Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
�
HOUSING FIRST in Hope, BC Readiness Assessment Prepared for the Hope and Area Transition Society
by Jennifer Hawkins [email protected] •Final Report• March 23, 2015 �
photo courtesy of Ray Daws
Table of ContentsTable of Contents 2
Executive Summary 4
Report Recommendations 4
Background 5
Hope and the Thunderbird Motel Project 5
Hope and Homelessness 5
The Thunderbird Motel Project 6
Methodology 7
Stakeholder Engagement 7
Client Research 8
Community Outreach 8
Findings 9
Community Gaps, Assets & Housing First Fidelity 9
Fidelity to Core Housing First Principles 9
Core 1: Immediate Access to Housing with no Pre-readiness Conditions 9
Core 2: Consumer Choice and Self-Determination 11
Core 3: Recovery Orientation 12
Core 4: Individualized and Client-Driven Supports 15
Core 5: Social and Community Integration 17
Recommendations 19
Housing First Core Support Team 19
Volunteer Coordination and Training 20
Aboriginal Partnerships and Outreach 20
Additional Staffing 21
Community Outreach and Engagement 22
Capital Project and Future Direction 22
REFERENCES 24
APPENDICES 27
Stakeholder Engagement Report Summary 27
Client Interviews Report Summary 28
Service Provider Report Summary 29
Community Forum Report Summaries 30
Statement on Appendices 36
�
Executive Summary �
Hope has unique issues with homelessness mainly because of its location and prevailing socio-
economic conditions. That said, Hope has the capacity and potential to sustain an exemplary,
best case practice model for the rural adaptation of Housing First (HF). The Thunderbird Motel
Project is ahead in practice, employs skilled program operators, and enjoys broad-based
community backing. However, challenges remain—namely, the creation of a sustainable, cross-1
systems body of support that will ensure the health and longevity of the program.
Report Recommendations
•establishment of HF Core Support Team
•implementation of formalized volunteer training
•procurement of an Aboriginal outreach worker
•procurement of additional staffing and system supports
•engagement in additional community outreach
This support is not universal, and outstanding issues and concerns remain. It will be imperative to maintain communication and 1
dialogue with the community moving forward.
4
Something that seems so simple—
having a place to sleep at night,
receive mail, keep personal
goods, cook meals and socialize—
provides the foundation from
which people live their lives. —Karyn French, BC Partners for
Mental Health and Addictions
Background HOPE AND THE THUNDERBIRD MOTEL PROJECT
Hope and Homelessness
Hope represents only 2% of the population in the Fraser Valley Regional District; however, it contains an
outsized 7.8% of the FVRD’s homeless population (FVRD, 2014; van Wyk, 2015). As the “last stop”
between Vancouver and the mountains, and as a town located at the hub of five major highways, Hope
attracts a migratory homeless population. It also contains a significant homegrown homeless population.,
the vulnerability of which is reflected in large part by statistical indicators. Available indicators relating to 2
homelessness include low income, housing, serious drug crime, level of education, and mental health.
Hope stands higher than the BC average on all indicators: 4.6% of the population receives income
assistance (compared to 1.7% province-wide); 59.2% of Hope’s renters live at a shelter-to-income ratio of 3
more than 30% (compared to 43.4% province-wide); indicators of serious drug-related crime in Hope is
338.3 (compared to 170.3 for BC); 20.2% of Hope’s residents have not completed high school (compared 4
to 11.1% province-wide); mental health risk indicators for Hope is 8.7 (compared with provincial rate of
4.0). Additionally, Hope has sustained a vacancy rate of less than 2% for several years (CMHC, 2012)
There are many triggers and risk factors relating to homelessness; these represent available census data 2
Multiplied by 10 on the chart for better visual comparison alongside other indicators3
Divided by 10 on the chart for better visual comparison alongside other indicators4
5
HopeBC
A
EDCB
A - Income assistance B - Percentage of renters with STIR > 30% C - Drug-related crime D - Non-completion of high school E - Mental Health risk indicators
Source: BC Stats Socioeconomic Profiles 2012
Homelessness Vulnerability Indicators
The Thunderbird Motel Project
Despite the vulnerability of these indicators, for a small community, Hope is very much ahead of
the game in addressing homelessness. Most rural communities have only implemented
emergency services at best (Waegemakers-Schiff, 2014). However, the Hope and Area
Transition Society (HATS) piloted a low barrier housing project—the Thunderbird Motel Project
—in 2009 that leaned towards Housing First before Housing First was even officially embraced
by the federal government. This project has therefore been the central focal point of the
following HF readiness analysis. The Thunderbird aims to provide permanent, semi-
independent housing for people trapped in chronic homelessness. Residents are not
encumbered with any pre-housing readiness conditions (such as sobriety or mental health case
management), but the project emphasizes recovery and community integration. It offers 24 units
on 3 acres of land, with a communal drop-in centre on site, as well as access to horticultural and
other activities. Outreach, intake and case-management are provided through the full-time
Homeless Program Coordinator (HPC), Paul Keller. Keller’s position is funded by BC Housing
and contracted through HATS. The remainder of this report will indicate both gaps and
strengths in the Thunderbird’s embodiment of a Housing First approach; it will also outline
steps in moving forward with further HF implementation.
6
I’ve been in a few different shelters,
and what you have at the Thunderbird
is extraordinary! —Thunderbird resident
Methodology
Research included both quantitative and qualitative aspects. Primary quantitative data from both
past and current Point-in-Time counts, BC Housing stats, BC Stats, and Stats Canada were used
to get a statistical picture of homelessness and homeless vulnerability factors in Hope.
Additionally, throughout the assessment period, a considerable amount of secondary academic
research provided both a baseline for framing the issues and continuing input.
The qualitative, exploratory research engaging stakeholders, clients and community members
does not offer a scientific assessment of nuanced perspectives and feelings—if it were truly
possible to quantify feelings. It rather outlines themes and concerns that emerged from multiple
narratives of experiences and opinions. Summaries of reports submitted to HATS and the
Housing Task Force are provided as appendices at the end of this report.
Stakeholder Engagement
Community stakeholder engagement was more exploratory in nature and therefore more
qualitative. The researcher began with individual stakeholder interviews based on
recommendations and insights from Housing Task Force, HATS, other stakeholders, and
academic research. This included stakeholders from the political and business sectors, the
volunteer and faith communities, related social service industries (including addictions and
mental health) and representatives of other models in the region (including abstinence-based and
higher-barrier options). Participants were asked questions such as what their experience had
been with low-barrier housing, how they felt that it had worked so far in the community, and what
they felt the major issues were that needed addressing.
7
Client Research
Client research was also qualitative in nature. The researcher spent time integrating into and
participating in day-to-day operations of the Thunderbird in order to get a sense of operational
logic, program structure, and general atmosphere. Individual interviews were conducted in order
to hear personal narratives and lived experience of clients. Two additional focus groups were
held to get client perspective on what they perceived did and did not work about the
Thunderbird. These interviews and focus groups were conducted independently of the Homeless
Program Coordinator.
Community Outreach
Community research formed another component in the assessment. This involved both
quantitative and qualitative research. The first point of contact was an informal, day-long forum
in the Blue Moose Coffee Shop. The purpose was to enter into an initial dialogue with the
general community about issues surrounding low barrier housing and homelessness in a way that
supported a local business. A survey was provided as an additional way to hear from attendees if
they chose. As issues in the Silver Creek residential community began to emerge from
community engagement, a second forum was held at the Silver Creek Elementary School to hear
from residents regarding their experiences with low barrier housing in the community. However,
participants seemed to want answers just as much—if not more—than they wanted to provide
input; accordingly, a third forum was held as a Housing First Informational Forum at the Hope
Recreation Centre. At this forum, a brief survey was provided at the end of the event to give
attendees an opportunity to indicate their general support or opposition to Housing First
implementation in the community.
8
Findings COMMUNITY GAPS, ASSETS & HOUSING FIRST FIDELITY
Canada has adopted five core philosophical principles that underline its approach to Housing
First (Gaetz, 2014; Goering, 2014). The following analysis in relation to these five principles
forms the basis for the recommendations in this report. Gaps and assets are discussed
throughout.
Fidelity to Core Housing First Principles
Core 1: Immediate Access to Housing with no Pre-readiness Conditions
In not requiring any pre-readiness conditions before accessing
housing, the Thunderbird aligns completely with HF
philosophy. In spite of this strong fidelity, however, the type of
housing offered is not the most common for HF programs and
should be discussed here.
Because of the priorities of client choice and community integration, scattered-site housing is
most often preferred in HF programs (Gaetz, 2014). As a congregate model, the Thunderbird
Motel Project is weaker in alignment with a typical HF program framework. This does not,
however, preclude fidelity to the theoretical framework, and government policy makers and
practitioners recognize that HF programs can look different and still maintain core HF fidelity
(Gaetz, 2014). Two things are of note here: 1) a congregate model is most certainly the best
option for HF implementation in Hope, despite its lack of consumer housing choice; 2)
additional outreach and intake staffing could provide a greater level of choice for placement
within existing housing options in the community when available and fitting. This report
addresses the second point in its discussion of Core 4 below.
9
Regarding the first point, rural HF implementation often encounters difficulties with a scattered
site approach (Waegemakers-Schiff, 2014). Limited rental stock is one concern; additionally,
one of the main obstacles is the smaller-town phenomenon of being known, where clients have
often “burned bridges” (Forchuk, 2010; Greenberg, Pathways, 2007). A study of homelessness
in small BC communities highlighted the difficulties for people with histories of homelessness in
finding housing because of their reputations (Greenberg, 2007). Rural communities also find
difficulty in achieving efficiencies of scale with scattered-site approaches. The Homeless
Outreach Program (HOP) in Hope encountered all these typical rural difficulties before the
Thunderbird Project began.
Research supports the efficacy of a congregate approach for
rural communities. Participants in the At Home/Chez Soi
study identified a lack of supportive relationships as key to 5
their path to homelessness (Piat, et al., 2012). Congregate
housing can go a long way in developing a supportive
community. In the rural arm of the At Home/Chez Soi
study, participants experienced difficulties with the scattered-site approach, so the project
implemented a congregate, peer-supported home for those participants that were particularly
difficult to house (Aubry, et al, 2014). An additional study of low barrier, supported housing in
rural Nova Scotia demonstrated that supports were strengthened through the peer networks that
developed through congregate housing (Leviten-Reid, 2014). The congregate model also helps
achieve efficiencies of scale. One of British Columbia’s first examples of HF, the Princess Rooms
in Vancouver, operated under a congregate model. The operating agency, RainCity Housing,
developed formal partnerships with health care and community service providers to bring
services to clients (Remund, 2007). This can
lessen the load of formal support services
delivered through a scattered site approach.
The congregate model embodied in the
Thunderbird revolves around empowerment,
responsibility, and social support. It centralizes
outreach resources, and it provides immediate
Conducted by the Mental Health Commission of Canada, this was the world’s largest trial of Housing First; the final report was 5
released in 2014.
10
Most of us don’t have family.
We’ve left stuff behind.
This is our family. —Thunderbird resident
This is an interesting and exciting family
to belong to. There’s always something
going on. … We care for each other.
Everything gets resolved, and everyone
understands. —Thunderbird resident
housing for those with known histories within the community. In short, a congregate HF model
remains the best option for Hope.
Core 2: Consumer Choice and Self-Determination
The second HF core involves consumer choice. It does not view
formerly homeless people as passive recipients of services that
affect change in their lives; rather, services help support and
direct, but people themselves have primary agency in their own
future trajectories (Parsell, 2014).
As discussed above, the Thunderbird is limited in its offering
clients choice in terms of housing; however, it has the potential
to offer considerable amount of choice in living environment,
personal contribution, supports, and personal progression.
Paul Keller operates strongly under supportive case-management
relationships; his door is open to meet with residents to discuss anything they want or need.
Almost every resident interviewed expressed the sentiment that Keller “had their back” and
seemed to experience a genuine belief in his concern for their welfare. Clearly, residents
interviewed felt empowered to engage with Keller about issues
in their lives. Additional opportunities for self-determination
involve communal meetings. On the first Thursday of every
month, residents attend a Resident Meeting where they can air
concerns and deal collectively with issues that come up. On the
other Thursdays, residents can choose to attend a Support
Meeting. These platforms give residents a chance to provide
input to each other and the HPC.
That said, client self-determination could be stronger. One of
the main obstacles is lack of staffing. Residents repeatedly told the researcher that they desire
additional open hours for the the common spaces. Residents live in what most people would
11
Nobody wants to be told what to do. —Thunderbird resident
A lot of them [service
providers] just put the time
in for the government, they
just put the hours in.
Not Paul. —Thunderbird resident
consider to be cramped quarters. The common space (aka
“Social Cafe”) provides a place to sit together, play pool or
music, watch tv, and even cook together. The space is
under-utilized because of staffing shortages, and this
impacts residents’ quality of life. Currently, the common
space is only open from 9:00 am - 3:00 pm Monday-
Thursday, and 9:00 am - 12:00 pm on Fridays. It is completely closed on the evenings and
weekends, which is difficult for residents and can even undermine the sense of community that
supports the congregate model.
A Peer Council or Resident Council with the more invested and longer-term residents could also
be a positive step; however, again, a lack of staffing support would impede any implementation of
resident input. Additional staffing support would allow the Thunderbird to align more
completely with HF Core 2 priority.
Core 3: Recovery Orientation
A burning question for some in the community seems to be: Does Housing First actually work?
By “work,” people seem to mean different things; it depends largely on how one frames the
problem. If the problem is homelessness—people not having a home—giving them a home solves
this problem. If the problem is addiction,
giving people a home will not necessarily
entirely “solve” this problem (nor, it must be
noted, do abstinence-based programs).
However, stable housing has been proven,
over and over, to have a strong link with
decreased substance use—even if complete
rehabilitation remains a working goal (French,
2007; Larimer, 2009; Kertesz, 2009; Gaetz,
2014; Goering, 2014). One American study by the National Institute of Mental Health compared
Treatment First (TF) and Housing First (HF) program models for homeless clients (Henwood,
2011). Researchers found that TF providers became consumed with finding housing, where HF
providers were able to focus more on treatment. The At Home/Chez Soi Project echoes these
findings when it reports that in the midst of daily survival struggles, “shelter becomes the
12
primary concern over and above maintaining health and wellness” (Piat, 2012, 16). So it is safe to
assert that providing housing “works” even when people frame the problem differently. 6
That said, the level of services has a correlative impact on the recovery orientation of a HF
program. At the beginning of the readiness assessment, service
provider research in the community of Hope revealed a distinct
lack of outreach support in any capacity: police, medical, mental
health, or addictions. Community-based supports (such as Read
Right Society and Free Rein) are strong, although transportation is
an issue (discussed in section 4).
Most HF programs operate with Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) or Intensive Case
Management (ICM) teams. These teams are typically available to clients 24/7, particularly in the 7
first 6 months of the challenging transition from absolute homelessness to being housed. Teams
can include physicians and nurses, mental health case managers, addictions outreach workers,
harm reduction, peer support, police outreach, and even positions such as home economists,
recreation supervisors, or employment development specialists (Gaetz, 2014).
At the onset of the research, the Thunderbird had one 35 hour/week outreach position, very
little police liaison, no mental health connection, nurse visits once a month or less, bi-weekly
harm reduction visits, and no addictions outreach—although an addiction counsellor was
available in town on a drop-in basis two times a week. Support levels at the Thunderbird have
tended to vary with the changing winds of funding and related program opportunities and has
enjoyed, at times, higher levels of surrounding supports. The level of supports at the onset of the
readiness assessment were unsustainable for the program but particularly for Housing First
implementation.
In recent months, HATS has made progress in buttressing the system of collaborative supports
surrounding the Thunderbird. Stronger police liaison through the new Staff Sergeant Bruce
Anderson, additional volunteer presence and community events coordinated by Sue Martin, the 8
As discussed elsewhere, further dialogue on these and surrounding issues needs to go forward in Hope.6
Policy-makers, academics, and practitioners alike do not expect rural adaptations of HF to have access to the same levels of 7
support as urban models. Creative and/or regional approaches are encouraged.
Volunteer presence is a vital link to recovery and a strength in Hope’s community—discussed further in recommendations 8
below.
13
People here are hurtin’. —Thunderbird resident
addition of a Serious Addiction Mental Illness (SAMI) worker provided by Fraser Health, and the
addition of a temporary, 35 hr/week peer support position for the Thunderbird are all making a
difference. Efforts to procure additional staffing and strengthen connections with community
supports are ongoing and still very much needed.
An additional factor in recovery that has yet to be addressed is
nutrition. According to homeless advocate Judy Graves, a
preponderance of lived experience, anecdotal evidence, and
common sense leads to the conclusion that proper nutrition is
a vital component in recovery orientation (Graves, personal
correspondence, Feb 10, 2015). It impacts overall physical
health, substance use, and one’s frame of mind. The
Thunderbird has an orchard, but year-round nutrition remains
a working goal. Creative ways of boosting nutrition—either
through volunteer presence or formal supports—would make a
strong contribution to recovery orientation at the Thunderbird.
A last point of note regarding recovery orientation is that the HPC in Hope operates very
strongly from the Strengths Perspective developed out of the University of Kansas School of
Social Work. This same perspective helped Princess
Rooms in Vancouver deal with an incredibly challenging,
street entrenched demographic in a congregate setting.
Leslie Remund writes: “Instead of focusing on a person’s
weaknesses, deficits or ‘issues’ and trying to ‘fix’ them, we
focus on their strengths: resiliency, knowledge from past
experiences, personal interests, hopes and skills. These
strengths are often the same personal resources and
talents that have helped the person survive” (Remund,
2007). At the Thunderbird, Keller integrates residents
into community life by encouraging home and building maintenance through residents’
application of personal skills and communal sense of
commitment and responsibility. This contributes
positively to recovery orientation no matter what level
of supports surround the Thunderbird.
14
This place is the best thing that’s
happened to me in a long, long time. —Thunderbird resident
Core 4: Individualized and Client-Driven Supports
Aboriginal Engagement: This remains one of the largest gaps in services to the homeless in
Hope. Hope is surrounded by several bands, and its population is 16.6% urban Aboriginal—
double that of the rest of the province. Additionally, over the
past six years, 30% of the HOP clients have been Aboriginal.
However, there has been little or no engagement with
surrounding bands or any Aboriginal agency or
organization. There is no easy blame or solution to this
situation, but it needs redressing.
In speaking of rural homelessness in the BC addictions and mental illness journal Visions,
Greenberg writes, “Situations of homelessness are still rooted in experiences of poverty,
colonization and trauma, and there is still the same overrepresentation of First Nations people;
landlords still discriminate against First Nations people” (Greenberg, 2007, 11). According to a
study in Southern Alberta that looked at reserve-city migration and homelessness in the
Aboriginal population, “the need to retain and renew kinship ties is a strong element in urban
Aboriginal experiences” (Belanger, 2013). As Hope is surrounded by bands, kinship ties with
urban Aboriginal populations are particularly pertinent. At the same time, according to a local
First Nations RCMP representative, alienation from reserve communities is also a common
experience (Starr, personal correspondence, November 2014). These culturally-specific
circumstances are best met with culturally-sensitive practices
delivered by Native practitioners. It is simply best practice to
have Aboriginal workers supporting Aboriginal people
(Greenberg, 2007). One of the main recommendations
below is the addition of local, Aboriginal homeless outreach
in the community.
Clinical Support: HF is designed for chronically homelessness individuals, many or most of
whom experience mental illness (Trainor, 2013; Goering, 2014). Mental Health is therefore a
vital link for Thunderbird residents. However, the current Mental Health office in Hope does not
operate in on-site outreach capacity because of high caseloads and large service area. There also
seems to exist some (not insurmountable) philosophical differences in approach, as well as some
15
past relational difficulties. This needs renewed outreach and continued connection to build trust
in moving forward.
The addition of the SAMI outreach worker working 2 days per week in Hope is a hopeful step in
the right direction on this issue. Additionally, HATS has been working with managers in Fraser
Health to advocate for additional mental health outreach to the Thunderbird. Additional support
staff could also potentially help Thunderbird residents access the Mental Health office for
appointments. For the most effective HF implementation, Mental Health is a vital link that needs
continuing maintenance and care despite difficulties.
Regarding general medical care, it has been expressed repeatedly by both residents and service
providers that nurse practitioner Sue Lawrence is a highly-valued presence at the Thunderbird.
However, her availability is limited—even though she comes at the full capacity in which she is
able. Given the distance of the Thunderbird from town, the drop-in clinic would be a greater
asset when paired with additional staff presence. Cross-systems advocacy and collaboration
would also be an important step in increasing clinical supports.
Staff Support: Additional issues related to staffing are discussed throughout this report, but
increased staff presence would also improve the client-driven, individualized supports core
value. The Thunderbird may not be for everyone—particularly youth or geriatric, high-service
needs clients who are at currently at risk of homelessness.
Additional staff and case management support could ensure that
all available options in the community are engaged, including any
scattered site locations.
Additionally, staff support would better equip Thunderbird
residents to access the robust system of community supports
located in-town. Transportation to these services is a problem
cited by both Silver Creek residents and Thunderbird residents. It is also one of the most
common issues faced by rural communities attempting to support HF (Waegemakers-Schiff,
2014; Leviton-Reid, 2014; Forchuck, 2010). BC Housing provides a van, but its use presents
challenges if only one staff member is available on-site.
Rent Support: Also in keeping with client-driven supports, the Thunderbird residents need
more rent support. The goal of HF programs is that clients do not have a STIR of more than 30%
16
(Gaetz, 2014). Two thirds of Thunderbird residents are eligible for a rental supplement;
however, all residents have a STIR of over 30%, many have a STIR of around 60%, and some
even have a STIR as high as 80-90%. Donated food and clothes help, as do community services
such as the Joshua project and Hope Community Services food bank. But an ease in
circumstances of poverty through rent support would help some residents achieve individual
goals and further facilitate independence for those who are able.
Core 5: Social and Community Integration
Overall, the Thunderbird sustains—or has the hopeful potential to sustain—high fidelity to this
core philosophical principle.
According to the cross-site participant narratives of the At Home/Chez Soi project, stigma and
discrimination has been a huge part of participants’ experience (Piat, 2012, 6). The Thunderbird
and its residents have most certainly come in for their share of experiences with stigmatization.
In the past, Keller and HATS have done a commendable amount of community outreach—
testified to by the strong base of support the Thunderbird enjoys. Keller consistently encourages
tours and visits from community members, and he has formed strong, positive relationships with
the Thunderbird’s immediate neighbours.
That said, persistent negative stereotypes—as well as voiced community concerns—need ongoing
community engagement to offset the tendency towards stigma and discrimination. It also keeps
the door of communication open to address legitimate problems. And these problems do occur.
Remund writes that at the Princess Rooms, they routinely encounter problem guests, damage to
rooms and buildings, psychosis and aggression or violence (Remund, 2007). In light of this,
RainCity Housing has expressed the importance, particularly in the beginning, of recognizing
residents’ challenges and remaining tolerant of drug- and trauma-related behaviours (Scott,
2014). This tolerance needs clear policy direction supported by HATS. But it could also use
some additional strategy on the backside. The Vivian—another congregate, HF site—
implemented a “Good Neighbour Policy” that requires residents to sign a Neighbouring
Agreement, negotiated with surrounding neighbours, to ensure a commitment from residents to
maintaining positive relationships with the community (Scott, 2014). This approach recognizes
that problems do occur, but it commits residents to thinking of their housing in relationship with
the wider community.
17
Aside from community engagement, volunteer
presence provides a wealth of resources for community
integration. Events open to the community and hosted
by the Thunderbird have also been a key aspect
supporting this core value. Additionally, as previously
discussed, the congregate model, along with Keller’s
Strength’s Perspective approach, provides substantial
support in social integration.
An additional aspect of social integration is the ability to pursue a spiritual path in connection
with community. The At Home/Chez Soi Moncton Site Final Report highlights this need.
Moncton was the only rural area studied in the At Home/Chez Soi project, and the first main
theme identified in qualitative interviews with participants was spirituality, which played a
fundamental role (Aubry, 2014). During focus groups and
interviews, Thunderbird residents repeatedly expressed the desire to
either attend weekend religious services in town or have a religious
service available at the Thunderbird. This is currently a gap.
18
Church is like family. —Thunderbird resident
Recommendations �
A formidable body of research exists that testifies to the efficacy of Housing First in helping
chronically or episodically homeless maintain housing. Furthermore, it appears to work over
sustained periods of time (Byrne, 2014). It is also quite
apparent that it does this at decreased costs to the community
(Hwang, 2011; Kellen, 2010; Gaetz, 2012). However, there is a
dearth of research and successful case models for rural
implementation of HF philosophies and programs. With
proper supports and systems collaboration, the Thunderbird
Motel Project could be an exemplary case model for rural
implementation of Housing First.
Housing First Core Support Team
Intensive Case Management or Assertive Community Treatment teams may not be doable in the
shorter-term for Hope and area; however, a HF support team is definitely within range. The team
would consist of the HOP worker, an RCMP liaison, the current Fraser Health Serious
Addictions Mental Illness (SAMI) outreach worker, Aboriginal outreach, an addictions
counsellor, a mental health liaison, and a Fraser Health physician or nurse practitioner. Time and
experience could add or subtract to the team as needed.
The team members would meet regularly and be able to commit to regular visits at the
Thunderbird within their capacities. This cross-agency communication and collaboration is
absolutely vital in maintaining a positive relationship with the community as well as a strong base
of support for the HF program and Thunderbird residents.
19
Volunteer Coordination and Training
One of the chief assets in Hope is its vibrant volunteer community.
One beautiful example was the gourmet Christmas dinner arranged
by Fraser Canyon Hospital Site Director Catherine Weibe and Hope
and Area Transition Society Board Member Pat Daws. Families and
Thunderbird residents enjoyed a banquet at the Thunderbird together on Christmas Day—
something that deeply impressed the residents.
The strength of Hope’s volunteer base has
already been recognized by a community
advisory committee that is currently looking for
funds to support a town-wide volunteer
coordinator. The HPC does not currently have
room in his schedule to be the main point person
coordinating all the people willing to volunteer at
the Thunderbird; ideally, a town-wide volunteer coordinator would have a strong connection
with the Thunderbird.
Although volunteers have a lot to contribute, they do need training in order to mitigate any risks
involved. It would also benefit HATS to have a policy regarding volunteer presence. The sooner
this happens, the better. Skilled and seasoned volunteers, in combination with peer support
workers, could potentially have the capacity to offset some of the gaps in available services;
however, they would need to be trained and integrated through a clear policy. For example,
some residents have talked about having a Friday night game night, and others in the community
have been interested in hosting. Also, several residents have mentioned their interest in having a
chaplain visit the Thunderbird on Sundays for a song service. Currently, however, the common
space is closed during evenings and weekends due to lack of staff.
Aboriginal Partnerships and Outreach
In accordance with the discussion in Core 4 above, an Aboriginal Homeless Outreach worker
would be vital to any HF program in Hope. The position would provide a greater connection to
Aboriginal services in surrounding areas. It would also, hopefully, engage those living at risk of
homelessness in Hope. Nikki Lamarre, Vice President of the Trails Crossing Friendship Centre
20
in Hope, attests to the fact that many of Hope’s 1300+ urban Aboriginals live at a high risk of
homelessness (Lamarre, personal correspondence, Nov. 2014). Again, reserve-town mobility
may be a factor here that would most certainly need Aboriginal involvement.
Additional Staffing
For the HF demographic, one staff member for 30 residents is high risk and unsustainable. The
Thunderbird’s distance from town means that shuttling residents to and from services in town
takes up a lot of time during the day, and while meaningful connection and relationship-building
happen during those drives, it also means that there is even less staff presence at the
Thunderbird. Residents repeatedly expressed frustration with “nobody being there” even when
the common space was open.
Low-barrier service providers, particularly those working with individuals living with a mental
illness, express the unified opinion that a congregate setting needs 24/7 staffing—most often
with a minimum of two staff. This is most likely not necessary—or doable—for the Thunderbird,
although it does attest to the challenges and needs in engaging a HF clientele. The need for 24/7
staff usually comes from operators of a more institutional setting where residents all present the
same kinds of challenges. However, because of the nature of BC Housing HOP funding, the
HPC position can ensure diversity in resident demographic. According to Keller, this lessens
some of the risks and contributes to a more positive community. Judy Graves also echoed this
sentiment (Keller & Graves, personal communication, Feb
10, 2015). Sometimes low-barrier housing is so highly staffed,
with such high levels of security, that it ends up feeling more
like an institution. The solution to homelessness is
facilitating homes; residents often expressed their need for a
place that felt like a home. The Thunderbird needs more support staff, but not so many and in
such a manner that the building feels like another Riverview.
Ideally, the Thunderbird would have another 35 hour a week position that could possibly take
some weekend or evening hours. During the regular work day, if or when this HF support
position was off duty, an intern or other staff could support the regular HPC position. The
Aboriginal Outreach position previously mentioned would provide additional support as well.
21
It’s your home, not a hospital. —Thunderbird resident
Community Outreach and Engagement
If the readiness assessment revealed any one thing about the community of Hope, it was that its
residents display a commendable level of support for marginalized populations. In fact,
commendable might be an understatement. Compared with other surrounding communities,
phenomenal might be a better term.
That said, the readiness research also revealed how quickly rumours can start in a small town, and
how damaging misinformation can become. It also showed how quickly things can escalate.
Furthermore, it showed that an energized and motivated group of people can place these issues
at the forefront of community consciousness. People may be passionately misinformed or simply
passionately disagree, but nevertheless, these issues can garner a high level of engagement.
Given the above realities, it is imperative for service
providers to remain engaged with the broader
population. Communication, outreach, opportunities
for involvement and volunteer service, and
collaborative representation with related service
providers is essential. In particular, beginning a
dialogue—in collaboration with related services
providers—regarding addiction, substance use
approaches, and available services in the community would be a healthy next step. Another
healthy next step would be the consideration of a Neighbouring Agreement as implemented by
The Vivian in Vancouver.
Capital Project and Future Direction
Exploratory efforts towards identifying a potential location for and pathway towards a new, low
barrier capital project were largely unfruitful. If such a project would be advantageous for the
community of Hope, for HATS as a non-profit agency, and for the at-risk population, it most
likely remains a relatively long ways off. Finding adequate and sustainable supports for the
Thunderbird is the imperative next step to supporting Housing First in the community. Efforts
to purchase the Thunderbird involve careful consideration and assessment. BC Housing has not
proved to be as supportive a partner in ownership as initially hoped.
22
Given this situation, as a stop-gap measure until progress is made on finding the most beneficial
direction, an appropriate next step should involve municipal support. After the Housing Fist
Information Forum, Town Council members must know that these issues are important to
Hope’s residents, and the Thunderbird enjoys a high level of community support. Given the fact
that the Thunderbird is owned by a private owner yet is providing essential service to the
community, it would be entirely appropriate and advisable to ask the municipal government to
consider supporting the Thunderbird by re-investing associated tax revenue back into the
project. This makes both political and practical sense.
23
When the elements are positively aligned, ‘home’ is a foundation, a base, and a key component of our personal lives. A life in the community is built from home, and after facing the daily challenges of community life it is the place to return and recharge.
—Mental Health Commission of Canada
REFERENCES
Aubry, T., Bourque, J., Volk, J., Leblanc, S., Nolin, D., & Jette, J. (2014). At Home/Chez Soi Project: Moncton Site Final Report. Calgary, AB: Mental Health Commission of Canada. Retrieved from: http://www.mentalhealthcommission.ca
Belanger, Y., Weasel Head, G., & Awosoga, O. (2012). Assessing urban Aboriginal housing and homelessness in Canada. Ottawa: National Association of Friendship Centres (NAFC) and the Office of the Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians (OFI). Ottawa, Ontario.
Belanger, Y. D., Weasel Head, G. 2013. Urban Aboriginal homelessness and migration in southern Alberta. Final report prepared for the Alberta Homelessness Research Consortium (AHRC). Edmonton, AB: April 30, 2013.
Byrne, T., Fargo, J., Montgomery, A., Munley, E. & Culhane, D. (2014). The relationship between community investment in permanent supportive housing and chronic homelessness. Social Service Review. 88(2), 234-263.
Chinman, M., Rosenheck, R., Lam, J. (2000). The case management relationship and outcomes of homeless persons with serious mental illness. Psychiatric Services. 51(9), 1142-1147.
Forchuck, C.; Montgomery, P.; Berman, H.; Ward-Griffin, C.; Csiernik, R.; Gorlick, C.; Jensen, E. & Riesterer, P. (2010). Gaining ground, losing ground: The paradoxes of rural homelessness. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research. 42(2), 138-152.
Fraser Valley Regional District. (2014). Regional statistics. Retrieved from: http://www.fvrd.bc.ca/aboutus/Pages/DistrictStatistics.aspx
Fraser Valley Regional District. (2014). Social Services Inventory. Retrieved from: www.fvrd.bc.ca/regionalplanning/Pages/AffordableHousingandHomelessness.aspx
French, Karyn & Margaret McNeil (2007). Health and housing: Partnerships for success. Visions: BC’s mental Health and Addictions Journal. BC Partners for Mental Health and Addictions Information. 4 (1), 4.
Gaetz, S. (2012). The real cost of homelessness: Can we save money by doing the right thing? Toronto: Canadian Homelessness Research Network Press.
Gaetz, S., Donaldson, J., Richter, T. & Gulliver, T. (2013). The state of homelessness in Canada: 2013. Toronto: Canadian Homelessness Research Network Press.
Gaetz, S., Scott, F., & Gulliver, T. (2014). A framework for housing first. In Housing first in Canada: Supporting communities to end homelessness. Toronto: Canadian Homelessness Research Press.
24
Gaetz, S., Gulliver, T. & Richter, T. (2014). The state of homelessness in Canada: 2014. Toronto: The Homeless Hub Press.
Goering, P., Veldhuizen, S., Watson, A., Adair, C., Kopp, B., Latimer, E., … Aubry, T. (2014). National At Home/Chez Soi Final Report. Calgary, AB: Mental Health Commission of Canada. Retrieved from: http://www.mentalhealthcommission.ca
Greenberg, T. (2007). Pathways into and out of homelessness in small BC communities: Interviews with clients and landlords involved in CMHA BC Division’s homeless/income outreach project. Canadian Mental Health Association, BC Division.
Greenberg, T. (2007). Homelessness: Not just an urban phenomenon. Visions: BC’s Mental Health and Addictions Journal. BC Partners for Mental Health and Addictions Information. 4 (1), 10-13.
Henwood, B., & Padgett, D. (2011). The role of housing: A comparison of front-line provider views in housing first and traditional programs. Administration and Policy in Mental Health. 38, 77–85.
Hulchanski, J., Campsie, P., Chau, S., Hwang, S., Paradis, E. (2011). Introduction: Homelessess what’s in a word? Finding home: Policy options for addressing homelessness in Canada. Toronto: Cities Centre Press.
Hwang, S., Weaver, J., Aubry, T. & Hotch, S. (2011). Hospital costs and length of stay among homeless patients admitted to medical, surgical, and psychiatric services. Med Care. 49(4), 350-354.
Kellen, A., Freedman, J., Novac, S., Lapointe, L., Marranen, R., & Wong, A. (2010). Homeless and jailed: Jailed and homeless. Toronto, ON: The John Howard Society of Toronto.
Kertesz, S., Crouch, K., Milby, J., Cusimano, R. & Schumacher, J. (2009). Housing first for homeless persons with active addiction: Are we overreaching? The Millbank Quarterly. 87, 495-534.
Kertesz, S. & Weiner, S. (2009). Housing the chronically homeless: High hopes, complex realities. JAMA. 301(17).
Larimer, M., Malone, D.K., Garner, M.D, et al. (2009). Health care and public service use and costs before and after provision of housing for chronically homeless persons with severe alcohol problems. JAMA. 301(3).
Leviten-Reid, C.; Johnson, P. & Miller, M. (2014). Supported housing in a small community: Effects on consumers, suggestions for change. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health. 33 (3), 57-69.
Mercier, Jon (2007). “Life on the Streets.” Visions: BC’s Mental Health and Addictions Journal. BC Partners for Mental Health and Addictions Information. 4 (1), 15.
Parsell, C.; Tomaszewski, W. & Phillips, R. (2014). Exiting unsheltered homelessness and sustaining housing: A human agency perspective. Social Service Review. 88 (2), 295-321.
25
Patrick, C. (2014). Aboriginal homelessness in Canada: A literature review. Toronto: Canadian Homelessness Research Network Press.
Piat, M;, Polvere, L.; Townley, G.; Nelson, G.; Macnaughton, E.; Egalite, N.; Goering, P. (2012). Baseline consumer narratives of lived experience of the Mental Health Commission of Canada’s At Home/Chez Soi Project: Cross-site report. Calgary, AB: Mental Health Commission of Canada.
Remund, L. (2007). Housing first—The Triage experience. Visions: BC’s Mental Health and Addictions Journal. BC Partners for Mental Health and Addictions Information. 4 (1), 30-31.
Robertson, M.; Harris, N.; Fritz, N.; Noftsinger, R. & Fischer, P. (2007). Rural homelessness. Toward understanding homelessness: The 2007 national symposium on homelessness research. Retrieved from: http://aspe.hhs.gov/homelessness/symposium07/robertson/
Scott, F. (2014). Vancouver, British Columbia: The Vivian. In Housing first in Canada: Supporting communities to end homelessness. Toronto: Canadian Homelessness Research Press.
Stefancic, A.; Henwood, B., Melton, H., Shin, S., Lawrence-Gomez, R., & Tsemberis, S. (2013). Implementing housing first in rural areas: Pathways Vermont. American Journal of Public Health. 206-S209.
Trainor, J., Taillon, P. & Pandalangat, N. (2013). Turning the key: Assessing housing and related Supports for persons living with mental health problems and illness. Mental Health Commission of Canada.
van Wyk, R. (2015). Fraser Valley Regional District 2014 Homelessness survey: Findings, conclusions, and recommendations. Retrieved from: http://www.fvrd.bc.ca
Waegemakers Schiff, J. & Turner, A. (2014). Housing first in rural Canada: Homelessness & housing feasibility across 22 Canadian communities. Human Resources and Skills Development Canada. Homeless Partnering Strategy. Calgary, AB: University of Calgary.
26
APPENDICES
Stakeholder Engagement Report Summary
27
Stakeholder Interviews
Participant Sectors • RCMP • Trails Crossing Friendship Centre • Mental Health • Fraser Health • Volunteer • Municipal government • Business (informal)
Questions • What is your role in the community? • What has your experience been with low barrier housing? Housing First? • What are your thoughts about a proposed Housing First capital project in Hope? • Can you tell me anything about Hope that would pertain to these issues?
Main Themes 1. concern over sustainability 2. desire to make sure project benefits community 3. belief in the importance of keeping people informed 4. volunteers are keen; churches want to help 5. concern over accountability and recovery incentive 6. perception of need for rules and standards 7. some community negativity building
Quotes “Housing First needs 24/7 care.” “We have to walk beside these people.” “Make sure it’s for our people, our community.” “If you do for them, they don’t do for themselves.” “Volunteers are really important—they have the heart of gold.” “For our people, it’s all about being connected to the land—you need to include that in any program for healing.”
Client Interviews Report Summary
28
Client Interviews
Participant Sectors • Thunderbird residents • Shelter occupants • Soup kitchen clients (informal)
Questions • What led to your situation of homelessness? • How did you end up at the Thunderbird? • What do you think works at the Thunderbird? • What community services do you like? • What do you think isn’t working? • What makes things difficult for you?
Main Themes 1. desire to be heard and included 2. need for more resources and support 3. perception of overall effectiveness 4. appreciation of the property 5. problems with transportation 6. perception that Paul needs help 7. importance of a sense of home 8. belief that community and relationships are key to overcoming addictions and
other challenges 9. STIR problematic 10. need for better connection with Mental Health 11. appreciation for Sue Lawrence, nurse practitioner who comes to the Thunderbird
Quotes “Needs more help around here.” “Things were better with an extra support worker around here.” “This place is the best thing that has ever happened to me.” “There has to be someone here all the time to enforce the rules and see what’s going on.” “The one solid thing that keeps it going is rules—we have rules here.” “Poor Paul is trying to do everything on his own!”
Service Provider Report Summary
29
Service Provider Interviews
Participant Sectors • Homeless Outreach • Low barrier practitioners • Medium barrier practitioners • Clinical
Questions • What is your role in your community? • What has your experience been with low barrier housing? Housing First? • What are your thoughts about a proposed Housing First capital project in Hope?
(for Hope residents) • Can you tell me anything about Hope/your context that would pertain to these
issues?
Main Themes 1. need for additional outreach (cross-sector) 2. problematic caseload levels 3. concern that project could draw people from outside Hope 4. concern for other at-risk populations 5. tension between various treatment outlooks 6. concern over relationship between the possibility of service providers sharing
building space with HF clients 7. concern over what could happen with most challenging demographic 8. perception that volunteers are gold
Quotes “WE NEED MORE OUTREACH RESOURCES!” “Free barrier housing is not going to fly in this community.” “Without 24/7 staffing, there’s no way you can do it.” “If we’re going to have this, it needs to be in town.” “We need outreach on every level: police, medical, mental.” “The things that help involve real, human touch.”
Community Forum Report Summaries
30
Blue Moose Forum
Survey • provided below
Main Themes 1. tension between concern over crime and concern to help 2. tension between harm reduction and abstinence approaches 3. tension between perception of the problem (ie homelessness or addiction) 4. concern to be informed about any changes 5. support for Thunderbird, looking for ways to help 6. negative perception of Thunderbird, breakdown in trust 7. feeling that agencies are not doing enough 8. concern for other at risk populations 9. concern about bringing in homeless from other areas 10. problems in Silver Creek
Quotes “I think Paul Keller has done a great job over at the Thunderbird.”“They need a NO TOLERANCE policy for drugs/alcohol!”“‘Zero Tolerance’ is what got us into this mess in the first place!”“It’s the drug addiction that’s the problem.”“I love what is happening at the Thunderbird; anyone who hasn’t visited, should.”“Free meals and clothing do a lot for the homeless, but having a safe place to live would help to stabilize their lives.”“No need to expand on this experiment gone wrong.”“We need more connection with the Aboriginal community.”“More policing would be helpful.”“We do not need any more services for the homeless!”“I think the Thunderbird is an excellent project. The distance from the main business centre makes sense.”“Overall we need to be sure that ‘helping’ people is not enabling them.”“I strongly support the Thunderbird project.”“Children/families have been disrupted enjoying our community park.”“I do not like or approve of the Thunderbird project—housing drug addicts with no rules.”“It’s a significant issue if one person is homeless. We’re a community. We need to help our people.”
31
1) Do you see homelessness as a significant issue in the community? If so, why? If not, what other issues do you
see as significantly affec<ng the community of Hope?
2) Do you think that exis<ng services are adequate to meet the needs of the homeless community (or other issues
of concern)? If so, what are the strengths and assets of exis<ng services? What are gaps or weaknesses in
service?
3) How do you think that the community of Hope can leverage or create services to meet the needs of
homelessness or other areas of concern?
4) What is your opinion on low barrier housing? Also, please feel free to write down any comments or quotes that
you would like to have on record.
Housing Task Force Commi2ee: Community Survey
Name (op<onal): _____________________________
Contact: Jen [email protected]
32
Silver Creek Forum
Participant Sectors • Silver Creek residents • wider community
Main Themes 1. mistrust over past history, sick and tired of crime 2. feeling that community was not properly consulted over Thunderbird 3. fear that the same thing will happen with a new project 4. suspicion there is a hidden agenda that will be forced on the community under
false pretense (a bit less than half of participants) 5. weariness and bitterness over crime, including theft, vandalism, private property
trespassing, and assault (rarer but verified) 6. grief and anger over perceived loss of safety in community 7. disgust and anger over general vagrancy, particularly when accompanied by
behaviors under substance influence 8. fear of harm to those under influence and also what happens to people who may
accidentally harm them 9. against any type of low barrier housing in community (about half of participants:
21/41) 10.supportive of helping homeless, but do not support location (some participants) 11.assertion that residents would be still committing crimes regardless of
Thunderbird (a handful of participants) 12.conditionally supportive of low barrier housing; assertion that it needs to include
more supports and rules (a few participants) 13.majority of participants felt that crime had gotten worse in the past few years;
some participants felt that it had not 14.transportation (particularly on Richmond and Airport) is a huge issue
Reported Experiences • included below
Quotes • included below
33
Silver Creek Forum 2
Reported Experiences 1
• 2 women assaulted at work by reputed Thunderbird residents (one not reported to police)
• truck vandalized, $3,500 worth of damage • clients in Silver Creek from 10:30 at night to 6 in the morning • woman had resident jump in front of her car at a stop sign and slam hands on hood,
trying to get a ride into town • woman living on Airport road experienced trespassing, residents on her porch, says
residents are constantly on her road at 3 in the morning • man driving almost hit about half a dozen people at various times staggering down
the street • one man has lived in Hope for 30 years and in Silver Creek for 20 and has been
robbed 6 times; 5 were not Thunderbird residents, 1 remains unsolved • man’s experience of panhandling at Flying J has increased • woman experienced people at the end of her driveway in the early morning hours,
also sees people wandering around in the middle of the night • man had windows broken, stuff stolen - addicts doing damage • three times a woman drove by the Thunderbird, and a person presenting with drug
usage tried to jump in front of her car • same woman had problem person try to light a fire behind her business • two accidents from residents on road, plus one elderly lady had a client leap on her
windshield and smash it; woman is still traumatized
Quotes • included below
These experiences have not been independently verified; the main purpose of the forum was to listen 1
and report.
34
Silver Creek Forum 3
Quotes “We have people that could be considered crackheads or drug users living in other parts of Silver Creek and in town as well. There’s no orange bracelets on the people that are from the Thunderbird. … In my experiences, I’ve seen the before the Thunderbird project too.” “It’s changed. The dynamics of the community have changed. You notice it quite a lot.” “Low barrier is not helping them, it is not rehabbing them. It is warehousing them.” “I’m not absolutely opposed to low barrier housing, but there has to be support on the backside.” “I would feel safer if there were some kind of rule—within a year or two you had to get off drugs, or something like that.” “My concern is that they have to go past the school here. You have to deal with them occasionally cutting through the yard.” “We all realize that these people need a place to live. … The thing is, why did you put them out of town? They don’t have transportation. … There’s nothing out there for them.” “I think everyone here agrees and is sympathetic and everything. I think the issue is, is the Thunderbird, is it the right location for the services? The school here is a central part of our community. I feel bad for them, the Thunderbird residents.” “There is a hate because there is so much damage.” “There’s lots of kids. They should be able to walk safely up and down that road to the creek in the summer. They can’t.” “They like this place because they can do anything they want to. And they do.” “We have to find a solution not just for the Thunderbird—it’s all around.” “All they do is conspire to do drugs. That’s all they do. I know first hand ‘cause we live right across the street from them.” “If the Thunderbird shuts down, they’re still going to be here.” “Why wasn’t it put in town? … At least put in a bus service or something.” “We’ve lived here 22 years and we’ve never seen anything like it until recently.” “For me, I understand harm reduction. But it just seems like such a poor location.” “I think that it is frightening because you see people that perhaps you wouldn’t invite in for tea, walking up and down the streets at various times of the day and screaming, and whatever challenges they face—and everyone has them—it’s unnerving. I think a lot of us are quite disgruntled because there was no public discussion and community input. It just sort of happened. You know, great—you want to help—but at the same time, you have to respect that people have property, they have children, they have their own concerns.”
Housing First Informational Forum
More than 230+ people attended this event.
According to many attendees, it was the
largest attendance of any public event in
recent memory. The event was slated as a
“Housing First Community Information
Forum.” Advertisements described it as
following:
“Hope and Area Transition Society will be hosting a
community forum to present information regarding
the Housing First approach in addressing
homelessness. The forum will also provide
opportunities to address any outstanding questions
and concerns from the community.”
HATS hosted a panel with various
representatives who had connections with
Thunderbird clients: harm reduction, clinical,
cultural, the executive director, and faith-based poverty outreach.
The event confirmed the researcher’s experience “on the ground.” There are most definitely
questions and concerns from the community. And there is a vehement and vocal opposition.
However, the majority of Hope’s community stands in strong support of the Thunderbird and a
Housing First philosophical approach to addressing homelessness. At the beginning of the
event, the moderator asked for a show of hands for those in opposition, for those who hadn’t
made up their minds, and for those who came in support. The very strong majority indicated
support. Towards the end of the event, surveys were provided for people to give a record of their
views. They could check off one of the following statements:
I am fully supportive of Housing First in the community of Hope
I am absolutely opposed to Housing First in the community of Hope
I am leaning towards support of Housing First, but I need more information
I am leaning against Housing First, but I need more information
35
HOPE & AREATRANSITION SOCIETY
HOMELESSNESSIN HOPE
Hope and Area Transition Society will be hosting a community forum to present information regarding the Housing First approach to addressing homelessness. The forum will also provide opportunity to address any outstanding questions and concerns from the community.
HOUSING FIRST COMMUNITY INFORMATION FORUM
February 19, 7-9 pmREC. CENTRE CONFERENCE ROOM
Of the 91 responses, 64 were in full support, and 14 were leaning towards support. Ten were
absolutely opposed, and 3 respondents were leaning against. Again, this matched experiences
“on the ground.” That said, although a majority of Hope’s community will support Housing
First, there are definitely outstanding issues, concerns, and misinformation. In fact, the whole
social service industry—particularly as touches on harm reduction—needs to engage in wider
dialogue within the community.
Statement on Appendices
The above appendices are summaries of reports—both verbal and formal—given to HATS and the
Housing Task Force on interviews and forums conducted in the community, with the exclusion
of the Housing First Informational Forum. This forum was attended by both the Executive
Director and the Board of HATS, so no report was given other than the results of the survey.
HATS also had the event filmed for the record.
It will be apparent in these report summaries that opinions from Silver Creek receive more
representation than other stakeholders, clients, and even other community members
encountered by the researcher. Two important points are of note in this respect: This
representation does not reflect their relative importance alongside other constituents outlined in
the Homeless Partnering Strategy contract. Nor is it indicative of proportional representation of
particular viewpoints alongside other constituents. Rather, this representation reflects the
conviction of the researcher that when frustration exists, people need to be heard and given a
voice and space to air their experiences and concerns. This is particularly true when oppositional
philosophies are at play.
A concurrent factor in the community outreach and research that led to the Housing First
Information forum was the considerable amount of misinformation afloat in the community—9
particularly through social media. As outlined in the recommendations, this is a continuing issue
that needs addressing.
Again, it must be noted that there are also legitimate concerns that need engagement. See Findings: Core 5 and 9
Recommendations.
36
