Wrap-Around
Supports

Download the full report

Problem

Homelessness continues to increase in Waterloo Region at alarming rates.  According to the 2021 Point in Time Count (PiT), which is mandated to be completed by the Federal/Provincial Government every two years, the total number of people experiencing homelessness at that time was 1085, an increase over the 2018 PiT Count when the number was only 333.  In a letter to Regional Council dated November 09, 2021, Lesley Crompton from the Social Development Centre Waterloo Region (SDCWR) had this to say about the accuracy of the PiT number: “Based on SDCWR Eviction Prevention work and our PIT team’s account of all the places and people we missed during the three days, we know that the number is far greater and cannot be taken as being “accurate.” Lesley points out that quantitative indicators relied upon by governmental agencies when it comes to decision-making related to shelters are questionable in terms of reliability because there is little allowance for the lived experiences revealed by the narratives from the “underserved residents, including the homeless, hidden homeless and soon to be evicted homeless in the community”.  The responses captured are anonymous so there is no way to ensure that the people who responded are the same individuals who reflect in the PiT count information and, many chronically homeless individuals are not connected to support services so are not captured anywhere in the data collected. If we are to have a long-term and sustainable plan to combat homelessness, then we need to tackle the problem in the present time in a reactive manner. We also need to address the issue upstream, preventing people from falling into homelessness in the first place, and we need to ensure that once individuals are successful at securing housing, they are well supported so that they can maintain that shelter without regression. The current state response to the homelessness crisis is driven by a “housing first” vision which is reflected in the support system we have created.  This system aligns with fiscal, political and administrative priorities but providing more “roofs over heads” does not, and will not solve the current crisis, if there is not the provision for individualized person specific supports.  Accessing an administratively layered system to obtain housing for the chronically homeless is often hugely challenging.

Many chronically homeless individuals struggle all their lives with issues tied to childhood trauma, PTSD, learning disabilities, mental and physical health challenges, addictions and substance abuse, and many have a severe distrust of institutions and the individuals who work within those structures.

Problem Drivers

We have learned that working with vulnerable populations comes with risks for the organization and its workers. These risks are primarily, health and safety and privacy, which is why there are policies and procedures created to outline processes. However, as we have learned from those working in the field, the system has become protective and risk averse, limiting the amount of creative problem solving and collaboration between agencies.  It does not help individuals move forward in the system and prevents them from connecting with the necessary workers who need to know the detailed information. Instead, an individual will be wayfinding and have to share their story two, three, or possibly four times. This repetitiveness creates frustration and tension for individuals. Since this is acting as a barrier, it is creating an exorbitant amount of duplicate work for front line workers who are trying to help clients move onto the next steps of their housing journey.

Another problem we have identified is the lack of communication and collaboration between the systems:  health, housing, and mental health. There is a struggle identified by organizations that funding options are limited and issues are not being recognized by the systems. Advocacy is turning into a full-time job for many front-line workers, and leaders of the system. Due to the high crisis, limited funding, and supports for this work, many organizations are too occupied to collaborate and engage in creative opportunities. They are too busy keeping their dedicated people afloat, or continuously searching for dedicated individuals to take on the work. Many of the not for profits have also transitioned to focus on specific objectives that are not consistent with system objectives, and in turn do not align with other organizations’ priorities. This creates a lack of opportunity but also inconsistency for the clients accessing supports.

The final noteworthy problem identified was the lack of mental health and substance support within the system. You can’t put a time on crisis yet services are not available to support individuals unless at specific times that are most convenient for the agency providing the support. This leaves individuals in a volatile state as well as in a significant amount of risk. If services are not able to tend to crisis beyond scheduled hours, then the front-line staff need to be given the proper training and education tools to meet those needs. We heard from experienced front line workers who acknowledged that the population who are accessing services today have more complex mental health issues. Organizations need to change their training and education requirements so we are meeting clients’ needs.

Actors

It is well understood that housing availability and the need to treat housing as a basic human right rather than a commodity is an issue that goes beyond any individual organization or municipality. There is a need for funding, direct support and advocacy for this issue from higher levels of government in collaboration with those on the front line and those with lived experience.

The primary actors that are motivated to see change on this issue and see improvement in our own backyard are the municipal governments and the not-for-profit organizations with similar or overlapping visions of reducing homelessness in our community and making housing accessible to all. The necessary funding for this work is not guaranteed over the long term, and there are opportunities for more varied wraparound supports to be delivered to individuals who need them when in crisis. This gap has led to individuals regressing on the housing continuum or getting lost in the system, which creates inefficiencies for all involved.