Indigenous Demographics, South East LHIN Calendar Year 2016

Definitions and other methodology notes can be found at the end of this document.

Disclaimer: Aboriginal information was obtained from the 2016 Census. In 2016, the long-form questionnaire was re-introduced to Canadians, including residents on Aboriginal Reserves and Settlements.1 While in 2011, when the National Household Survey was administered, there were 36 reserves or settlements that were incompletely enumerated, only 14 reserves were incompletely enumerated in 2016. Fortunately, the Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory in the South East LHIN was not affected in either year.

As a measure of data quality, the census provides global non-response rates (GNR) for each geographic area. It combines household and item non-response. The GNR is also used as a main dissemination criterion associated with the quality of the census estimates. For example, the census estimates for any geographic area with a global non-response rate greater than or equal to 50% are not published in the standard products. The estimates for such areas have such a high level of error that they should not be released under most circumstances. In 2011, there were eleven municipalities in the South East LHIN that had global non-response rates greater than 50% and could not be published; however, in 2016, there were no municipalities in the South East LHIN that had rates higher than 50%. Information for all municipalities are available.

Aboriginal Identity In 2016, 4.5% of the South East LHIN population reported an Aboriginal identity (i.e. being First Nations, Metis or Inuit and/or being a Registered or Treaty Indian). Compared to other LHINs, the South East LHIN reported the fourth highest per cent of Aboriginal population, and the most of the southern LHINs (Figure 1).

1 Reserves are defined as - A tract of federally owned land with specific boundaries that are set apart for the use and benefit of an Aboriginal band and that is governed by Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development (AANDC).

Settlement are defined as - A place where a self-contained group of at least 10 Aboriginal (First Nations) persons reside more or less permanently. It is usually located on Crown lands under federal or provincial/territorial jurisdiction. Aboriginal settlements have no official limits and have not been set apart for the use and benefit of an Aboriginal band as is the case with Aboriginal reserves.

1

Figure 1. Aboriginal Identity for LHINS, by sex, 2016.

2

At a municipal level, areas such as Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory, Limerick and had the highest per cent of population with Aboriginal identity (Table 1).

Table 1. Aboriginal Identity by municipality and sub-region, by sex, South East LHIN, 2016.

Municipality GNR Male Female Total # % of # % of # % of Population Population Population Rural Hastings N/A 1,195 6.8% 1,225 7.0% 2,410 6.9% Sub-Region 8.80% 255 11.5% 230 10.7% 485 11.1% Carlow/Mayo 7.50% 65 13.7% 30 6.6% 95 10.2% Limerick 10.90% 45 24.7% 20 11.0% 70 19.2% Faraday 8.10% 75 9.8% 100 13.1% 175 11.4% Wollaston 8.30% 55 14.2% 50 14.0% 105 14.1% Bancroft 9.30% 220 11.6% 250 11.8% 465 11.6% 8.80% 35 10.9% 25 9.0% 60 10.0% Madoc 9.70% 45 3.9% 45 4.1% 90 4.0% 8.30% 95 4.6% 100 4.6% 190 4.5% Tweed 9.40% 90 2.8% 130 4.2% 220 3.5% Stirling-Rawdon 6.40% 95 3.7% 140 5.4% 230 4.5% 7.50% 120 5.1% 105 4.5% 225 4.8% Quinte Sub-Region N/A 2,705 4.2% 2,855 4.3% 5,560 4.2% Brighton 6.60% 135 2.3% 135 2.4% 265 2.3% 5.70% 1065 4.8% 1010 4.6% 2075 4.7% Belleville 4.00% 1170 4.8% 1315 4.9% 2485 4.9% Prince Edward County 5.00% 335 2.7% 395 3.1% 735 2.9% Rural, Frontenac, N/A 2,650 8.6% 2,800 9.2% 5,440 8.9% Lennox & Addington Sub-Region Tyendinaga 3.70% 195 9.0% 255 12.6% 445 10.7% Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory 20.00% 1005 82.1% 1080 83.0% 2085 82.6% Deseronto 11.40% 175 18.4% 165 18.0% 340 18.2% Greater Napanee 3.90% 385 4.8% 435 5.2% 820 5.0% Stone Mills 3.20% 170 4.2% 190 4.9% 360 4.6% 6.40% 100 7.2% 120 8.9% 220 8.0% North Frontenac 8.60% 35 3.4% 40 4.2% 70 3.5% Central Frontenac 7.80% 215 8.7% 205 8.7% 425 8.8% South Frontenac 5.00% 370 3.9% 310 3.3% 675 3.6% Kingston Sub-Region N/A 2,275 3.1% 2,635 3.5% 4,910 3.3% Loyalist 4.20% 285 3.2% 355 4.3% 640 3.8% Kingston 4.20% 1965 3.0% 2255 3.4% 4225 3.2%

3

Frontenac Islands 8.10% 25 2.5% 25 2.5% 45 2.3% Lanark, Leeds & N/A 1,845 3.2% 2,075 3.4% 3,930 3.3% Grenville Sub-Region Perth 7.90% 80 2.9% 70 2.0% 145 2.3% Smiths Falls 11.30% 190 4.3% 215 4.4% 405 4.3% Montague 7.50% 70 3.9% 105 5.9% 175 4.9% Westport 9.30% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 10 1.5% Rideau Lakes 9.60% 135 2.6% 225 4.3% 360 3.4% Leeds and the Thousand Islands 5.90% 140 2.9% 180 3.9% 320 3.4% Gananoque 5.50% 80 3.2% 120 4.3% 205 3.9% Athens 4.90% 35 2.2% 30 1.9% 65 2.1% Front of Yonge 5.20% 50 3.6% 75 5.4% 120 4.3% Brockville 2.90% 360 3.4% 340 2.9% 700 3.1% Elizabethtown-Kitley 6.10% 90 1.9% 70 1.4% 170 1.7% Augusta 6.30% 90 2.4% 110 3.0% 205 2.7% Edwardsburgh/Cardinal 7.30% 210 5.8% 200 5.8% 410 5.8% Drummond/ North Elmsley 7.10% 100 2.6% 95 2.5% 195 2.5% Merrickville-Wolford 6.50% 65 4.6% 50 3.4% 110 3.8% Prescott 8.20% 80 3.9% 100 4.3% 175 4.0% Tay Valley 7.10% 70 2.4% 90 3.0% 160 2.7%

Socio-economic factors by Aboriginal Identity Additional analysis of aboriginal identity was completed using information from the 2016 census. Information on dwelling conditions, living arrangements, income, and languages was provided at a census metropolitan area level, only. For the South East LHIN, the only census metropolitan areas are Kingston and Belleville.

Dwelling Conditions The population that identified as Aboriginal in Kingston and Belleville reported less major repairs required on their dwellings compared to those who identified as Aboriginal at the provincial and Canadian level (Belleville: 9.6%; Kingston: 12.2%; : 16.9%; Figure 2. Distribution of Dwelling Condition by Canada: 19.4%). In Kingston and Belleville, Aboriginal Status, Census Metropolitan Area, 2016 the Aboriginal population reported that

4 they required more major repairs to their dwellings than the non-Aboriginal population. While this was also the case on the provincial and national level, the difference between the two populations was much more significant in Ontario (Aboriginal: 16.9% vs. non-Aboriginal: 5.8%) and Canada (Aboriginal: 19.4% vs. non-Aboriginal: 6.0%) compared to Kingston (Aboriginal: 12.2% vs. non-Aboriginal: 6.0%) and Belleville (Aboriginal: 9.6% vs. non-Aboriginal: 7.1%) (Figure 2).

Living Arrangements Less of the Aboriginal population in Kingston and Belleville reported living with grandparents when compared to the province or country. Interestingly, a significant amount of the Aboriginal population in Kingston reported living arrangements with lone-parent families. This was larger than Belleville, Ontario, and Canada values. Compared to the non-Aboriginal population, more of the Aboriginal reported living arrangements with only one or no parents present. This was similar across all geographies (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Distribution of Living Arrangements by Aboriginal Status, Census Metropolitan Areas, 2016.

Income The population that identified as Aboriginal in Kingston and Belleville reported slightly lower median and average incomes than the province and country (Figure 4). The median and average income of the Aboriginal population was consistently lower than the non-Aboriginal populations across all geographies.

5

Figure 4. Comparison of Median and Average income by Aboriginal status, Census Metropolitan Area, 2016.

Low Income Status A much higher proportion of the Aboriginal population in Kingston reported a low-income status compared to the Aboriginal population in Belleville, Ontario, or Canada. Compared to the non-Aboriginal population, all regions had higher prevalence of low income status in the Aboriginal population, particularly in Kingston (Aboriginal: 27.2%; non-Aboriginal: 12.8%) (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Percent of Population in Low Income Status by Aboriginal Status, Census Metropolitan Area, 2016

6

Mother Tongue Similar to the overall population, the areas of Kingston and Belleville had a higher proportion of the Aboriginal population report English as their mother tongue compared to the provincial and national values (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Distribution of Mother Tongue in the Aboriginal Population, by Census Metropolitan Area, 2016.

Knowledge of Languages Knowledge of any Aboriginal language was significantly lower in the Kingston and Belleville areas compared to the province and country. Belleville and Kingston both had proportions of 1.3% of the Aboriginal population having some knowledge of any Aboriginal language, compared to 8.9% for the province and 15.6% for the country. In the Kingston area, the most commonly known Aboriginal language was Algonquian with small proportions also having knowledge of Inuit or Iroquoian. However, in the Belleville area, the most common Aboriginal language was Iroquoian with a small proportion having knowledge of Inuit.

7

DEFINITIONS AND METHODOLOGY NOTES

Data Source Information on Aboriginal Identity for calendar year 2016 was obtained from via the Census Profile, Catalogue no. 98-316-X2016001. Definitions Aboriginal Identity as defined by Statistics Canada refers to whether the person identified with the Aboriginal peoples of Canada. This includes those who are First Nations (North American Indian), Metis or Inuk (Inuit) and/or those who are Registered or Treaty Indians (that is, registered under the Indian Act of Canada), and/or those who have membership in a First Nation or Indian band. Aboriginal peoples of Canada are defined in the Constitution Act, 1982, section 35 (2) as including the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada.

Aboriginal identity is derived from data collected in three questions: Aboriginal group (Question 18); Registered or Treaty Indian status (Question 20); and Membership in a First Nation or Indian band (Question 21). In Question 18, respondents could respond 'Yes, First Nations (North American Indian),' 'Yes, Métis,' 'Yes, Inuk (Inuit)' or 'No, not an Aboriginal person' by checking off the appropriate mark-in circle. In Question 20, respondents could respond 'No' or 'Yes, Status Indian (Registered or Treaty).' In Question 21, respondents could respond 'No' or 'Yes, member of a First Nation/Indian band.'

8