Comparing Canadian Born and Foreign Born Respondents

Comparing Canadian Born and Foreign Born Respondents

The Panel Study on Homelessness in OttawaF. Klodawsky, T. Aubry, B. Behnia, C. Nicholson, M. Young

Nov 22, 2005 National Housing Day Ottawa

Outline of the Presentation

Foreign Born Respondents– Design and Methods– Results:

• Profile of Foreign Born Respondents• Comparison with Canadian Born Respondents

– Findings– Recommendations


Design

Panel Study sampling goals: 25% of adult women and 40% of adults in families should not be Canadian citizens

Cultural interpreters were utilized whenever appropriate.

One Panel Study interviewer, trained as cultural interpreter, spoke Somali as his mother tongue and Arabic

Ninety-nine of 412 respondents were not born in Canada


Methods The original question on citizenship was not

linked to reasons for arrival But further discussion and research indicated

that we should re-categorize respondents as immigrants (IMM) or as refugees (REF)

When comparing the situations of Canadian Born Respondents (CBR) and Foreign Born Respondents (FBR), and IMM and REF, we used matched samples based on sex and age


Results Profiles of Respondents

– Distribution of Refugee and Immigrant Respondents– Sex– Age – Year of Arrival in Canada– Country of Origin

Comparisons Among Matched Samples– Number of Children– Reasons for Homelessness– Number of Time Homeless– Educational Attainment– Health Status– Health and Social Service Utilization


Immigrant and Refugee Origins and Citizenship Status REFUGEES

– 52/99 respondents came to Canada as refugees;

• 25% were Canadian citizens and 40% were refugee claimants

IMMIGRANTS– 47/99 respondents came to Canada as

immigrants; • 60% were Canadian citizens


Citizenship Status by Subgroup (#)

Subgroup Came asImmigrants

Came asRefugees

RefugeeClaimants

Adult Female 11 8 5Adult Male 5 2 0Youth Female 8 2 1Youth Male 5 0 0Adult Female inFamilies 16 16 11Adult Males inFamilies 2 3 4


Sex PREPONDERANCE OF WOMEN

AMONG FOREIGN BORN RESPONDENTS – 79% of foreign born respondents – 84% of refugees were female– 74% of immigrants were female– 87% of adults in families were female

AMONG CANADIAN BORN…– 48% were female


Age

MAJORITY WERE WORKING AGE ADULTS– Smaller clusters of:

• Immigrant youth • Refugees over 50 years of age


Year of Arrival (%)

FBR

N=99

IMM

N=47

REF

N=52

2001-2003 32 17 48

1996-2000 23 22 23

1990-1995 28 26 29

PRE 1990 16 35 0


Country of Origin Somalia 22 Colombia 3 United States 8 Kenya 2 Haiti 6 Ukraine 2 Unknown/Missing 7 Palestine 2 Rwanda 5 Italy 2 Djibouti 4 Burundi 2 Zaire 3 Philippines 2 Ethiopia 3 D.R. Congo 3

And one person each from: Africa (Unspecified) Costa Rica Poland The Gambia Angola England Saudi Arabia Trinidad Armenia Eritrea Scotland Vietnam Burk. Faso Guatemala Singapore Yemen China India South Korea

Kuwait Sudan Lebanon

Matched Comparisons

FBR v. CBR

IMM v. REF


Number of Children (%)

FBR N=98

FBR N=78

CBR N=78

IMM N=32

REF N=33

None 31 37 30 25 30

1-2 33 26 46 50 18

3-4 24 25 19 19 33

5+ 11 12 6 6 18


Reasons for Current Episode of Homelessness (%)

FBR N=99 FBR N=78 CBR N=78 IMM N=33 REF N=33

REFUGEE CLAIMANT 10 9 21FINANCIAL/

HOUSING43 42 41 54 33

FLEEING ABUSE 18 18 18 21 24FAMILY CONFLICT 20 24 14 18 3OTHER 5 6 11 3 3SUBSTANCE ABUSE 3 4 10 3 0LEFT FACILITY 0 0 5 0 0


Number of Times Homelessness (%)

FBR N=99

FBR N=78

CBR N=78

IMM N=33

REF N=33

1x 42 39 31 42 54

2x 29 31 23 33 24

3x 11 10 13 6 9

4x 5 5 14 3 6

5x 3 3 6 3 3

More than 5 times

10 12 13 13 4


Level of Education Attained (%)


Grade 11 or Less 34 35` 55 27 34

High School w. or w/o diploma

25 38 36 33 40

Some trade, college, etc. no diploma

9 5 3 9 3

Some post-secondary 20 13 5 21 12

University Degree 10 9 1 9 9


Norm-based Mental and Physical Health Component Scores (SF-36)

USN CBR FBR IMM REF

Mental Health

49.3 41.2 46.9 47.4 46.5

Physical Health

51.3 49.7 53.7 52.7 54.5


One or more social or health service contacts in last 12 months (%)


General Practitioner

62 59 72 76 61

Specialist 22 25 36 30 21

Nurse 27 31 36 24 27

Social Worker

33 39 51 39 30

Psycholog. 10 13 12 12 12

Shelter Worker

31 34 53 39 24

Dentist 17 14 28 18 15


Overview

Overall, FBR in Ottawa have significantly different demographic characteristics and patterns of service usage than do CBN; differences between IMM and REF are less pronounced but noteworthy where they exist

Their reasons for being homeless are more likely to be explained by structural barriers, such as lack of access to: a) jobs, b) housing, c) child care and d) appropriate health and social services.


Findings Financial reasons, family violence and conflict,

and reasons tied to being a refugee claimant dominate among the reasons for being homeless among FBR.

Higher family conflict possibly linked to FBRs’ greater propensity to extended family living, and to initial informal housing arrangements

Health and substance abuse problems are less significant among FBR overall. Probably due to citizenship screening but also resiliency among refugees. Needs more research.


Recommendations

Pressing need for coordinated involvement by all levels of government (ie. federal government immigration policies are not well-coordinated with municipal level settlement services.

State programs and policies need to be focused, yet to recognize ways that different issues overlap (ie. Family violence, inadequate housing, stress, poverty)


Recommendations (continued)

There is a clear need for greatly enhanced availability of permanently affordable, safe and appropriate housing

There is a clear need for greatly enhanced appropriate health and social services for newcomers

Documents

Comparing Canadian Born and Foreign Born Respondents