This study examined the risk of homelessness among families living in aging rental high-rises in Toronto. It found that 56% of families were at moderate risk of homelessness, 30% at severe risk, and 11% at critical risk. Risk was highest among low-income families, recent immigrants, and those relying on social assistance or child support for income. Factors contributing to the risk included unaffordable and poor quality housing, overcrowding, unsafe conditions, and tenant insecurity. The study recommends increasing affordable housing, improving tenant rights and housing standards enforcement, and expanding housing support services to help stabilize at-risk families and prevent homelessness.

1. Nowhere
Else
to
Go:
Inadequate
Housing
and
Risk
of
Homelessness
Among
Families
in
Toronto’s
Aging
Rental
High-­‐Rises
Emily
Paradis,
University
of
Toronto
e.paradis@utoronto.ca

2. The
Study
• High-­‐rise
apartment
tenants
in
the
inner
suburbs
and
Parkdale
(private
market
&
TCHC)
• Random
sample
of
all
rental
apartment
units
in
Toronto
built
between
1950
&
1980
• Oversampling
in
high-­‐poverty
clusters
• 3200
persons
interviewed
in
2009
–
2010
• This
study
based
on
1566
families
with
children
• Focus
groups
with
100+
service
providers
and
30+
parents
• Examining
inadequate
housing,
risk
of
homelessness,
and
hidden
homelessness

4. Socio-­‐demographic
indicators
81%
47%
82%
50%
37%
30%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Racialized
Immigrants
Lone
Parent
Families
Sample
Toronto

5. Immigrant
Status
Newcomer,
under
5
years
35%
Recent
immigrant,
5.1
-­‐
10
years
21%
Long-­‐term
immigrant,
10+
years
26%
Canadian
born
18%

6. Educa[on
Less
than
high
school
16%
High
school
diploma
26%
Post
secondary
educaMon
56%
Other
2%

7. At
Risk
of
Homelessness
“At-­‐Risk
of
Homelessness”
includes
2
categories:
• Precariously
Housed:
Facing
housing
challenges
that
may
or
may
not
lead
to
homelessness
in
near
future,
such
as
– Unaffordable
housing
– Bad
housing
condi[ons
– Overcrowding
– Unsafe
housing
• At
Imminent
Risk
of
Homelessness:
Facing
poten[al
loss
of
housing,
due
to
– Evic[on
– Inability
to
pay
rent
– Violence
/
abuse
in
the
home
See
Canadian
Defini[on
of
Homelessness
at
hdp://www.homelesshub.ca/Library/Canadian-­‐Defini[on-­‐of-­‐
Homelessness-­‐54225.aspx

8. Indicators
of
Inadequate
Housing
• Unaffordable
Housing:
50%
or
more
of
household
income
is
spent
on
rent
and
other
housing
costs
• Overcrowded
Housing:
More
than
2
persons
per
bedroom
• Unsafe
Housing:
Resident
has
changed
rou[ne
due
to
safety
concerns
• Insecure
Housing:
Resident
has
been
behind
in
the
rent
in
the
past
year
(risk
of
evic[on)
• Bad
Unit
CondiMons:
The
unit
required
3
or
more
repairs,
and
the
landlord
did
not
fix
all
of
them
• Bad
Building
CondiMons:
The
building
has
two
or
more
of
the
following
condi[ons:
frequent
elevator
breakdown,
pests
and
vermin,
and
/
or
broken
entrance
locks

9. Inadequate
Housing
Indicators
27%#
23%#
22%#
32%#
50%#
46%#
0%# 20%# 40%# 60%#
Overcrowded#Housing#
Bad#Building#Condi<ons#
Unaffordable#Housing#
Bad#Unit#Condi<ons#
Unsafe#Housing#
Insecure#Housing#

10. Risk
of
Homelessness
Index
• Adequately
Housed:
0
indicators
• Inadequately
Housed,
Moderate
Risk
of
Homelessness:
1
–
2
indicators
• Severe
Risk
of
Homelessness:
3
–
4
indicators
• CriMcal
Risk
of
Homelessness:
5
–
6
indicators

11. Risk
of
Homelessness
Index
3%#
30%#
56%#
11%#
0%# 10%# 20%# 30%# 40%# 50%# 60%#
Adequately#Housed#
0#indicators#
Moderate#Risk#of#Homelessness#
182#indicators##
Severe#Risk#of##Homelessness#
384#indicators##
Cri+cal#Risk#of#Homelessness#
586#indicators##

12. From
Homeless
Hub
www.HomelessHub.ca
infographic
by
Isaac
Coplan

13. Immigrant
Status
Immigrant$Status$
All$Families$in$the$Study$
Newcomer# Recent#Immigrant# Long8term#Immigrant# Canadian8born#
35%$
37%$
33%$
18%$
20%$
16%$
21%$
23%$
28%$
33%$
25%$
26%$
20%$
16%$
18%$
29%$
0%# 20%# 40%# 60%# 80%# 100%#
Adequately$Housed$
Moderate$Risk$of$Homelessness$
Severe$Risk$of$Homelessness$
Cri/cal$Risk$of$Homelessness$

14. Risk
of
Homelessness
by
Low
Income
Low-­‐Income
(At
or
Below
Cutoff)
Not
Low-­‐Income
(Above
Cutoff)
83%
100%
68%
47%
32%
18%
53%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Adequate
housing
(11%)
Inadequate,
some
risk
(56%)
Severe
risk
(30%)
CriMcal
risk
(3%)

15. Source
of
Income
Sources$of$Income$
All$Families$in$the$Study$
Employent# Government# Child#Support# Other#
67%$
58%$
47%$
80%$
29%$
37%$
45%$
15%$
0%# 20%# 40%# 60%# 80%# 100%#
Adequately$Housed$
Moderate$Risk$of$Homelessness$
Severe$Risk$of$Homelessness$
Cri0cal$Risk$of$Homelessness$

16. Reasons
for
Moving
Reasons$for$Moving$
All$Families$in$the$Study$
To#buy#a#house# To#be#nearer#work# Too#expensive#
Require#bigger#unit# Poor#maintenance# Too#unsafe#
Other#
34%$
24%$
14%$
54%$ 9%$
17%$
23%$
18%$
12%$
15%$
14%$
14%$
13%$
25%$
8%$
15%$
15%$
0%# 20%# 40%# 60%# 80%# 100%#
Adequately$Housed$
Moderate$Risk$of$$Homelessness$
Severe$Risk$of$Homelessness$
Cri.cal$Risk$of$Homelessness$

17. Risk
of
Homelessness
by
Neighbourhood
Adequate
Moderate
Severe
Cri[cal
Mid-­‐Scarborough
Dorset/Kennedy
Weston/Mt.
Dennis
Jane/Finch
Rexdale
Thorncliffe/Flemingdon
Parkdale
Total
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%

18. How
Inadequate
Housing
Affects
Families
• Overcrowding:
Increases
stress
and
conflict
• Bad
building
and
unit
condi[ons:
Associated
with
poor
health
among
children
• Unaffordable
housing:
Drives
housing
choices;
linked
to
hunger
• Unsafe
housing:
Experiencing
crime
more
common
among
families
at
higher
risk
• Insecure
housing:
History
of
evic[on
creates
barriers
to
new
housing

19. Housing
Loss
&
Hidden
Homelessness
• Newcomers
double-­‐up
“temporarily”
• Severity
of
risk
differs
between
groups
• Housing
loss
common
among
low-­‐income
families
• Causes:
Violence,
evic[on
due
to
unaffordability,
poor
condi[ons
• Families
double-­‐up
to
stay
close
to
home
• Hidden
homelessness
and
shelter
stays
genng
longer
• Finding
new
housing
impeded
by
discrimina[on,
low
income

20. Barriers
to
Adequate
Housing
for
Migrant
Communi[es
• Income:
Low
wages,
precarious
employment,
low
social
assistance
rates,
benefit
cuts
• Housing:
High
rents,
bad
condi[ons,
wait
lists
• Shelter:
inaccessible,
long
stays
• Immigra[on
&
integra[on:
discrimina[on,
changing
policies
• Landlord
rela[ons:
Disrespect,
racism
&
sexism;
insufficient
enforcement
by
City
• Services
&
access:
Childcare

21. Par[cipants’
recommenda[ons
• Mul[-­‐lingual
educa[on
&
enforcement
on
discrimina[on,
human
rights,
tenant
rights
• Eliminate
“Canadian
credit
history”
and
“Canadian
experience”
requirements
• Increase
wages
&
government
transfers
• Build
more
affordable
housing
• Housing
stabiliza[on
services:
rent
banks,
Housing
Stabiliza[on
Fund
• Family
shelters
in
all
neighbourhoods
• Make
services
available
to
all
families
–
not
only
those
in
TCHC
or
shelters
• Children’s
services

22. What
can
be
done?
1. Federal:
First,
Housing
2. Province:
Inclusionary
Zoning
3. Province:
Housing
Benefit
4. City:
Standards
Enforcement
&
Tenant
Rights

23. Family
Homelessness
in
Toronto’s
Inner
Suburbs
View
the
full
report:
hdp://neighbourhoodchange.ca
Funded
by
Homeless
Partnering
Strategy,
HRSDC
and
by
Social
Sciences
and
Humani[es
Research
Council
of
Canada
Emily
Paradis,
University
of
Toronto,
e.paradis@utoronto.ca