(from its meeting on November 5, 1998,

1

Report of the Provincial Task Force on Homelessness

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to provide an analysis of the report of the Provincial Task Force on Homelessness and to identify implications for the City of Toronto.

Financial Implications:

A total of $4 million in a new Homeless Initiatives Fund is available to municipalities across Ontario from the Ministry of Community and Social Services to support the recommendations of the Provincial Task Force on Homelessness.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

Council Reference/Background/History:

On January 29, 1998, the Honourable Janet Ecker, Minister of Community and Social Services, announced the formation of a Provincial Task Force on Homelessness. The Task Force was comprised of five Parliamentary Assistants and Chaired by the Honourable Jack Carroll. The Task Force held locally organized consultations with nine representative municipalities, provided an opportunity for all MPPs to bring forward local issues, and accepted written submissions from community agencies across the Province.

The mandate of the Task Force was to develop recommendations on how best to support municipalities in improving their response to homelessness, to build on community partnerships with all sectors and on initiatives to help keep public areas and streets safe.

When the Task Force was announced, the Ministry of Health formally also announced allocations of $2.5 million for mental health outreach programs in Toronto, Ottawa, London and Hamilton. An additional $4 million was announced by the Ministry of Community and Social Services to implement the Task Force recommendations and is now available to municipalities across Ontario. These dollars must be targeted toward initiatives which foster self-sufficiency and prevent homelessness. In addition, municipalities have been granted the option of redirecting a portion of emergency shelter dollars toward programs which help people find and maintain housing.

This report provides an analysis of the report of the Provincial Task Force on Homelessness, released on October 9, 1998, and identifies implications for the City of Toronto (An executive summary of the Provincial report is attached, a full copy of the report is available in the City Clerk’s office.)

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Given the key role the Province has to play in developing an effective response to the homeless crisis in Ontario, their decision to establish a Task Force on Homelessness is encouraging.

In their report, the Task Force acknowledges the complexity of homelessness which often involves a combination of individual and societal factors. Their key finding is that homelessness is about lost connections - from family, friends, employment and the community. Based on this awareness, they recommend increased co-ordination between all levels of government to achieve three broad objectives: to move people from the street to emergency shelters, from shelters to permanent homes and to prevent people from becoming homeless in the first place.

Historically, Toronto has taken a broader, systemic approach to the issue of homelessness. This includes an understanding of contributing individual factors such as abuse, family breakdown, health, mental health and addiction issues. However, the role of societal factors is seen as key to understanding the dynamics of homelessness and in the development of sustainable solutions. These factors include unemployment levels, poverty, housing vacancy rate declines, long social housing waiting lists, the possibility of another economic recession and the impact of policy changes by governments in the areas of income assistance, housing, health and mental health.

The Provincial Task Force does not address the systemic causes of homelessness in detail. The Task Force clearly identifies the responsibility of municipalities to maintain an effective service system and to lever the development of affordable rental housing. They also highlight the neglected responsibilities of the Federal Government. What is missing, however, is an analysis of the linkages between poverty and homelessness and recent policy changes in the areas of social assistance and social housing, which are provincial responsibilities.

The Provincial Task Force developed five key recommendations which touch on:

The Task Force report summarizes a number of provincial initiatives, some related directly to homelessness (i.e., Community Partners Program, new initiatives in Community Health Centres and continued cost-sharing of domiciliary hostels) as evidence of their response to homelessness. However, the key initiative in the report is a commitment to continue with the current 80:20 cost-share arrangement with municipalities for emergency hostels.

The following discussion is organized around the key issues and recommendations contained in the provincial report.

The main goal of the Task Force was to identify ways in which the Province could better support municipalities in improving their response to homelessness. In this regard, they have acknowledged the vital role municipalities, such as Toronto, have played as service managers. They also express concern about how municipal responses to the problem vary widely across the Province. Toronto is the city with the highest number of people who are homeless and while most are current residents of Toronto, many arrive from other areas of the Province and, indeed, the country. Although there will always be people who come to Toronto in search of employment and housing opportunities, it is essential that people have the option of staying in their own communities. As the largest provider of services for homeless people in Ontario, Toronto would support provincial initiatives which increase the capacity of municipalities to address the needs of people who are homeless in their own communities.

The Task Force also comments on the lack of a designated municipal lead to oversee the development, management and funding of the service system. The Mayor's Homelessness Action Task Force has been given the mandate to recommend a comprehensive municipal strategy for Toronto. Solutions will focus on a range of strategies including those targeted toward the systemic causes of homelessness - poverty and the lack of affordable housing. The final report of the Mayor's Task Force is expected in January 1999.

Service Co-ordination:

The Task Force recommends improved service co-ordination and delivery as key to improving municipal responses to homelessness. This issue has received considerable attention by the City of Toronto for many years. Appropriate, collective responses in the City are continuously reviewed through standing committees, inquests and other collaborative means. The Mayor’s Homelessness Action Task Force is currently revisiting the area of service co-ordination and will likely address it in its final report. It is important to note that in Toronto there is an issue of capacity as well as co-ordination.

Service Provision:

In terms of service provision, the Provincial Task Force recommends a number of initiatives to help people move from the street to hostels (e.g., outreach workers, drop-ins and hotlines), from hostels to homes (e.g., housing registries, housing help workers, trusteeship programs, transportation) as well as strategies targeted toward prevention (e.g., crisis support, rent banks, mediation, and economic development initiatives.)

We agree that these initiatives are important. Similar initiatives are already underway in Toronto and many have been active for several years with proven track records. The majority of programs and services have been targeted toward people who are already homeless, however, concerted effort is being made to channel resources to prevention which includes affordable housing creation strategies. The City relies heavily on partnerships with community-based agencies to ensure appropriate and responsive services are in place.

The Provincial Task Force recommends a shift in service focus to emphasize reconnecting homeless people with personal supports to help them get back on their feet. This is clearly an essential part of resolving a homeless experience. Many people benefit from renewed contact with a positive support network. For others however, the assumption that independence is possible in the short term is unrealistic. Shelter, health care and food programs, which often require alternative service models, will continue to be in demand for this specific population. While Toronto is committed to providing these type of programs, an investment by the Province is necessary to ensure their sustainability.

Service Funding:

A key concern for municipalities is reduced funding levels at a time when service demand continues to rise. The $4 million attached to the Provincial Task Force's recommendations is welcome, however, it represents only a fraction of the dollars cut by all levels of government to housing support services in recent years. In 1996, the City of Toronto responded to growing needs by establishing a $6 million Survival Fund. Unfortunately, this fund was only available for two years. The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Community Partners program, supports housing help centres across Ontario, however, since 1994 this fund has been cut from $8.3 million to $2.3 million. One consequence has been fewer housing support workers helping people with low incomes find and maintain housing.

The Task Force acknowledges that there are provincial barriers with respect to funding (i.e., unclear expectations and complicated requirements favouring short-term crisis services) and recommends that the relevant ministries work together to develop more flexible program and funding requirements to enable innovative responses at the municipal and community levels. A consultation process involving municipal and community stakeholders is recommended as an essential part of this process.

There is also a critical need for interministerial collaboration at the provincial level in terms of policy development to ensure a comprehensive, holistic approach is applied to policies which directly affect people who are homeless or who are at risk of becoming homeless. For instance, we agree with the Task Force's observation that there is a lack of discharge protocols from correctional facilities leaving people without resources to find housing, and as a result they are at risk of ending up in the emergency shelter system.

Funding for Emergency Shelters:

The Provincial Task Force recommends that the Province continue to provide 80 percent cost-sharing with municipalities for the provision of emergency hostel services. This is extremely important at a time when Toronto's hostel system is expanding to meet the growing demand for these services.

However, the Province has a ceiling of $34.50 on the hostel per diem. The City of Toronto currently has an average per diem rate slightly above the provincial cap with the result that the Province funds only about 73 percent of the City’s actual costs. This discrepancy is primarily due to the fact that the provincial cap has remained frozen for the past five years while occupancy and supply costs continue to rise. It is therefore recommended that the Province raise the per diem ceiling so that the actual costs of providing emergency shelter in Toronto are recognized.

The Task Force also suggests that the Province allow municipalities to redirect a portion of emergency hostel dollars, cost-shared at the 80:20 level, to programs aimed at helping people find and maintain housing. This proposal is welcome. Currently, the municipality provides 100 percent funding for several innovative homeless programs. Project Going Home and Housing and Employment Connections are two new programs with the specific goal of reconnecting people to family, housing and employment supports. Given that these goals are consistent with those of the Provincial Task Force, it is appropriate that the Province cost-share these programs at the 80:20 level as a first step in redirecting emergency hostel dollars.

The Task Force raises the issue of "double dipping" referring to people who, in the same month, receive a welfare cheque and also stay in a shelter. As a service of last resort, emergency shelter is provided to people who are homeless regardless of whether they have received a social assistance cheque (which includes a shelter allowance) earlier in the month. There are many legitimate situations in which an individual or family might require emergency shelter, even though they have already received income assistance. Shelter staff ensure that upon admission social assistance recipients inform their workers that they are staying at an emergency shelter.

New strategies aimed at stemming the tide of people who have reached a critical point and are headed into homelessness are obviously necessary and the Provincial Task Force acknowledges this reality. In Toronto, several pilot projects are underway which help people hold on to their housing thus diverting them from the hostel system (e.g., Rent Bank Pilot Project) and provide transitional accommodation for youth who need to develop skills which help them to stay housed (i.e., Ordnance Youth Shelter.) Provincial support through the flexible use of hostel dollars is key to expanding these kinds of housing support initiatives with other high risk groups.

A major thrust of the Mayor’s Homelessness Action Task Force will be on preventing homelessness and creating alternatives for people who are at risk of losing their housing. The Province’s support for these efforts is positive and in line with the direction the City is likely to continue to take.

The special needs of Aboriginal peoples are highlighted by the Province in recognition of their disproportionate representation among people who are homeless. Toronto has placed a high priority on the needs of Aboriginal people, providing support and funding for hostel programs, street outreach, drop-in and resource centres. The Mayor’s Homelessness Action Task Force will recommend a strategy, in consultation with the Aboriginal community, to address the specialized needs of these groups.

Health Issues:

In response to health care issues for people who are homeless, the Task Force points to the recent Ministry of Health initiative to enhance health care services for the homeless through Community Health Centres - three of which are in Toronto. While this initiative is welcomed as a positive step, the dollars allocated ($6 million across the Province) are unlikely to cover identification costs let alone meet the primary health care needs of homeless people. In addition, this initiative is attached to Community Health Centres and not all homeless people use this type of health service.

Research has consistently shown that people who are homeless suffer disproportionately from multiple acute and chronic illnesses. They are also vulnerable to health card loss or theft, which now seriously jeopardizes their ability to access health care. As of March 1, 1998, the Ministry of Health requires that people have their health card in hand to receive health care. When pressed on this issue, Ministry officials contend that a health card number is all that is required. However, this does not bear out in practice. Street health care workers give accounts of people who are afraid or who think they cannot receive health care unless they have a health card. Some people have been refused health care even though they were able to provide their health card number verbally. These examples illustrate the serious communication issues existing between the Ministry of Health, health care providers and the general public which need to be addressed immediately.

Given the critical link between health and homelessness, the Ministry of Health must be encouraged to work with health care providers and homeless service providers to develop strategies to ensure homeless people have needed access to health care.

Mental Health Issues:

The Provincial Task Force acknowledges serious concerns arising from the fact that past reforms to the mental health system, specifically deinstitutionalisation, have not coincided with an increase in community-based mental health support services. This lack of support increases the vulnerability of people with mental health issues living on their own often placing them at considerable risk of losing their housing. This is true especially for people with concurrent disorders (i.e., mental health and addictions.)

As identified earlier in this report, when the Provincial Task Force was formed, the Ministry of Health announced allocations of $2.5 million across the Province for mental health outreach programs. While these funds are desperately needed to augment this part of the service sector, additional dollars are required for the range of services which help people with mental health issues to both find and keep their housing.

Toronto, therefore, recommends that the Province proceed immediately on implementing mental health reforms especially with respect to the funding and expansion of community-based mental health services.

The Provincial Task Force calls upon the Federal Government to relieve Ontario, and its municipalities, of the substantial social assistance costs that result directly from Federal immigration policies. In particular, to assume responsibility for income support for refugee claimants, and introduce tighter sponsorship criteria and more effective monitoring and enforcement measures to reduce sponsorship default. These recommendations echo those made in the Federal legislative review document, "Not Just Numbers: A Canadian Framework for Future Immigration".

The Federal Government sets the policies and practices with respect to immigration, however, it is often the provinces and municipalities which absorb these considerable associated costs. In Toronto, an estimated 6,000 social assistance cases per month are the result of sponsorship breakdown. This costs the Province an estimated $49 million per year of which the City pays 20 percent. In 1996, the provincial costs of social assistance benefits for refugees were $133 million. Toronto’s share of this bill was $25.5 million (note: refugees and refugee claimants are not differentiated in this total.)

Toronto regularly provides emergency shelter to refugees on an interim basis until they are able to secure permanent housing. Toronto used to receive 100 percent funding from the Province for refugees, who fall under the classification of "non-residents", for the first year, however, as of January 1, 1998, all costs are shared at the 80:20 level. These expenditures should be covered 100 percent by the Federal Government as the level of government responsible for immigrants and refugees. Therefore the City should join the Province in encouraging the Federal Government to assume responsibility for these social assistance and hostel accommodation costs.

Settlement Services:

The Provincial Task Force also calls upon the Federal Government to ensure that immigrant and refugee settlement and integration programs are adequately funded. As the major immigrant settlement centre in Canada, Toronto is dependant upon stable and responsive immigration and settlement services for newcomers. Since 1995, the Federal Government has attempted to devolve the management of settlement programs to the provinces. Ontario, however, is only willing to discuss the devolution as part of broader negotiations on a bilateral agreement on immigration. To date, a federal-provincial agreement has not been reached.

Toronto should support the Provincial Task Force in calling upon the Federal Government to ensure stable funding for the settlement services sector. This same message must also be communicated to the Province in light of the ongoing negotiations on Settlement Renewal. In particular, that funding for the financially vulnerable community-based settlement services is maintained.

Funding of Non-Residents:

The issue of financial responsibility also extends to services provided by municipalities to non-residents of Ontario (i.e., less than one year residency in Ontario, whether arriving from out of province or out of Canada.) Prior to January 1, 1998, Toronto received 100 percent funding from the Province for non-residents. However, these costs are now cost-shared on an 80:20 basis. This funding change is especially significant for Toronto as an estimated 19 percent of hostel users come from outside of Ontario. The estimated costs to Toronto’s hostel system for non-residents are $1.7 million for 1998.

As well, the City feels the financial impact of non-residents as a provider of social assistance benefits. The average number of non-resident cases per month in 1998 is 4,200. Toronto’s 20 percent share for 1998 is estimated at $7 million (this is a net expenditure and does not include possible revenues, i.e., earned income from a client).

The municipality has consistently opposed this new cost-share arrangement with the Province. Given the recent hostel’s data, and the identification by the Provincial Task Force of jurisdictional responsibilities, it is appropriate for the City to reiterate its opposition regarding the payment of non-residents for hostel accommodation and social assistance benefits.

(4) Improving the Climate for Private Rental Housing Development:

It is clear to the City of Toronto that any strategy which seriously aims to eliminate homelessness must have a primary goal of increasing the affordable rental housing stock. The Mayor’s Homelessness Action Task Force, in its interim report, estimates that a minimum of 4,000 new affordable units must be built in Toronto every year for the next five years, simply to keep up with demand.

The Provincial Housing Role:

We agree with the Task Force that all levels of government need to be involved in improving the climate for private rental housing development. The main thrust of their housing supply strategy lies in removing barriers to new construction; a strategy which relies on the private sector to develop, build, and manage housing. The Task Force suggests that the investment climate for new construction has improved through streamlining planning and regulations in development approvals, reforms to rent regulation (i.e., Tenant Protection Act) and opportunities for municipalities to reduce multi-residential taxes.

To further promote rental housing supply the Provincial Task Force recommends: a review of Federal housing and tax policies, increasing opportunities for public/private sector partnerships and measures that municipalities can take in the areas of zoning, building and property taxes. We agree that such mechanisms are needed to encourage rental housing development. However, they are unlikely to produce housing which is affordable to the estimated 20 percent of the population who cannot financially compete in the traditional private rental market.

Further government intervention is required to address the needs of this population. Such mechanisms could include social assistance shelter allowance benefits which more closely approximate actual rents, rent supplements and other supply strategies that bring rents below market levels.

The Federal Housing Role:

We agree with the Provincial Task Force that a returned involvement by the Federal Government to housing supply is needed. The Task Force suggests that future Federal involvement include tax incentives, lowered Canada Mortgage and Housing insurance fees and a replacement for the Multiple Unit Residential Building (MURB) program offered in the 1970s. We agree that these incentives will provide some of the necessary encouragement to the private sector. There are limitations, however, if Federal action is not also associated with other policy objectives to direct a portion of the new construction to low-income households.

For instance, over its seven-year existence, the MURB program, together with provincial construction loan programs, produced about 195,000 units across the country. The buildings could be registered as condominiums, there were no rent targets and no restrictions on the incomes of the tenants who live in the building. As a result, the housing supply increased but not at the lowest end of the market, precisely the level needed by people trying to prevent or escape homelessness. Without additional government incentives (e.g., shelter allowances), private rental housing will only be produced at market rent levels.

The Municipal Housing Role:

In general, municipalities have a limited capacity to protect existing affordable stock or to create new affordable supply without supportive provincial legislation or programs. In the past, this has included protecting existing rental stock, using planning powers to require and encourage affordable housing and providing financing support for affordable housing development. Low cost housing stock, such as Toronto’s rooming houses, is vulnerable to loss and conversion without protections.

Recently, Toronto City Council adopted an affordable housing strategy which capitalizes on the various "tools" available to the municipality, for example, making City-owned land available for demonstration projects. The City is also considering the use of the special property tax class for new multi-residential rental housing. Despite its best efforts however, the municipality simply cannot generate the significant number of affordable units required without provincial and federal support.

Supportive Housing:

The City welcomes the Province's recent announcement on retaining funding responsibility for the existing dedicated supportive housing units. However, there is a need to increase the number of supportive housing units for the chronically homeless who often require support services to maintain their housing. This need is well documented. In their interim report, the Mayor’s Task Force reveals that people considered to be "chronically homeless" represent about 17 percent of all hostel users. What is most alarming however is that they use almost 50 percent of the existing emergency hostel services. Clearly, supportive housing represents a more cost-effective approach for this "hard to serve" group of people.

The Mayor's Homelessness Action Task Force recommends that a minimum of 5,000 supportive housing units need to be built in Toronto to meet the need. As the level of government responsible for social housing, the Province must take the lead in this area.

Conclusions:

The Provincial Task Force has issued its report at a time when homelessness is considered by many to have reached crisis proportions. The Task Force has made recommendations which will help municipalities to improve their response to homelessness in their communities. The additional $4 million from the newly created Homeless Initiatives Fund, along with the recommendation that the Province allow municipalities to redirect emergency shelter dollars into creative housing support programs, is welcome.

Toronto is committed to working together with the community and all levels of government to develop solutions to the rapidly growing homeless crisis in Toronto. However, the reality is that homelessness will continue to rise until there is a commitment and a financial investment from both the provincial and federal governments to fundamentally address the root causes of homelessness - poverty and the lack of affordable housing.

Contact Names:

Joanne Campbell

————

The Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee reports, for the information of Council, also having had before it during consideration of the foregoing matter a communication (October 22, 1998) from Ms. Barbara Craig, RN, Street Health Community Nursing Foundation, providing comments in response to the Report of the Provincial Task Force on Homelessness.

(A copy of the Exeuctive Summary, referred to in the foregoing report, was forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee for its meeting on November 5, 1998, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

2

Provincial Homelessness Initiatives Fund

Purpose:

To provide the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee with information on the Provincial Homelessness Initiatives Fund and the proposed process for disbursing the City of Toronto portion of this fund.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

There is no financial impact on the City. The Provincial Homelessness Initiatives Fund will be funded 100 percent at the Provincial level.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

Council Reference/Background/History:

A report is before the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee on November 5, 1998, describing the findings of the Provincial Task Force on Homelessness.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Background:

On October 8, 1998, the Provincial Task Force on Homelessness released their report. A report is before the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee which outlines the findings of that report and provides the City of Toronto response to that report. Following the release of the report, the Province made an announcement regarding the Provincial Homelessness Initiatives Fund which will be made available to support new, innovative approaches to addressing homelessness.

Funds Available:

The total fund for Ontario is $4 million, of which $1.02 million has been allocated to the City of Toronto. The Province has indicated that the first year's allocation will be available within the Municipality's current fiscal year, with an ongoing annual allocation to follow. Funds for the first year are available immediately and a status report on the actual and projected use of the funds is required by June 30, 1999. It is expected that projects will be well underway by this time.

This fund will be 100 percent subsidized by the Province, with no cost-sharing required from municipalities. There will be no net cost for the City of Toronto.

Provincial Guidelines:

The Province has provided some direction regarding the priorities and approaches to be used for the Homelessness Initiatives Fund. They have directed that funds must be used for new, innovative programs which will achieve one or more of the following "outcomes":

The Province is providing municipalities with the authority to determine the use of the funds within their community and clearly state their expectation that municipalities will consult with local service partners to set priorities for the allocation of funds. Municipalities will be expected, at year end, to report on the use of funds and results of programs which were put in place. A copy of the Agreement to Terms and Conditions from the Ministry of Community and Social Services is attached.

City of Toronto Process:

The Province’s desired outcomes, as noted above, are supported by the City of Toronto. There are many programs already in place which focus on the three respective "outcome" areas, however, there are significant gaps in service due to the increased number of people in danger of losing their housing and the increased levels of homelessness. In addition, there has been only limited funding for such responses available to the former municipalities of Scarborough, North York, York, East York and Etobicoke. The funding being made available by the Province will allow the City and its community partners to develop new and innovative responses to homelessness in all parts of the City of Toronto.

Through ongoing consultations with community groups, staff have already identified a number of priorities within each of the three "outcome" areas identified by the Province where funding is needed. These project proposals address gaps in services, create efficiencies, divert people from the shelter system or assist shelter users in finding more permanent accommodation, and link homeless people to longer term solutions. In addition, it is anticipated that employment opportunities for people who have experienced homelessness could be provided in many of the proposed projects. Examples of these projects are as follows:

Staff will set in place a consultation process with community partners that will solicit input on additional services gaps and overall priorities. The Alternative Housing and Services Committee has an annual process for identifying service gaps, prioritizing needs and proposing appropriate strategies. The Committee will be discussing these issues and making recommendations on November 4, 1998. The recommendations will be forwarded to the next meeting of the Advisory Committee on Homeless and Socially Isolated People for comment and further community input.

Once service priorities have been identified and articulated, staff will use a targeted Request for Proposals process to select agencies to work on projects. The Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services will approve all projects and allocation amounts.

Conclusions:

The new Provincial Homelessness Initiatives Fund will provide the City of Toronto and its community partners with the opportunity to implement further innovative responses to homelessness at no net cost to the City. Staff of the Community and Neighbourhood Services Department will set in place a process to identify service priorities and to select projects to be funded. All projects selected and allocation amounts will require the authorization of the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services. Quarterly reports will be provided to the Committee regarding fund expenditures and projects.

Contact Name:

Joanne Campbell

General Manager, Shelter, Housing and Support Division

Tel: 392-7885

(A copy of the Agreement referred to in the foregoing report was forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee for its meeting on November 5, 1998, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

3

Update on Development of 30 St. Lawrence Street

Purpose:

To provide an update on progress to date in realizing this development which will provide permanent housing for 40 formerly homeless men and women, and to obtain authority for a further advance from a grant authorized by the Council of the former City of Toronto.

The recommended advance would come from previously authorized funds.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services be authorized to advance a second $40,000.00 of the approved grant monies from the Capital Leverage Fund to permit payment of costs incurred by the City in retaining and stabilizing the west and north walls of the buildings being demolished on the site, as required by the residents of the adjacent street.

Background:

The 30 St. Lawrence Street site has been owned for many years by the City of Toronto. Since 1982, Dixon Hall, a multi-service community agency which provides a range of cultural, educational and social services, has managed an emergency shelter for homeless men in a building on the street frontage, under contract to the City, and with staff funding through Toronto Community Services. The building was not designed for this use and was inadequate in many ways. The shelter was closed and vacated by July 1 to allow demolition and remediation to begin - the first step toward creating 40 units of new housing for formerly homeless men and women.

This will be the first long-term housing project for homeless people to be developed in the City since the cancellation of the non-profit housing program by the Provincial Government in 1995. It is being developed by Dixon Neighbourhood Homes (30 St. Lawrence Street) Inc. (DNHI), a subsidiary organization of Dixon Hall, with $400,000.00 in grant support from the City’s Capital Leverage Fund (CLF) and City-owned land conveyed to DNHI for a nominal sum. DNHI will construct and manage ten four-bedroom townhouse units on the rear portion of the 30 St. Lawrence Street site. The units would be affordable based on the shelter component of the existing social assistance programs. As the DNHI proposal uses less than the full site area, the City will be able to offer the bulk of the street frontage for sale at a later date.

The Council of the former City of Toronto adopted Clause No. 34 of Report No. 21 of the Executive Committee at its meeting on September 22 and 23, 1997, agreeing to convey the rear portion of the site to Dixon Neighbourhood Homes (30 St. Lawrence Street) Inc., at nominal cost, subject to a number of conditions being fulfilled within nine months, i.e., by June 23, 1998. A subsequent report, Clause No. 6 of Report No. 7 of The Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee, adopted by Council at its meeting on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, outlined the progress to that point in time. This report provides a further update.

Comments:

As site remediation is a precondition of CMHC providing mortgage insurance for DNHI’s development, and as the favourable price obtained through a tender several years ago expired on August 1, demolition and remediation commenced on July 20, 1998. Funds for the demolition/remediation are coming from $190,000.00 in insurance settlement monies received following an on-site fire several years ago, held for the account of this project, and $150,000.00 to be advanced by the City from the Land Banking Fund, coming from monies received from the sale of sites declared surplus after the Province’s cancellation of the social housing programs.

An application to the Committee of Adjustment was necessary to amend a previously approved site-specific bylaw. This resulted in concerns being expressed by the surrounding community about the proposed development. In particular, the residents of a private street immediately west of the proposed development wanted to see the west and north walls of the buildings on the 30 St. Lawrence Street site retained to form a secure barrier between the two sites. Staff consulted with the residents on several occasions to hear their concerns, to obtain their support for the project, and to avoid objections to the Committee of Adjustment decision. As a result, instead of the total demolition of the existing structures, which had been contemplated at the time of tender, the west and north walls had to be hand cut to a height acceptable to the adjacent residents. The remaining walls, which were never designed to be free-standing, and which now function as a retaining wall (grade being higher to the west and north than on the 30 St. Lawrence Street site), have to be braced with concrete caissons and steel piles.

Dixon Neighbourhood Homes will make arrangements to have these additional costs included in their capital budget and will pay the cost of this work which is, however, part of the contract between the City and the demolition/remediation contractor and which exceeds the contingency available to the City. To do so, however, they require another advance of $40,000.00 from the approved grant from the Capital Leverage Fund. The increased costs of demolition/remediation will not adversely affect the project’s ongoing viability.

The Council of the former City of Toronto granted $400,000.00 from the Capital Leverage Fund to DNHI to assist with the capital costs of the development. This amount was subsequently confirmed through the budget process of the new City. It was intended that these funds only be advanced after closing, and according to the progress of construction. Closing will not occur, transferring title to the site to DNHI, until they have a satisfactory construction price and a Building Permit. As the cutting of the wall and its bracing are part of the work currently underway on site to prepare the property for the construction of the homeless housing, an advance of $40,000.00 from the previously approved grant should be provided now.

Conclusion:

Funding reductions by senior levels of government combined with social and economic changes over the past decade have created a larger and more vulnerable group of low-income people. The most visible aspect of this change is the more than 5,000 people in Toronto who are homeless and who sleep in hostels, stairwells, sidewalks and over subway air vents.

DNHI is pursuing an innovative development to house 40 formerly homeless men and women at 30 St. Lawrence Street. This is an important opportunity for the City to participate in the creation of an innovative project to provide permanent housing for the homeless.

Contact name:

Joanne Campbell

Tel: 392-7885/Fax: 392-0548

4

Survey of Single Parents

The Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee reports, for the information of Council, having directed that a copy of the report of the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services be forwarded to the Budget Committee for its information during consideration of that portion of the 1999 Operating Budget pertaining to Children’s Services.

Purpose:

In the Spring of 1998, Toronto Social Services conducted a survey of single parents receiving social assistance in Toronto. This report briefly discusses why the survey was undertaken, and the way the findings will be used by the Department to assist single parents in Ontario Works to become independent. The key findings are reported in the Executive Summary of the report, which is attached (Appendix B).

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

Background:

In the Spring of 1998, Toronto Social Services initiated a survey of single parents receiving social assistance in Toronto. The impetus for this research project was threefold:

The issue of how to effectively support harder-to-serve clients in mandatory programs is itself related to the increase in the proportion of social assistance caseloads comprised by single parents, who often require special supports, and face specific challenges, reintegrating into the workforce.

In December 1991, single parents made up only 6 percent (5,600 cases) of the overall caseload. However, the proportion of the total caseload comprised by single parents has been increasing rapidly through the 1990s. This trend has been accelerated by the steep decline in the total caseload since late 1994. Currently, in Toronto, single-parent families receiving Ontario Works account for approximately 34 percent (or 26,400 cases) of the total municipal caseload. The Provincially-delivered program serves approximately 17,000 single-parent families. When these cases are transferred to Toronto, the single parent caseload in Toronto will number nearly 44,000 cases, or 45 percent of the City’s total social assistance caseload.

In addition, Divisional data indicate that, since mid-1995, single clients have been leaving the caseload much more rapidly than families, especially single parent families. Should this trend continue, the proportion of the caseload comprised of families, the majority of whom are single parents, will steadily increase.

Taken together, these changes, combined with the sheer size of the single-parent caseload and the specific barriers single parents face when seeking employment, will have significant implications for Toronto’s Social Services and Children’s Services Divisions.

To help prepare and plan for these changes, the Division undertook a survey of single parents receiving social assistance, including cases served by the municipality and those still served by the Provincial delivery system. The Ministry of Community and Social Services (MCSS) assisted with the survey, providing access to necessary caseload data, as well as reviewing the methodology and survey instrument, and the final report.

Discussion:

The purpose of the survey was to enable the Division to develop effective ways of designing program options and using program resources to assist single parents obtain and sustain employment. While the Division has analyzed the information available on its caseload databases, certain critical information could only be gathered through a direct survey of clients, including the following areas: previous use of social assistance; level of education; use of training courses and programs; paid and volunteer work experience; child care needs; constraints to finding work; assistance required to look for work; and basic demographic information.

The primary findings from the survey are reported in the Executive Summary, which is attached. A brief summary of the survey results are discussed below, focusing on the degree to which single parents are prepared to become independent of social assistance, and on the supports they need to do so. A quick review of the survey methodology used is provided below.

Because of the pending transfer of single parents receiving social assistance under the Provincial system to the municipally-delivered system, the decision was made to contact single parents from both the municipal and Provincial caseloads. Individuals chosen for the sample were randomly selected by computer so that every member of the population had an equal chance of being selected.

Seven hundred and seventy clients completed the full questionnaire: 372 were receiving municipal benefits under Ontario Works, and 398 were receiving benefits delivered by the Province. Appendix A contains specific information about number of contacts made and the survey return rate. With regard to the survey, findings based on the sample data can be considered accurate within six percentage points (plus or minus a three percent error rate), 19 out of 20 times.

External consultants (Professors Sandy Welsh and Dean Behrens from the University of Toronto Sociology Department) with expertise in survey design, and with a knowledge of issues affecting single parents, were engaged to provide assistance with the development of the overall methodology. They provided extensive input into the creation of a survey instrument, and developed and provided a training package to staff responsible for administering the instrument.

Extensive efforts were made to contact clients who were selected to participate. However, the survey did have certain constraints. For example, it was not possible to contact clients who did not have access to a telephone or who were not available during survey times. As well, some non-English speaking respondents could not complete the surveys because an interpreter was not available. As a result, potentially under-represented among the respondents are people who may have the greatest needs. This includes people who were not capable of completing the survey in English (and for whom translators were not available), and those who were unable to maintain stable accommodation.

The overall impression that the survey results convey is of a group of people with solid assets and strengths, and a realistic outlook. One consistent theme emerged throughout the survey process - single parents recognize the value of working, and want to work.

Given their current circumstances, almost half (49 percent) of the single parents surveyed felt it would take less than one year to qualify for a job. And 27 percent felt they could qualify for a job in three months or less. The jobs most frequently identified included clerical and sales positions, and jobs in health care.

In fact, a substantial number of single parents, about 43 percent of the overall sample, are already working, studying or volunteering, with 20 percent of municipal cases and 8 percent of provincial cases doing more than one of these activities at the time of the survey. The highlights of the survey, respondents’ educational backgrounds, involvement in training activities, and work experience are contained in the attached Executive Summary.

The survey also provided the basis for a preliminary assessment of respondents' "employment readiness." The intention was to provide a preliminary picture of the degree to which respondents are employment ready, and in turn, the staff time and resources that will be required to support single parents’ efforts to increase their employment earnings. A basic employability scale was developed using selected variables from the survey database.

This initial "employability profile" revealed the following:

It must be noted that the middle group obviously spans a wide range of clients, with varying kinds and levels of needs. Clearly, a critical task will be to develop improved methods of precisely assessing service needs, as well as ensuring that individuals are carefully screened before placement in Ontario Works program options (Skills Development, Community Participation, Employment Placement).

However, for many of these clients, there is little reason to believe that they will not be able to find work, if it is available, provided they can obtain the right supports. If anything, the survey results indicate that personal and health matters, while they represent very important barriers to some respondents, are less an issue for many parents than the ability to find a good job, and to obtain the support they need to do so: help with transportation expenses, reliable child care, and educational and training upgrading.

It is also clear, however, that there is a group of hard to serve single parents, made up of those who face multiple barriers to employment. Intensive service supports will be required to assist these individuals, and to move them as far as possible towards independence through employment.

Conclusion:

Overall, this survey shows that many single parents are positioned by virtue of their education and skills, or by their desire to become independent, to re-enter the workforce. Many are either already going to work or taking steps to prepare themselves. The findings strongly suggest that the majority of single parents, with the right training and supports, will be in a favourable position to obtain employment if the current economic climate prevails, and jobs continue to be created in the Toronto region. The findings also dispel some myths about single parents, and provide a good overview of the types of activities people are engaged in.

The survey confirms that single parents require supports, such as child care, educational upgrading and transportation expenses, to prepare for and seek work. These basic supports are available under the Ontario Works program. However, the survey provides a basis for a more careful assessment of the degree to which these supports can meet client needs, and the areas where additional supports will yield a clear payoff in terms of better integration into the labour market.

However, the findings also reveal that there is a core group of hard-to-serve clients. This group will require special efforts to simply become employment ready. In some cases, they may have to rely on social assistance for extended periods because of the personal barriers they face.

In a broader sense, placing too much emphasis on individual "barriers" can deflect attention from the ongoing need for all levels of government to carefully monitor and analyse labour markets to better understand how specific groups, like single parents, fare. High unemployment rates and competitive job markets continue to place substantial pressure on all service providers to maximize the effectiveness of resources deployed to assist people return to work. To that end, to serve these and other clients effectively, the Division must be similarly aware of changes underway in government programs designed to serve the unemployed.

The impetus for this survey came from the knowledge that much more needs to be done to better understand the characteristics, service needs and employment barriers of single parents receiving social assistance. Ultimately, the study’s findings provide a valuable basis for determining the most effective ways to support single parents by targeting resources to meet identified and unique service needs. In the longer term, the analysis of the survey results, plus other work being undertaken by the Division, is essential to planning for the delivery of services to an increasing number of hard-to-serve clients.

Contact Name:

Heather MacVicar

392-8952

————

Appendix A: Client Contacts

Prior to telephoning, letters were mailed to the members of the sample population advising them of their selection for the survey. Interviews were conducted in English by Social Services staff and took between 15 and 45 minutes.

Telephone interviews of people in the municipal sample were conducted in mid-February, while clients receiving provincial benefits were contacted in early April 1998. Procedures were identical for both groups. Survey staff made calls between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 7:30 p.m. Calls were made on one of the weekend days between noon and 4:00 p.m. In attempting to reach selected participants, interview staff made up to six phone calls. Every effort was made contact the client, including leaving messages where this was possible.

When talking to people, interviewers stressed that the survey was voluntary, that all information gathered was strictly confidential and would be used only for research purposes, and that any decision whether or not to participate would in no way affect eligibility for social assistance. Because no links were maintained between survey data and client case information, client anonymity was assured.

In a small number of instances, telephone interviewers were able to offer interpretation in Cantonese and Somali. Some participants arranged their own interpreter, who assisted them in completing the survey on the phone.

By the end of the municipal survey period, 800 people had been contacted. Of this number, 490 people, or 61 percent of the sample, were successfully reached. A total of 372 people, or 47 percent of the total sample, completed the full questionnaire.

By the end of the provincial survey period, 1,200 people had been contacted. Of this number, 549 people, or 46 percent of the sample, were successfully reached. A total of 398 people, or 33 percent of the total sample, completed the full questionnaire. This sample was also measured and found to have a level of confidence of plus or minus 3 percent 19 times out of 20.

Interview staff were unable to successfully contact 310 people, or 39 percent of the total municipal sample and 651 people, or 54 percent of the total provincial sample. Frequent attempts were made to reach all sample members. Messages were left whenever possible. In some instances the telephone was not answered, or the telephone number was incorrect. In the cases where the telephone number was incorrect, directory assistance was used to attempt to locate new telephone numbers.

Full details of the contact outcomes are provided in Table 1.

Table 1: Survey Results

(A copy of the Executive Summary, referred to in the foregoing report, was forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee for its meeting on November 5, 1998, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

5

Increasing Demand on the City of Toronto’s

Recommendation:

The Advisory Committee on Homes for the Aged on October 16, 1998, recommended to the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee the adoption of the attached report (September 24, 1998) from the General Manager, Homes for the Aged, respecting the impact on the Homemakers and Nurses Services Program resulting from changes to the community-based long-term care system, subject to amending Recommendations Nos. (1), (2) and (3) by adding the words "and Ministry of Long Term Care" after the words "Ministry of Health", so that the recommendations now read as follows:

"It is recommended that:

The Advisory Committee on Homes for the Aged reports, for the information of the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee, having requested the General Manager, Homes for the Aged, to work with other providers of Homemakers and Nurses Services who are trying to achieve changes within the system.

(Report dated September 24, 1998, addressed to the

Advisory Committee on Homes for the Aged from the

General Manager, Homes for the Aged)

Purpose:

To update City Council regarding the changes in community-based long term care, their impact on the municipality's Homemakers and Nurses Services Program (HMNS), and the evidence of increasing gaps and differences in service levels provided to Toronto citizens as a result of the creation of six independent Community Care Access Centres (CCACs).

Funding Sources/Financial Implications/and Impact Statement:

The Municipality's Homemakers and Nurses Services Program is cost-shared by the Ministry of Health and the City of Toronto on a 80:20 basis, as outlined in the Homemakers and Nurses Services Act. The 1998 approved gross budget is $4.28 million, of which the City of Toronto pays $1.5 million. There is no impact on either the gross or net budget as a result of this report.

However, this report identifies growing pressure on the HMNS to provide service to an increasing number of clients, due to the fact that the CCACs are rejecting clients for service, based on their own financial constraints. The negative outcome from this is threefold. First, individuals at risk in the community are being declined service to which they are entitled as outlined in the Ministry of Health policy directions for community-based long term care. Second, a large number of the referrals to HMNS from the CCACs are for individuals who should not be served by the HMNS program; this is placing an unfair onus on the municipal staff, to try to secure some type of service on behalf of citizens who are potentially at risk. Last, since the HMNS budget has not been increased, it may be necessary to initiate a waiting list protocol for the program for the first time in the history of HMNS, which will create a delay in service to vulnerable individuals.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

Council Reference/Background/History:

Under the authority of the Homemakers and Nurses Services Act, the Homes for the Aged Division operates a municipal Homemakers and Nurses Services Program (HMNS), purchasing homemaking services such as meal planning and preparation, shopping, personal laundry service, and household cleaning, on behalf of elderly and disabled adult clients and families in crisis, who demonstrate both financial and functional need. The program provides in-home assistance, in order to support clients in remaining in their own homes; the goal of the program is to prevent premature institutionalization and family breakup. HMNS operates on a brokerage model. HMNS staff perform a case management function; direct service is provided by 14 contracted agencies (both for-profit and not-for-profit), who sign an annual service agreement with the City.

Approximately 53 percent of all HMNS clients are elderly; the remaining clients are individuals under the age of 65 who are suffering from stable chronic illness, disabilities, or psychiatric illness, and families in crisis, who require respite support for a period of time, in order to prevent family breakup.

Historically, HMNS worked in close co-operation with the Home Care Program of Metropolitan Toronto, and the two programs consulted frequently to ensure that clients did not "fall through the cracks" of varying eligibility determination of the two programs.

In January 1996, the Minister of Health announced changes to Ontario's long term care system, which substantially changed community-based long term care. The Province's 74 existing Home Care programs and existing Placement Co-ordination Services were amalgamated into 43 new agencies called Community Care Access Centres (CCACs). Governed by non-profit Boards, the CCACs are mandated by the Ministry of Health to process and authorize applications for admission to all Ontario's nursing homes and homes for the aged, and arrange for the provision of community-based long term care services, on behalf of eligible clients. CCACs operate on a managed competition model, purchasing services from contracted agencies who have been awarded the contracts on the basis of best quality-best price.

Throughout Ontario, the creation of CCACs reduced the overall number of agencies responsible for the provision of home care. However, such was not the case in the City of Toronto. Rather, the Ministry of Health's direction to establish CCACs preceded the creation of the new City of Toronto; therefore, the CCACs were established on the six pre-existing municipal boundaries. There are currently six independent CCACs within the City of Toronto.

This policy direction was accompanied by a financial commitment from the Ministry of Health to increase community-based long term care funding by $551 million over the period of eight years, realizing a financial commitment of $1.75 billion by the year 2005/2006.

Funding was provided to the new CCACs on the basis of an equity funding formula developed by the Ministry of Health. Simply stated, the Ministry determined the amount of money currently available, and redistributed it to the "38 service areas" created by the development of the CCAC model. The City of Toronto is one "service area". The City of Toronto's allocation is then further broken down into funding for the six CCACs.

The equity funding formula is based on the determination of population and needs assessment (including factors related to age and sex distribution). As a result, some of the CCACs within the City of Toronto were "red-circled", and some received new base funding, in the initial year of operation. Ministry of Health representatives clearly communicated to the CCACs that they were expected to work within the approved budgets, and that continuing deficit budgets (as was often in evidence in the pre-1996 practice) would no longer be tolerated.

In terms of future planning, the Ministry of Health confirmed that the equity funding formula would continue to direct new dollars to CCACs each year up to the year 2006. The formula assumes an annual 2 percent increase in the range and type of service provided, and is structured to respond to population growth and changes in hospital discharge trends. Ministry staff estimate that CCACs within the City of Toronto will receive approximately 30 percent of all new funding up to the year 2006.

Although the 1996 announcement created CCACs as a replacement for the pre-existing Home Care programs, the announcement did not rescind the Homemakers and Nurses Services Act. Rather, the Ministry of Health encouraged continued involvement by municipalities in the discretionary municipal HMNS program, in order to continue to offer a social safety net to vulnerable individuals, who are deemed ineligible for CCAC service, but who, without some type of in-home support might suffer premature institutionalization and/or family breakup.

The City of Toronto's HMNS program has remained intact, with continued provincial funding and commitment, and staff have been active in reviewing and tightening eligibility criteria, to ensure that support is available to those vulnerable individuals at risk in the community. Staff have met regularly with the Executive Directors of the various CCACs, in order to establish a co-ordinated system for citizens of the City of Toronto.

Comments:

Individuals eligible to receive service from the HMNS program have historically presented a different profile than those clients served by the previous Home Care program and the current CCACs. The municipal HMNS is developed specifically for low-income individuals who require some type of in-home support to remain independent, but who do not qualify for the Ministry of Health's long term care program. Applicants to HMNS must demonstrate financial need, as determined by legislation, and must be assessed to have a functional need associated with one or more household tasks related to activities of daily living. HMNS does not provide direct personal care, professional nursing, and/or professional therapy service, and therefore clients admitted to the program must be medically stable.

By contrast, the CCACs are agencies created by the Ministry of Health to co-ordinate access to long term care facilities and to provide a full range of community-based long term care services to eligible clients. The long term care services available to community clients include professional services of all types, personal care (e.g., bathing and hygiene), and homemaking. CCACs assign priority for admission to the range of service, based on the applicant's degree of health risk. Eligibility to receive assistance with homemaking is based on the prerequisite of the client's need for personal care.

As a result of their own financial pressures, particularly within CCACs which are red-circled, CCAC referrals to HMNS have increased dramatically. For example, prior to 1997, HMNS averaged 115 referrals from CCACs per month. Throughout 1997, this figure rose to an average of 129 referrals per month. From January to June 1998, there were an average of 139 referrals per month from the CCACs to HMNS. In July 1998, HMNS received 186 referrals. Of these 186 referrals, 44 percent originated from the CCAC serving the previous City of North York, and 30 percent originated from the CCAC serving the previous City of Toronto. These two CCACs are experiencing particular financial difficulties.

In addition to the marked increase in referrals, there is a disturbing trend developing, with respect to the type of client being referred. A number of referrals have been for individuals who have been in receipt of CCAC service for a number of years; many were frail elderly, whose health and functional status have not changed significantly to warrant a transfer to an alternate level of service.

A number of the clients referred were beyond the scope of service provided by HMNS, and/or did not meet the financial eligibility criteria for the program. Historically, the rejection rate for HMNS (i.e., the percentage of applicants deemed to be ineligible for service) has been approximately 35 percent; year-to-date in 1998, the rejection rate is 51 percent. It is worthy of note that 72 percent of all applicants to HMNS deemed to be ineligible for service have been referred from the CCACs.

The total units of service provided by HMNS is also rising significantly in 1998, to the degree that, unless steps are taken to manage the total number of individuals served and the total volume of service provided, HMNS will accept a growing risk of being over-expended within the next several years. Table 1 details trends in HMNS service delivery over the period of 1994 to July 1998.

In order to remain within the approved 1998 budget, HMNS staff are in the process of developing a "priority ranking" system and waiting list protocol. For example, based on the average number of hours of service per client (2.16 hours per client per week), the intake rate, and the average attrition rate, the program can reasonably admit an average of approximately 94 clients per month over the course of a year. Using this as a guide, staff may need to more strictly apply eligibility criteria, delay implementation of service for approved clients, and develop a waiting list, admitting on a priority ranking system. That is, the waiting list will need to make priority provision for those individuals who are in receipt of no alternative community-based service, and who may be at risk if homemaking services are not provided in a timely fashion.

Although it is acknowledged that these steps will effectively manage the HMNS budget, they do not address the larger policy issue; that is, the current community-based long term care system is not working effectively to ensure that individuals receive the care and service that they are legitimately entitled to, as envisioned by long term care reform and identified in provincial policy. There are gaps in the system and Toronto citizens are being left without service. Although HMNS staff regularly meet with CCAC staff, in an effort to work collaboratively, it may be appropriate to ask the representatives of the Ministry of Health to co-ordinate a meeting amongst the Executive Directors of the various CCACs in an attempt to develop a plan to improve service delivery, with respect to equity of access and scope/level of service and case management and co-ordination.

Conclusions:

HMNS has historically provided service to clients not served by other programs and has collaborated with the other providers to provide a continuum of care. Staff are continuing to work with community partners through this transition period as long term care reform is further unfolding, in an attempt to find solutions to the apparent increasing community need for service.

The current demand for service is creating a strain on the available resources. It is anticipated that, unless alternative solutions are identified, this strain will continue to exist until the provincial equity funding formula is fully implemented. Therefore, further review and immediate action are urgently required, in order to ensure that citizens of Toronto are not left at risk.

Contact Name:

Margo McNamara, Co-ordinator - Homemakers and Nurses Services Program,

Tel: 392-8543/Fax: 392-8457

6

Expenditure from the Residents’ Interest

Recommendation:

The Advisory Committee on Homes for the Aged on October 16, 1998, recommended to the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee the adoption of the attached report (October 15, 1998) from the General Manager, Homes for the Aged, respecting the purchase of a new wheelchair-accessible bus for Seven Oaks Home for the Aged.

(Report dated October 15, 1998, addressed to the

Advisory Committee on Homes for the Aged from the

General Manager, Homes for the Aged)

Purpose:

To receive authority to make an expenditure from the Residents' Interest Reserve Fund for the purpose of purchasing a new bus to respond to the transportation needs of the Home's Day Centre clients and residents.

Funding Sources/Financial Implications/and Impact Statement:

Annual expenditures from the Residents' Interest Reserve Fund are generally limited to 90 percent of the income generated by the fund. Consideration may, however, be given for an expenditure of capital from the fund in exceptional circumstances. The total cost of the bus proposed for purchase for Seven Oaks is $89,000.00 (inclusive of PST and GST).

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

Background:

In 1955, Metropolitan Toronto Council approved a transfer of trust funds held for residents in the Metropolitan Homes for the Aged from a non-bearing current account to an interest-bearing savings account and approved the use of interest for the general welfare of residents. This practice was discontinued in 1973. At that time, there was in excess of $400,000.00 in accumulated interest.

Under the new system, estimates were made of the rate of interest expected in the forthcoming year, and interest at this rate was credited to the residents except where an account was less than $50.00, or where the account was opened and closed during a quarterly period. This system continued until May 1981, when Council approved the current practice of paying the actual interest earned to the residents. In addition, Council approved the payment of interest on a monthly basis in January 1984.

In the years between 1973 and 1983, interest compounded annually and funds accumulated on the $400,000.00 balance of 1973, and this amount was further increased by the fact that during the period from 1973 to 1981, the estimated rate of interest (the rate used for paying the residents) tended to be less than that actually received, with the difference going into the reserve fund.

Metropolitan Toronto Council requested that the Province amend the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Act to establish the Residents' Interest Reserve Fund. The amendment was given third reading and Royal Assent on May 29, 1984.

Section 163a states: "The trust fund, composed of undisbursed interest accumulated prior to the 1st day of January 1982, on the trust accounts of the residents of Metropolitan Toronto Homes for the Aged, is vested in the Metropolitan Corporation for distribution of both the fund and the interest accruing therein by the Metropolitan Council in its absolute discretion for the general benefit of the residents of Metropolitan Toronto Homes for the Aged, provided that no expenditure shall be made for the ordinary operation and maintenance of the Homes".

Metropolitan Toronto Council established administrative procedures for the management of the Interest Reserve Fund as follows:

The current balance of funds held in the Residents' Interest Reserve Fund is approximately $1.9 million.

Annually, based on the approved 90 percent spending limit, each of the ten Homes for the Aged receives an allocation, to be used for quality of life issues for their residents. Each expenditure request must be submitted in advance, for review and approval. In addition to the annual usage described, there have been a number of capital items purchased from the fund. For example, decor and aesthetic enhancements requested by Residents' Councils have been approved. In addition, the fund was used to purchase three buses for the various Homes; these buses were purchased in the mid- to late-1980s. There are currently seven buses in use amongst the ten Homes. No buses have been purchased since 1989, and several of the buses are now experiencing substantial maintenance costs.

Comments:

Seven Oaks Home for the Aged, located at 9 Neilson Road, administers a very successful Adult Day Centre, in partnership with Centenary Health Centre. Operated five days/week, the Day Centre averages 12-15 clients per day, with the Home's driver providing transportation for the Centre's clients. The daily bus route associated with Day Centre clients results in approximately 150 kilometres driving distance per day. In addition to the daily Day Centre requirements, the bus is used for weekly resident outings from the Home, adding an additional 200 kilometres driving distance per week.

The current Seven Oaks bus was purchased in 1989 and has been experiencing high maintenance costs for the last several years.

Upon a request from the General Manager, the Home's staff researched the marketplace to identify the styles and makes of buses currently available, consult with other service providers to access information about their experiences, and make a recommendation with respect to acquiring a new bus through use of the Residents' Interest Reserve Fund. In their research, staff paid particular attention to issues related to passenger comfort and convenience, design and construction features, and maintenance history. Major desired features include a fibreglass body, stainless bumpers, scenic windows, wide aisles, bright lighting, wheelchair lift, accessible entrance doors, and interior luggage racks. In addition, a diesel engine, with sound reduction insulation is a desired feature. Detailed specifications have been provided by Divisional staff, in anticipation of expenditure approval.

It is anticipated that the cost of a bus with the desired features can be purchased at a cost not to exceed $89,000.00 (inclusive of PST and GST).

Conclusions:

Given the age of the Division's current vehicles, there is a need to start a process of vehicle replacement, or transportation needs of residents and Day Centre clients will not be appropriately served. The Seven Oaks vehicle has been selected as the vehicle to be replaced at this time, in light of the scope of the Day Centre program and the regular use of the vehicle for resident outings and trips.

This expenditure request is consistent with the established criteria for use of the Residents' Interest Reserve Fund and is supported by Seven Oaks management staff, the Division's Executive Office staff, including the General Manager.

Contact Name:

Sandra Pitters, General Manager, Homes for the Aged Division

Tel: 392-8907/Fax: 392-4180, E-mail: sandra_pitters@city.toronto.on.ca

7

Other Items Considered by the Committee

————

————

————

CHRIS KORWIN-KUCZYNSKI,

Chair

Toronto, November 5, 1998

COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBOURHOOD SERVICES COMMITTEE