participated inmorethanoneactivitywhileothersdid notengagein These categoriesarenotmutually exclusive.Sometenantsparticipated 5 impossibility atTent City). an children forweekendvisits(reportedly university, and onewomanwasseeingher onepersonhopedtogo job opportunities, to gobackschool,10%felttheyhadmore respondents wereinschooland12%wanted 16%of By thetimeoffinalinterviews, that itwastooearlytotell. but felt thattheymighthavenewopportunities rehabilitation program.Otherswereunsureor to getajob,gobackschoolorenter their life.50%suggestedtheymightbeable in they feltnowhadmoreopportunities During thefirstinterview, peoplewereaskedif are consideredtobelong-term. enhanced senseofstabilitysinceODSPsupports to anincreaseintheirqualityoflifeand approximately $400permonth.Thiscontributes people areonODSP, theirincomeincreasesby Workers.help oftheHousingSupport Once process ofpreparingtheirapplicationswiththe has anapplicationpendingandthreeareinthe have beentransferredfromOWtoODSP, one Since theprogram’s inception,sevenpeople andsystemsbrokering. intervention counselling, crisis changes throughinformal WorkersHousing Support hasfacilitatedthese assume moreresponsibility. fromthe Support enabled peopletomakepositivechangesand of theirlives.Havingadequatehousinghas have takengreaterresponsibilityinmanyareas The responsesofthetenantsindicatethatthey

any ofthesepursuits. TENANT TURNOVER Findings In the research sample, a number of people There has been some concern with the extent of moved from unsatisfactory buildings or units. In tenant turnover in the EHPP program, particularly one complex, there were complaints from EHPP as there are a variety of costs associated with tenants of drug trafficking, insecurity and diffi- each move. TCHC estimates the average cost to culties with the management. Some participants be $484 per move. A few tenants have been lost or left their housing after coming into conflict particularly hard-to-house, especially those with with the landlord or other tenants, for noise major addictions. For some, relocation has infractions, for inappropriate behaviour such as been beneficial. Some tenants have been more having unruly visitors or for drug or alcohol successful in buildings where there are few if related activity. In many instances, WoodGreen any other tenants from Tent City. Others have staff negotiated a leaving date with the landlord found landlords that are more tolerant of substance in order to avoid an eviction and new housing use and/or difficult behaviour. It may be that was found. those who have been housed two and three times are not ready for independent housing in the private market, even with supports. Some people may be better served in transitional housing.

21 2 2 Findings from theiroriginalunit moves willdeclineastenantswhowantedtomove Over time,itisanticipatedthatthenumberof separating. Some ofthesemovesweretheresultcouple once, although9%hadrelocatedmorethanonce. The majorityofthegroup(53%)hadmovedonly 38% remainedintheiroriginalaccommodation. for housing.Amongthosehouseholdshoused, housed intheprogramandanother12eligible 1,2004,therewere96households As ofFebruary circumstances thatnecessitate a unitforyear, unlessthere are compelling r to policy thatrequiresEHPPparticipants The SteeringCommitteehasnow administrativeandmovingrelatedcosts. support, must bebalancedbyattentiontotheadded their needs,preferencesorlifestyle.However, this or neighbourstoanenvironmentthatbettermeets l with they maybeexperiencingconflicts living them tomovefromadifficult becauseitmayenable on programparticipants Moving toanewunitmayhavepositiveimpact stabilized. more do soandtheirliveshavebecome have had the opportunity to have hadtheopportunity an earliermove. introduced a situation where andlords emain in Pa ofEligible Housing Status % of Households Housed of Moves, February, 2004 Households Housedby Number % of Participants r 100 ticipants, February, 2004 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 0 oeOeToThree Two One None osdEligibleforHousing Housed ELIGIBILITY REVIEW POLICY Findings While major efforts have been made to assist all Twenty-nine people have been scheduled to of the former Tent City residents in obtaining appear before the Eligibility Review Committee. and maintaining housing, it became evident Not all of the individuals choose to attend but over the course of the EHPP that a few of the the Committee does hold a discussion on their participants were not ready to be housed. circumstances. In some cases, the review provides Among this relatively small group (less than an opportunity to reinforce the requirements of 10% of the total EHPP participants) some have the program. To date none of the former Tent had major difficulties in maintaining their housing, City residents have been permanently ejected from do not appear to be interested in participating the program. However, one person in the sample in the program and/or are behaving in such a group has not been in contact with WoodGreen manner that it is extremely difficult to locate staff and is currently considered to have left the appropriate housing. In order to address such program. issues, TCHC staff and WoodGreen, with input from the Steering Committee, developed an Those Who Left the Program Eligibility Review Policy. The policy may be Over the course of the evaluation, out of the applied to tenants who: total number of participants, four people left the program (moved or obtained employment) and › are in arrears two people died. In the sample group, none left have acted in a manner to impair the › the program, although some members of the safety of the community, caused sample group were untraceable for periods of substantial interference to the community time, or temporarily suspended (some did attend or committed an illegal act the Eligibility Review Committee to be re-admitted). › have been absent from their unit for a period of 120 days › have broken a policy set by TCHC Of the six people who are no longer in the program: (such as failing to give 60 days notice) Reason Provided Number have made more than one move within › Out of town 2 a year Working and chose not continue to in program 2 Such tenants may be called before an Eligibility Deceased 2 Review Committee to discuss their situation and put forward plans for rectifying any problems. Total 6 The review is based on the principles of hope and an understanding that transition to housing can be challenging. Committee members from TCHC and WoodGreen Community Centre (but not Housing Support Workers) assess the situation and the applicant’s plan to address problem areas and make a decision as to whether or not to readmit the participant to the program.

23 2 4 Findings finding newlandlordsandassisting withtherelocations. WorkersSupport busyin indicatedthattheywerevery buildings.Again,theHousing problems inparticular not fitwiththeirneedsbecauseofthelocationor after afewmonths,manyrealizedthattheirunitsdid housing atthebeginningofprogram,however, Tentformer Cityresidentswereeagertotakeany becausethe complexes. Themovesoccurredinpart of themoreproblematicsuburbanapartment thoselocatedinone of tenantsrelocated,particularly During thelatespringandsummerof2003,anumber to peoplewhohadnothousinginyears. andgenerally providingsupport obtaining furniture, between tenantsandlandlords,assistingin the correctrentalpayments,mediatingdifficulties which includedensuringthatlandlordswerereceiving number ofissuesrelatedtothemove-inprocess, Workersthe HousingSupport weredealingwitha 2003, When theresearchprojectbeganinFebruary Scarborough. north Etobicoke,whileothersmovedto housed innorth downtown inareasunfamiliartothem.Somewere foundthemselveslivingfarfromthe participants readily accepted.Asaresult,numberofprogram torentseveralunits,thiswas landlords offered and theirspecificneedsorhabits.Whenlarge a thoroughsenseoftheindividualstheywerehousing thattheydidnothave of theprogram,theyreported quickly.landlords very Duringtheinitialfewmonths few monthsoftheprojectandpressuretofind WorkersSupport spokeofthehecticpacefirst session oftheSteeringCommittee,Housing systems.Atade-briefing housing andincomesupport tenant householdsandassistedtheminnavigating toapproximately108 provided individualsupport The threeWoodGreen Workers HousingSupport INTERVIEWS WITHHOUSINGSUPPORTWORKERS approach. providersthatprovideaholistic to findservice etc.)butitischallenging rehabilitation, crisisservices, (drug been successfullymadeforspecificservices of theworkerswasseentobekey. Referrals have rentsupplements, thegeographicmobility portable inaprogramwith provide consistencyofsupport follow aclientifheorsheshouldmove.Inorderto graphical restrictionsthatwouldlimittheirabilityto their mandate,andthatmostagencieshavegeo- of aspart havehousing/landlordsupport services experience withrentsupplementprograms,thatfew donothave few),thatotherservices only toavery arenotopentonewclients(or that manyservices Theyreported clients, thishasproventobedifficult. fortheir services toaccessothersupport efforts WorkersAlthough theHousingSupport havemade shift inactivitiesduetothecrisisnatureofwork. activities. However, tomakethis ithasbeendifficult change indirectionandnotedtheneedforboth for clients).TheSteeringCommitteeapprovedthis supports transitional planning(seekingalternative worker wouldfocusonlandlordoutreachand inlate2003,itwasanticipatedthatthenew staff OW. Whentherewasturno addressing andissues mental healthcrisesthatpeopleneedhelpin medicaland inthetenantinterviews), under-reported indicateis landlords andtenants(anissuethatstaff between oriented. Therecontinuetobedifficulties locating landlordsmuchoftheirworkremainedcrisis thatwhiletheywerespendinglesstime reported staff Eighteen monthsaftertheinitiationofprogram, with TCHC, ver inthe ODSP and/or osn worker housing resolve andtookupthemajorityoftheirtime. to issues requiredsubstantiallymoreinterventions WorkersHousing Support thatsystem reported butnottimespentoneach. and interventions, indicatesissues each problem.Thefollowingchart ittooktoresolve in-person ortelephoneinterventions period inNovember2003andthenumberof that arosefor75oftheirclientsduringaonemonth WorkersSupport trackedthenumberofproblems spent resolvingtheseissues,twooftheHousing In ordertohaveagreaterunderstandingofthetime TCHC, ODSPandOW. brokering betweenclientsand/orlandlordsand that approximately50%oftheirworkinvolved WorkersHousing Support estimatedinMarch2004 Committee tomodifysystemsmeettenantneeds, oftheSteering In spiteoftheconsiderableefforts Sta u oa 1182.6 1.7 N/A 2.5 1.7 2.5 158 10 N/A 48 2.8 92 23 61 Total 95 6 19 activities *** 53 Other tenantsupport 9 77 Landlord/Tenant Support Sub Total Landlord 27 TCHC ODSP Ontario Works ff

Activities for 75clients,NovemberActivities for 2003 sus nevnin* Ratio of# Interventions** Issues* 0 5 N/A 250 209 property inJune2003. property landlord inheritedtenantswhenshepurchasedthe initiated Workers thatHousingSupport landlords reported becoming involvedintheprogram.Sevenof rates andtheguaranteeofrentwereanincentiveto All ofthelandlordsstatedthatincreasingvacancy group. program, butnowrentstoonlyfouroftheoriginal who hadhoused30peopleatthebeginningof Much ofthereductionoccurredwithonelandlord only28tenantsremained. the timeofsurvey a totalof63tenantsfromtheprogram.However, at At EHPP weresurveyed. ofthe managers) whowereinitiallyorarestillpart EHPP. Ninelandlords(fiveownersandfourproperty inthe There arecurrently52landlordsparticipating INTERVIEWS WITHLANDLORDS Interventions to Issue to Interventions their involvementintheprogram.One one point,theninehoused * Othertenantsupport *** ** Interventions –phone Interventions ** *I search, referrals landlord intervention, counselling, crisis activities –informal home visits visits, calls, office activities support be addressed,general ssues –problemsto nine

2 Findings 5 2 6 Findings Landlord satisfactionwiththeprogram: problematicforthem. particularly ownersrevealedthatthiswas Small property andtherentpaymentswereinconsistent. start toaslow thattheprogramgotoff Most reported coverage. be housingbecauseoftheextensivemedia they weregenerallyawareofwhowould ontheprogramandthat adequate information W thatthe callingcard.Allreported Staff came tothebuildingandleftaWoodGreen One landlordhadaforrentsignandthetenant landlord said he had learned tocommunicate landlord saidhehadlearned tenants. One issues, conflicts,andtosupport WorkersSupport extensivelytoresolvepayment hadusedHousing All ofthelandlordssurveyed they wouldnotremaininvolved. the program,twowereunsure,andsaid Five landlordsindicatedawillingnesstostayin Landlords satisfactionwithtenants: oodGreen › › › › › › › › › 2 Satisfied 3 unsatisfied 2 Somewhatsatisfied 2 Very satisfied 2 Very unsatisfied 1 Unsatisfied 1 Somewhatsatisfied 3 Satisfied 2 Very satisfied staff hadprovidedthemwith staff In additiontheysuggestedthattheprogram: vacancy ratesthatcurrentlyexistinToronto. into theprogrambecauseofrelativelyhigh toattractnewlandlords should notbedifficult landlordsindicatedthatit Most ofthesurveyed a landlordandforthetenant. resolution thatwaspositivebothforhimselfas problem, inordertoensurethattherewasa needor indication ofapotentialsupport with WoodGreen assoontherewasan › › › › › › the tenant of increase accountabilityonthepart walking distancetoallservices”) limited incomeyouneedtobewithin consider location.(“Whenyouhave have notmadethesamedecision”) need tobechallengedbyfriendswho attempting tochangetheirlifestyledon’t tenants inabuilding.(“Tenants whoare limit thenumberofrent-supplement ofrent(33%) income portion one-year limit)directpaymentsystemsfor have continuous(ongoingratherthana the month(22%) landlords togettheirrentonthefirstof ensure thereissysteminplacefor (33%) support maintain theirhousingwiththeright assess tenantstoensurethattheycan INPUT FROM OTHER STAKEHOLDERS

Five service providers, who were involved in the provision of services to Tent City residents Findings while they were living at the site, offered their perspective on the EHPP.

All of those interviewed supported the expansion Staff at Fred Victor Housing and Access Support of the rent supplement program and most Services, and the Community Resources considered it to be the best housing program Consultants of Toronto Hostel Outreach Program in the City. (services that provide somewhat comparable supports to the long-term homeless population) A few respondents highlighted the importance were consulted regarding the levels of support of support for the homeless population and they provide. Client/staff ratios for the Hostel suggested that the success of the EHPP depended Outreach Program and the Fred Victor program in large part upon the support services available are 1/15 and 1/25 respectively; in contrast, to the participants. the WoodGreen Housing Support Workers have caseloads that average 1/35. Over the past One health care worker reported that a few of several years, the Fred Victor program has only the former Tent City residents have continued to been able to reduce their caseload by 10% take leadership roles in advocating for housing because there are few other services to transfer and services for the homeless and some are people to and because the issues are very participating in the work of the Toronto Disaster complex. Of the people who are housed, 90% Relief Committee. continue to require support. Both programs indicated that their staff also spend considerable Another respondent suggested that additional time in negotiating issues with ODSP. rent supplement programs should be targeted to older homeless people and those who have chronic health problems.

27 2 8 Findings were availablewhenhousingwaslocated. quicklyandthatincomerentsupplements EHPP wasunderway The SteeringCommitteeplayedapivotalroleinensuringthatthe INPUT FROMSTEERINGCOMMITTEEMEMBERS in ensuringthat these issueswereresolved. of errorsinthe ar example, whensometenantswere in decisions be streamlinedandimportant systemic atthetablesothat organizational partners critical tohaveseniorpeoplefromeachofthe Committee memberspointedoutthatitwas developed bytheSteeringCommittee.Several processes ofTCHC,ODSPandOWwere Agreements regardingthevariouscontactsand not inspectedbyTCHCpriortooccupancy. were residents oftenhadnoincome,andunits T the program.Forexample,former sequence becauseoftheemergencynature the EHPP, itwasnotpossibletofollowtheusual with thelandlordandaccountsaresetup.With contractissigned inspected byTCHC,aformal unitsare canbedetermined, rental portion sourceofincome fromwhichtheir a confirmed thetenanthas when housingisbeingoffered, In otherTCHCrentsupplementagreements, delivery. program tofacilitatetheservice provided anadditionalpositiontoworkonthe ofmove-inactivity.a flurry Ultimately, TCHC during theinitialfewmonthswhentherewas for TCHCasprocesseswerebeingdeveloped consuming programtoadminister, particularly first yearofoperation,theEHPPwasatime to addresstheseinconsistenciesandgaps.Inits designed, developedandimplementedquickly pilot. Newsystemsandprocesseshadtobe tohandletheidiosyncrasiesof necessary example, computersystemslackedtheflexibility did notfitwithintheirexistingsystems.For challenges toTCHC,OWandODSPbecauseit The programpresentednewadministrative issues couldbeaddressed,processes could ytm aaeswer system, managers e involved rears because ent City made. For to thecommunitymanagementplan. project andanindicationoftheircommitment the EHPPasanexampleofsuchameaningful meaningful and engagingtenantstenantleadersin communities safeandgoodplacestolive management planthatfocusesonmakinghousing thatTCHChasacommunity reported TCHC staff including theEligibilityReviewprocess. developingpolicies is intheprocessoffurther operations havebecomemorestable,thegroup new issueswillemerge.Nowthatprogram manage theirownfunds.Astheprogramevolves, or notthiscompromisedtheabilityoftenantsto system ofpayinglandlordsdirectlyandwhether there weredebatesaroundissuessuchasthe program. Intheearlystagesofdevelopment regarding theoperationofRentSupplement The Committeeaddressednumerousdetails individual casesdiscussed. so thatspecificissuescouldbedealtwithand SteeringCommitteemeetings before theofficial the session.Operationalworkinggroupsmet then followedup with TCHC to comeWoodGreen andfillouttheforms Act,tenantswereinvited Social HousingReform of tenantincomeandeligibilityrequiredbythe example, inordertocompletetheannualreview developed bytheSteeringCommittee.For Creative methodsofproblemsolvingwere staff. The Housing Support Workers TheHousingSupport staff. decisions andprojects.Theyview with peoplewhodidnotattend Brokering TCHC, ODSP and direct agreements renewed, the renewal did OW Systems not occur in all the OW cases. The OW computer system automatically suspended the The EHPP is made possible through the coordination of a number of programs ‘pay direct’ agreements for some recipients Findings focused on one client group. These programs after one year. Once the electronic flag for the are mandated by different legislation, have pay direct of the shelter portion had dropped specific accountabilities, are administered off, the tenants were sent the shelter portion of using complex rules and regulations, and can the allowance directly (along with the rest of be difficult to negotiate. The membership their benefit) with very limited ‘payment stub’ and level of involvement of the EHPP Steering information and no detailed explanation of the Committee made it possible for system increase in the amount of the OW payment. administrators to communicate and coordinate Housing Support Workers and OW staff worked with each other and with Housing Support to address these issues and to resolve the ‘rental Workers directly supporting EHPP participants. arrears’ for those affected EHPP participants. On an ongoing basis, Committee members worked to coordinate agreements and payments It is expected that the Housing Support to landlords for rent, and to manage individual Workers bring these types of issues to the cases experiencing system-related problems. In many cases, these programs were attention of Steering Committee members or administered in new ways to accommodate system administrators. In the example given the needs of the clients involved. above, Steering Committee members from Toronto Social Services and WoodGreen These, however, are complicated programs, Housing Support Workers spent considerable and it is not surprising that the Housing time rectifying the situation. Overall, these Support Workers spent considerable time problems were addressed and/or strategies assisting their clients to navigate the systems were put in place to prevent them from repeating. throughout the pilot. As well, all of the tenants in the program have ‘pay direct’ agreements However, systemic problems may be ongoing with TCHC, OW and ODSP. This means that the and difficult to resolve. For example, most TCHC rent supplement and the shelter portion of EHPP participants cannot afford telephones the OW or ODSP is sent directly to the landlord. and they are, therefore, not in a position to make or receive calls. This can make it difficult Although they are not responsible for rent for them to inform people of problems they are payment, tenants are advised when there are experiencing and to advocate for themselves problems. In some cases, landlords issued with front-line staff who typically contact “Notices to Vacate” to the EHPP tenants as clients by phone. As well, many participants a result of those problems although no reported feeling intimidated by these organi- participants were actually evicted. EHPP zational systems. Often the expertise of an tenants interviewed reported experiencing experienced Housing Support Worker is considerable stress when there were rent needed to advocate on their behalf. While this payment problems, as they were fearful of may change over time, participants will likely losing their new found housing. continue to need assistance from the Housing Support Workers and the Steering Committee Although the files of the former Tent City members to address system-related problems. residents were to be flagged, and the pay

29 3 0 Findings EHPP PROGRAMCOSTS by TCHCincludingst landlords byTCHC,administrativecostsincurred ment paymentsthatarepaiddirectlytoprivate and March31,2004includestherentsupple- The costoftheEHPPbetweenOctober1,2002 to accreditedroominghouses). health agencythatprovidestransferpayments (amental andHabitatServices Hostel Services data wasalsogatheredfromtheCityofToronto costs. Forpurposesofcomparison,financial TCHC suppliedextensivedataonprogram cost effective withinthenextyearofoperation. cost effective It isexpectedthattheprogramwillbecomemore added totheoverallprogramcost. are paiddirectlytothelandlords,hasalsobeen OW orODSPbasicshelterallowances,which Workers.Housing Support Anestimateofthe providedbyWoodGreen services support uttl$1257384% 13% 3% 1,285,773 $ 200,000 40,800 $ $ T Supports (WoodGreen) Administration (TCHC) Subtotal R tlCss$15653100% 1,526,573 $ otal Costs ent SubsidyPayments etsplmn amns$1098970% 1,069,809 $ Rent supplementpayments etPrin(WOS)$120512% 2% 182,045 $ 33,919 $ Cost oftransferswithintheprogram (OW/ODSP) Rent Portion art upcosts art and tenant of 70 transfersoccurredwithinthefirst18months considered akeycomponentoftheEHPPprogram. currently 13%ofthetotalprogramcostsandare The WoodGreen Costsare HousingSupport future years. costswhichwillnotapplyto program start-up The administrativecostofTCHCincludes the leaseagreement. 60 daysnoticetothelandlordinorderbreak meet basicrequirementssuchastheprovisionof moves pertenantyearandtenantsmust Committee hasnowrestrictedthenumberof canbeexpected,the EligibilityReview turnover $33,919 or$484permove.Althoughsome landlord. TCHChasestimatedthiscosttobe wit vacated these an impactonthecostofprogram.Most

op era expenses wereincurredbecausetenants tio n, hout providing60daysnoticetothe an d th is t enant turnover hashad enant turnover % ofTotal Cost comparisons with other programs

The Emergency Homelessness Pilot Project was compared to two other programs. Each program provides shelter and subsidies to similar populations:

› The EHPP costs are based on 1,583 tenant supplement months. The tenant supplement months Findings equals the number of tenants in a unit multiplied by the length of time they resided within the unit. The 1,583 tenant supplement months are based on the actual occupancy level of the EHPP program. The tenant supplement months were then divided by the total cost of each of the components of the EHPP program, and then multiplied by 12 (calendar months) to determine the EHPP annual per capita cost calculation. › Shelters operating in the City of Toronto provide shelter and support services to the homeless population. In the chart, the shelter and support components of the per diem represent funding to City-managed and purchase service shelters from Provincial and City sources. These costs have been calculated to reflect a mix of gender specific hostels such that they compare to the gender ratio of the tenants currently housed in the EHPP. The costs reflect a bed in a shared room. Support costs shown for shelters are those provided in-house and do not include food services or supports provided by outside agencies working in shelters. › The Habitat Program is a transfer payment agency that provides funding to house individuals with severe mental health histories. Habitat enters into contractual agreements with private rooming house operators who agree to a set of building standards. Habitat monitors those standards. The ‘Rent Costs’ are based on the cost of single rooms in rooming houses. Tenants pay the maximum shelter allowance of their ODSP/OW to the landlord. Habitat tenants are often connected to Assertive Community Treatment Teams or other support services. The cost of such services could not be estimated. The table only includes the cost of Habitat’s in-house Site Support program. It can be concluded that the support costs are underestimated for this program.

Annual per capita cost

EHPP Shelters Habitat Rent or Shelter Only Rent Supplement/Shelter Costs $ 8,415 $ 12,528 $ 3,876 OW/ODSP Shelter Component 1,380 5,100 Subtotal 9,795 12,528 8,976 Administration 311 1,148 Support Services 1,525 3,628 3,333 Total per capita costs $ 11,631 $ 16,156 $ 13,457

31 3 2 Findings a reductioninadministrationcosts. Asthe there willbefewermoves,which willresultin should decreaseslightlyasitis anticipatedthat program. Overtime,theEHPP programcosts providedbyeach types anddepthofservice tocomparethe programs, althoughitisdifficult also appearmuchlessexpensivethaninother intheEHPP services shelter system.Support costs forapersoninthe shelter andsupport Thisis28%lessthan program andsupports. per yearforhousing,administrationoftheEHPP programs. Itcurrentlycosts$11,631perperson relativetoother the EHPPappearscosteffective onthepreviouspageindicates, As thechart › › › › programs includes: The combinedtotalcostofeachthe operators usedforbasicshelterservices. and Habitatprograms)orsubsidiesto includes rentsubsidiespaidtolandlords(EHPP R charged themaximumshelterallowance). t Under theHabitatprogram, are chargedtheminimum paid tolandlords.(UndertheEHPP, tenants includes theOWorODSPshelterallowance (All programs). toindividuals. services provides support Services: Support Services. Shelter CostsandSupport costs forSheltersareincludedinthelines (TCHC) andHabitatprograms).Administrative incurred bythetransferpaymentagency(EHPP Administration: O ent Supplement/Shelter Cost: ent Supplement/Shelter W/ODSP shelter component: W/ODSP shelter This istheadministrativecost Each oftheprograms shelter allowance. enants are This cost This shelter work andenteredrehabilitationprograms. toschool,sought whoreturned participants the likelycostbenefitstosystemofEHPP lives. Itwasnotpossibletofactorintothisstudy inpeople’sHousing hascreatedarippleeffect areenormous. to theprogramparticipants at $16,156peryear. Inaddition, thebenefits to accommodationinthesheltersystem,estimated alternative costeffective avery per annumoffer (including theOW/ODSPsheltercomponent) homeless, theEHPPcostsof$11,631perperson forthe extended periodsandwhouseservices For peoplewhohavebeenhomelessfor factored intotheHabitatfigures. However, costsarenot support someexternal program havebachelororone-bedroomunits. accommodations whereastenantsintheEHPP (not couples)insingleroomroominghouse financially comparable,housesindividuals The Habitatprogram,althoughthemost reduced accordingly. the costofsuchspecificprogramswouldbe andconsequently may requirefewersupports (women leavingabusivesituations,refugees) Other populationsofhomelesspeople that t anticipated supports become stabilizedintheprogram,needfor brokerage shoulddecline.Finally, astenants systems areaddressed,theneedforsystem challenges withtheTCHC,OWandODSP should alsodecline,althoughitisnot hey willbeentirelyeliminated. The EHPP has provided housing in the private market for a group of people deemed ‘hard-to-house’, people who had been homeless for extended periods and Conclusion who struggle with addictions, mental health issues and among whose lives are often chaotic.

Eighty-nine percent of the households remain Data from the interviews indicates that over half housed (and another 11% are likely to be of the participants experienced an improvement re-housed) eighteen months after the initiation in their mental and physical health during the of the program. Among those housed, 38% of first six months that they were housed. households continue to reside in their original Surprisingly, nearly 25% experienced an increase accommodation while 55% have moved once. in health problems by the time of the second Observation of the researchers as well as interview. In part, this may be due to the fact feedback from tenants and Housing Supports that several of the respondents were attending Workers indicates that much of the housing to chronic health problems for the first time in stock that was accessed for the EHPP is adequate years. Hence, they were becoming aware of the or above average in quality. complexities of their health issues. Eighty percent reported that their eating habits had improved as The former Tent City residents expressed a high they began to cook more and spend additional degree of satisfaction with their individual units money on food, but because of their low and with their neighbourhoods. In addition to incomes, 90% were still forced to use food addressing the housing needs of the participants, banks and half did not have access to food at the program had an impact in other areas of least once a month. By the third interview, 70% their lives. Many people experienced a sense of of respondents reported that their drug and stability for the first time in years. As a result of alcohol use had declined. The sample participants this, some individuals have been able to return also used hospital and emergency services less to school, obtain employment or enter drug or than those in a comparison group. The tenants alcohol rehabilitation programs. Others have attributed these and other positive changes to begun to address chronic health problems, the fact that they had adequate and stable housing. undertaken volunteer activities and stabilized This is a key finding of the research. Having their lives. Overall, there has been a marked stable housing enabled many individuals to change in the quality of life of almost everyone improve their lives in a number of ways and to in the sample who remains housed. take advantage of new opportunities.

33 3 4 Conclusion area (as are many other services), theyareable area (asaremanyotherservices), geographic they arenotconfinedtoaparticular withTCHC,OWandODSP.services Because andbrokering landlordsupports intervention, crisis to theprovisionofpersonalsupports, focus onrecruitmentoflandlordshasnowshifted Over timetheirrolehaschanged.Theearly supplement programandincomesupports. issues relatedtotheadministrationofrent andaddressed referrals toavarietyofservices, counselling,mediationwithlandlords, and informal ongoingsupport also providedcrisisintervention, phaseandas people moved.Theyhave start-up of thehousingunitsinprogram,both WorkersThe HousingSupport locatednearlyall an as-neededbasis. W providedbytheHousingSupport support ofthe of thetenantsstressedimportance Workers.Housing Support Ninety-threepercent providedbyWoodGreen services support Much ofthesuccessEHPPisdueto Tenttheir contactwithotherformer Cityresidents. easier tostayawayfromstreetlifeiftheylimited other tenants.Aswell,peoplenotedthatitwas T live inabuildingthathousedseveralotherformer Most peopleindicatedthatitwasproblematicto anddrop-ins. the centralcore,closetoservices although someofthesinglemenchosetobein preferred toliveoutsideofthedowntownarea, and alcoholuse.Allofthecouplesinsample street activity, assistedtheminreducingdrug that livingoutsidethedowntownarea,farfrom satisfaction. Inmanyinstances,tenantsindicated peoples’ needscontributedtotheirhousing The abilitytochosethelocationthatbestfit ent Cityresidents.Thisresultedinlabelingfrom orkers. This support wasusuallyaccessedon orkers. Thissupport ensure itscontinuation. facilitate theoperationofprogram and TCHC, OWandODSPmade decisions to program. Managementrepresentatives from ofthe essential inensuringtheeffectiveness addressing administrativeissueshavebeen ongoing roleoftheSteeringCommitteein creativity indevelopingtheprogram,and T To The quickresponseoftheCityToronto and remain housed. this featureappearstohaveenabledpeople program becauseofthehighnumbermoves, wascostlyatthebeginningof portability modation doesnotmeettheirneeds.Although unhappy intheiraccommodationortheaccom- limitations)iftheyare to move(withcertain individuals oftheprogrampermits The portability maintain theirhousingwithadequatesupports. iftheycould should beassessedtodetermine landlords consultedsuggestedthattenants percentof payment problems.Thirty-three resolving landlord/tenantconflictsorrectifying WorkersHousing Support playedarolein with theirtenants.Inmanyinstances,the in theEHPP, somehadexperienceddifficulties indicatedawillingnesstocontinue interviewed landlords. Althoughmostofthelandlords is agoodfitbetweenprospectivetenantsand toensurethatthere the EHPPanditisimportant The roleoflandlordscannotbeoverlookedin service. the support Scarborough. Thismobilityisakeyfeatureof Yorkin communitiesEtobicoke,North and tobothtenantsandlandlords to provideservice ent Cityemergency, theircommitmentand ronto CommunityHousingCorporationtothe Challenges

Because the EHPP program was a response to an emergency situation, there were particular challenges involved in its rapid implementation. Conclusion

The TCHC, OW and ODSP systems were not tenants will be able to live independently in the designed for this type of program, and both community without support, information from management and front-line staff had to make service providers who work with similar many adaptations to existing structures and populations indicates that people who have processes as well as devote a significant amount been homeless for long periods and who cope of time to operationalizing the new program. with addiction and/or mental health issues often need long-term support. Since there was considerable pressure to house people quickly, landlords could not be screened After years of homelessness, a few of the EHPP adequately and not all of the sites have been participants were not ready to assume the appropriate for this population. The resulting responsibilities of being a tenant. The Eligibility moves have added to the workloads of the Review Committee may conclude that there are TCHC staff and increased program costs. some tenants who cannot benefit from the Finally, the fact that the program was being program but, to date, no one has been excluded. developed on a daily basis resulted in uncertainty Of those who have left the program, four people and stress for the former Tent City residents. obtained employment or left town, while two others died. The Eligibility Review Committee A few tenants have made remarkable changes and the Steering Committee are in the process over the past 18 months, however, the majority of developing policies to address problematic of participants still remain vulnerable to crisis situations in which people have major difficulties and are in need of support. Some have been in maintaining their housing, do not appear to extremely anxious about the program require- be interested in participating in the program ments and are too intimidated to address and/or are behaving in such a manner that it system-related problems (such as late payment is extremely difficult to locate appropriate issues or arrears) on their own. They need landlords. support to navigate the TCHC, OW and ODSP systems. While it is anticipated that some

35 3 6 Conclusion programs. school, soughtworkandenteredrehabilitation to whoreturned the systemofEHPPparticipants factor intothisstudythelikelycostbenefitsto inpeople’seffect lives.Itwasnotpossibleto Housinghas created aripple are enormous. addition, thebenefitstoprogramparticipants system, estimatedat$16,156peryear. In intheshelter accommodation andsupports to alternative acosteffective per annumoffer (including theOW/ODSPsheltercomponent) periods, theEHPPcostsof$11,631perperson For peoplewhohavebeenhomelessforextended Benefit The Cost housing topeopleinneed. new programsshouldbedesignedtooffer inthisevaluation, Based onthelessonslearned made availableforthispurpose. be funding fromseniorlevelsofgovernment supplements inToronto, shouldadditional timetoexpandrent This isanopportune appropriate landlords. tofind it wouldlikelybemuchmoredifficult vacancy ratesdeclineoverthenextfewyears, possibility ofreducinghomelessness.Shouldthe the and therentsupplementprogramoffers In thismarket,housingcanbelocatedquickly because ofthehighvacancyratesinToronto. viableatthisjuncture The programisparticularly housingstrategy.component ofanaffordable Rent supplementsshouldbeoneimportant The Way Forward > > > RECOMMENDATIONS

which areaccurateandtimely. ensure theprovisionofrentalpayments participating should be str on-going support needs ofthetenants. on-going support thelevelof todetermine undertaken two yearperiod,anevaluationshouldbe maintained attheircurrentrates.Afterthe ratios oftenantstoworkersshouldbe EHPP tenantsforthenexttwoyearsand tothe should continuetoprovidesupport W homelesspopulation. The the long-term arerequiredfor house’ clients,supports agenciesworkingwith’hard-to- support W projections fromtheHousingSupport Based oncurrentdemandfromtenants, Coordination andcommunicationstructures a collaborativemanner. tions andcreatenewmethodsforworkingin develop processestoimprovecommunica- address problemsarisingintheprogram, should continuetooverseetheEHPPprogram, and administration.TheSteeringCommittee requires integratedandcoordinatedservices An effective RentSupplementprogram An effective oodGreen Housing Support WorkersoodGreen HousingSupport orkers, andtheexperiencesofother engthened betweenTCHC, landlords, OWandODSPto >

the following: needsandtakingintoconsideration support homeless peopletakingintoaccounttheir be consideredforotherpopulationsof Additional rentsupplementprogramsshould > > > > > in theinitialphaseofproject. A SteeringCommitteebeappointed tenants inanyonebuilding. the numberofrentsupplement Consideration begiventolimiting supplement programs. component forsomenewrent beconsideredasa Portability the developmentofnewprograms. lead-timebeallowedfor Sufficient to screenlandlords. A selectionprocessbedeveloped

3 Conclusion 7 3 8 Storiesfrom theRespondents who shared this information withus. who sharedthisinformation pseudonyms toprotecttheconfidentialityofthose All thenamesusedinthesepersonalstoriesare she hopestoattenduniversity. decisions inlifeandnotfollowothers.Oneday thatyouhavetomakeyourown has learned has reconnectedwithherfamily. Shesays she to 90%range.Shenolongerusesdrugsand and hasbeenroutinelygettingmarksinthe80% Annie hasbeenbackatschoolforthepastyear toschool. ment andreturned Annieobtainedherownapart- staff, Support life andwiththehelpofWoodGreen Housing her in that shewasreadytomakemorechanges with herboyfriendbutinMarchof2003 Grange Parkforaperiod.Shelatermovedin City wasdemolished,Annieendedupbackat were morefightsamongtheresidents.AfterTent began tocomeintothesettlementandthere at Tent Citybegantodeteriorateasdrugdealers living inatrailer, shefoundthattheatmosphere trailer atTent City. Althoughatfirstshefeltsafe Later, Anniemovedinwithafriendwhohad and goingtosquats.” the day. “Atfirstitseemedlikefun–partying cafesandsleptinGrange Parkduring Internet boyfriend. Attimestheystayedupallnightin began ‘hangingout’onYonge Streetwithher became strainedsoshemoveddowntownand using drugs,herrelationshipwithparents parents inRichmondHill.Whenshebegan Annie wasgoingtoschoolandlivingwithher Before sheendeduponthestreet,teen-aged Annie’s Story decided see hisfriendsfromTent Cityonaregularbasis. drop-ins orrideshisbicycle.He continuesto When notworkinghespendstimeatthe William stillobtainsoccasionalpaintingjobs. ODSP becauseofhealthrelatedissues. the RegentParkHealthCentre. eating betterandattendingtohishealththrough thatheis Since thisrecentmove,hereports and henowfeelsthislocationsuitshimwell. fromdowntown alittle further new apartment WorkersHousing Support helpedhimfinda because ofhismanyvisitors.TheWoodGreen began tohaveproblemswiththelandlord homeless) werecomingovertohisplace.He but foundthattoomanypeople(mostwere inthedowntowncore moved toanapartment the Tent Cityresidentswereevicted.Hefirst with connected then under abridgenearthewaterfront would happentothesettlement.Herelocated thatsomething William movedout,nervous Three daysbeforethedemolitionofTent City, alittlemoneypaintingordoingoddjobs. earned andattimes drop-ins toeatandstaywarm always peoplearound.Hefrequentedthe because althoughhelivedalone,therewere that insomewayshelikedthesettlement T in theDonValley fortwoyears.Heheardabout pay therent,heendeduplivingunderabridge Notableto he hadbeensharinganapartment. less afterthedeathofhismother, withwhom William, whoisinhismid-50s,becamehome- W ent Cityfromfriendsandmovedin.Hesays illiam’s Story a WoodGreen workerafter He isnowreceiving furnish theirnewplace. furnish from Goodwillandmanagedto furniture heard intenyears.”Theyquickly obtained about thetoilet.Itwasbest soundI’d and abalcony. We wereamazedandgiddy was afreshpaintjob,newly sandedfloor wasfreshly done.There beginning. Everything atthe where theystillreside.“Itwasscary the firstcouplestoobtainanapartment, emergency accommodation.Theywereoneof moved toWoodGreen CommunityCentrefor After thedemolitionofTent City, Lillyand Burt into thearea. peaceful, butthenthedealersbegantomove four cats.Forthefirstfewyearstheirlifewas shower andyard)wheretheylivedwiththeir (with abedroom,livingroom,stove,makeshift their shelteratTent Cityasanicelittleplace friends anddecidedtomovein.Theydescribed andLillyheardaboutTentBurt Citythrough Hall, wherehemetLilly. time helivedunderbridgesandoutsideCity homelessness continuedfor22years.Fora ho Army Salvation years at cheap hotelsandhostels.Hestayedthree doing oddjobsandstayinginroominghouses, He traveledbetweenOttawaandVancouver time ingrouphomes,onthestreetandjail. After beingkickedoutbyhisparents,hespent hadbeenonthestreetsincehe was12. Burt people andeventuallymetBurt. parks. Shemadefriendswithotherhomeless some timeendeduponthestreet,sleepingin 2000, Lillywhohadbeenthecaregiverfor When Lilly’s motherdiedofcancerinFebruary Story andBurt’s Lilly Seaton Houseandtwoyearsata stel inToronto. Thiscycle of an enclosedspace. and beingwitheachotherforlongperiodsin to getusedtheresponsibilityofhavingaplace admit therearechallenges.Ithastakenawhile andLilly that everhappenedtothem,bothBurt isthebestthing While sayingthattheapartment at home. doing volunteerworkandspendingmoretime Lilly, hasbeen fromseriousarthritis, whosuffers anddoesmostofthecooking. the apartment brother-in-law. continuestoenjoydecorating Burt to attendsummerschoolanddooddjobsforhis his GradeTen. Needingtokeepbusy, heplans Over thenextthreeyearshehopestocomplete including English,mathandcomputerskills. Centennial Collegetodobasicupgrading schoolinSeptember2003at started Burt

3 from the 9 Stories Respondents