[homeles_ot-l] - accessing scattered sites through portable housing allowances

Tue Jun 24 11:21:44 EDT 2014

Hi All,
I too, have appreciated the conversation that has been circulating on this topic, and have resonated with all of the valid points expressed.
Cornerstone’s experience is that of being a provider of emergency shelter and supportive housing, and of having four very different ownership/landlord and support models among our housing communities for women.
My understanding of the presentations I have been privy to about Housing First indicate that a range of affordability options is a healthy way to meet the variety of wants and needs that people bring to us. This allows for tenants to have choice, and for providers to offer a set of services which best utilize their capacity and expertise. Our work as a community over the next while will be to integrate the common assessment approach that will help us to ensure that people get access to the housing that is best suited for them going forward.
I am really encouraged that there seems to be consensus that a broad spectrum of housing responses will continue to serve us well as a community. I believe that it’s this type of dialogue that has given us a strong profile across the country as collaborators and solution builders.
Sue

From: homeles_ot-l [mailto:homeles_ot-l-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of Tim Simboli
Sent: June-24-14 11:00 AM
To: Rob MacDonald; John Dickie
Cc: Tim D. Aubry; Alliance Listserv
Subject: Re: [homeles_ot-l] - accessing scattered sites through portable housing allowances

Good discussion folks – thanks for stepping in and commenting.
From CMHA’s perspective the rent supps have worked very well. We do have special support services for those getting rent supps over and above our usual case management services, and they provide a mediating influence for the tenants and landlords. Our current experience is that landlords are coming to us to offer units because they value the support and the stability of income. Our population of course are folks with Serious mental illness (much the same population that the ‘At home/Chez sois’ served) and they have the supports but need the homes. The rent supps provide an avenue to get the units and get them quickly – we don’t have many instances of landlords ejecting tenants to upgrade their units, and we haven’t seen much upward pressure on the rental market because a couple hundred folks are suddenly able to get into basic level housing.
CMHA and others do offer an alternative to private market landlords by owning a small number of scattered site apartments that aren’t subject to the vagaries of profit motives.
I do think that there needs to be a fulsome array of responses to the housing crisis and every proven alternative should be employed.
Hoping to hear from others.
t

From: homeles_ot-l [mailto:homeles_ot-l-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of Rob MacDonald
Sent: June 24, 2014 9:59 AM
To: John Dickie
Cc: Tim D. Aubry; Alliance Listserv
Subject: Re: [homeles_ot-l] - accessing scattered sites through portable housing allowances

Hello, John,
I completely agree there should be some form of a rent supplement program, I just believe that building social housing is more practical beneficial long term solution.  I had a case where a senior citizen with cancer needed financial assistance when her landlord applied for an above guideline rent increase.  I had a case where a working single parent would lose her daycare subsidy if she moved to any of the social housing units which were all out of her area. There is a need for a supplement program, but it should be administered in moderation.
My concern with shelter allowances is that they are not based on tenants income meaning they are still paying more than thirty per cent of the rent.  It's also a given that the rents will increase in the following years through the guideline increase,not to mention above guideline increases, and higher rent increases on the private market (now that the vacancy rate is plummeting in Ottawa again).  It only means that tenants with shelter allowances will likely be forced to relocate down the road because the supplement doesn't keep pace with the market variables. It is a means tested program that provides moderate financial assistance to more people, but not enough to lift them out of their financial crises.
The private market model puts profits first and my tenants have had first hand experience with the results in rent supplement units.  I've had several cases where tenants with mental health issues settled into their rent supplement units only to have the landlord attempt to evict shortly afterwards them out because they wanted to renovate the apartments and raise the rents.  The security of tenure is not the same in the private sector as it is in the social housing model.
As I stated earlier, I do believe there is a need for some form of a supplement program, I just don't see that any of my concerns have been addressed here. What may seem like 'quick fix' solutions will have long term consequences.
Personally, I love these discussions and I sincerely apologize if you feel that I was attacking your perspective, I only commented it in the spirit of healthy debate.  However, in the interests of keeping this site on topic, perhaps we could carry it on offline.

Rob

On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 5:27 PM, John Dickie <JDickie at dickieandlyman.com<mailto:JDickie at dickieandlyman.com>> wrote:
Rob:

The section 8 program is badly designed and may inflate rents, although it strains credulity to think that a subsidy of $6B would raise market rents by $8M.

For Canada with a different program design for portable housing allowances, a CHMC study team concluded that there was no evidence that Canadian housing allowances raised rents: Housing Allowance Options for Canada.  That is also Marion Steele’s conclusion.  She is the most knowledgeable person in Canada on housing allowances.

Among the advantages of housing allowances one can list:

- allow tenants a wide choice of where to live;

- achieve income mixing without the cost of subsidizing middle income tenants;

- use the existing economical housing stock, rather than newly built (and therefore expensive) housing;

- allow the available funding to be spread more equitably among more low-income tenants;

- allow flexibility in program design to respond to different regional needs and provincial budgets;

- allow the provision of assistance quickly;

- can eliminate deep core need regardless of a household’s place on a chronological waiting list;

- allow tenants to keep their housing assistance when they move to take a new job (which is good for them and the economy);

- avoid the stigma often associated with public housing;

- can easily be used in rural areas and small towns where there are no large rental buildings; and
- can be administered at very low cost.

See the CFAA website for more details: http://www.cfaa-fcapi.org/pdf/CFAA_Portable_housing_allowances_facts_0809.pdf

I have stopped attacking social housing, and most social housing advocates have stopped attacking portable housing allowances.  Perhaps the people who need help in affording their housing would be better served if we all recognized that various programs are useful to achieve different purposes.
John Dickie
Chair, Eastern Ontario Landlord Organization
640-1600 Carling Ave.
Ottawa ON  K1Z 1G3
Tel. 613-235-0101<tel:613-235-0101> Fax 613-238-0101<tel:613-238-0101>
http://www.eolo.ca/
EOLO represents the owners and managers of more than 36,000 residential rental suites in Ottawa.  Founded in 1990, EOLO's members include some of the largest landlords in Ontario, as well as many small and medium size landlords.
From: Rob MacDonald [mailto:robm at housinghelp.on.ca<mailto:robm at housinghelp.on.ca>]
Sent: June 23, 2014 5:09 PM
To: John Dickie
Cc: M Laplante; Tim D. Aubry; Alliance Listserv
Subject: Re: [homeles_ot-l] Research on Housing First - accessing scattered sites through housing allowances

It may be true that other provinces have rent supplement program, but housing advocates across the country have had their concerns about how they are implemented into the system and whether they are doing more harm than good.  BC, for example has two supplement programs, one for seniors and one for families.  Everyone else gets left out.
In my own experience I have seen landlords evict or 'transfer' tenants unwillingly so that they can renovate the unit or allegedly move into it themselves.  There is no security of tenure for tenants and they can be evicted for a slew of reasons that may have nothing to do with their behaviour.
Rent supplements can also be a lottery for landlords in provinces that have weak rent control, since landlords can raise rents as much as they want and take advantage of supplements. In Ontario, there is no limit to the rent increase a landlord can take in a new tenancy.
A number of U.S. studies have also proven conclusively that market rents increased substantially for non-supplemented low-income tenants who lived nearby.  The Susin report studied 90large metropolitan cities where housing vouchers were introduced.  The main finding was was that "those areas with more vouchers experienced faster rent increases than those where areas vouchers were less abundant."  It estimated that the shelter allowance system actually raised rents by an average of 16 per cent.  THe vouchers caused an 8.2 billion increase in total rent paid by low income tenants while only providing a subsidy of 5.8 billion, ersulting in a net loss of 2.4 billion to low income households.
According to the Wellesley Institute, "supplements inflate rents for all tenants, not just those receiving subsidies..  The economic cost outweighs the economic value."
It must also be said that shelter allowance do nothing to alleviate the scarcity of housing. As the vacancy rate has dropped in Ottawa, landlords will be charging more for rents, and people with low incomes have no choice but to pay extravagant rents without assurances of adequate maintenance.  A social housing program, on the other hand, will increase the supply.

On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 3:53 PM, John Dickie <JDickie at dickieandlyman.com<mailto:JDickie at dickieandlyman.com>> wrote:
Many provinces other than Ontario use portable housing allowances, or housing benefits, which can be used for scattered sites.

The City of Ottawa now has a successful pilot project using portable housing allowances to expand the housing options for homeless people.  Expanding housing allowances would be a significant positive in the fight against homelessness, and in improving housing affordability.

John
John Dickie
Chair, Eastern Ontario Landlord Organization
640-1600 Carling Ave.
Ottawa ON  K1Z 1G3
Tel. 613-235-0101<tel:613-235-0101> Fax 613-238-0101<tel:613-238-0101>
http://www.eolo.ca/
EOLO represents the owners and managers of more than 36,000 residential rental suites in Ottawa.  Founded in 1990, EOLO's members include some of the largest landlords in Ontario, as well as many small and medium size landlords.
From: homeles_ot-l [mailto:homeles_ot-l-bounces at list.web.net<mailto:homeles_ot-l-bounces at list.web.net>] On Behalf Of M Laplante
Sent: June 23, 2014 3:49 PM
To: Tim D. Aubry
Cc: Alliance Listserv
Subject: Re: [homeles_ot-l] Research on Housing First

Thank you for distributing this.  I notice that Pathways to Housing's original scattered-site requirement seems to have become optional somewhere along the way with a variety of different implementations and studies.  There seems to be a wide spectrum of approaches that adopt some elements of Housing First and not others, making it difficult to determine which features are essential.  Without Section 8 vouchers in Canada, scattered-site may be more difficult to implement, but it might be essential.

On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 6:29 AM, Tim D. Aubry <taubry at uottawa.ca<mailto:taubry at uottawa.ca>> wrote:
I have recently received several requests about the research literature on Housing First.

FYI, please find attached a book chapter reviewing the literature that we wrote and appears in the recently published book “Homelessness and Health in Canada” (edited by Manal Guirguis, Ryan MacNeil, and Stephen Hwang).  Please note that the full book is available open access at    http://www.homelesshub.ca/resource/homelessness-health-canada  .

Our book chapter was written before the final report on the findings of the At Home / Chez Soi project were released.  So I am also attaching a .pdf of the final report.

Tim Aubry Ph.D, C.Psych.
Professeur / Professor
École de psychologie / School of Psychology
Chercheur / Senior Researcher
Centre de recherche sur les services éducatifs / Centre for Research on Educational and Community Services
Chaire de recherche facultaire en santé mentale communautaire et l'itinérance /
Faculty Research Chair in Community Mental Health and Homelessness
Faculté des sciences sociales / Faculty of Social Sciences
Université d'Ottawa / University of Ottawa
Vanier Hall, 5002J
Ottawa, ON
K1N 6N5
Tel.: 613-562-5800 x 4815<tel:613-562-5800%20x%204815>
Fax: 613-562-5188<tel:613-562-5188>
E-mail: taubry at uottawa.ca<mailto:taubry at uottawa.ca>
Bio: http://www.socialsciences.uottawa.ca/psy/eng/profdetails.asp?id=137
Twitter: @TimAubry

PLEASE ADD OUR ADDRESS,
homeles_ot-l at list.web.net<mailto:homeles_ot-l at list.web.net>
to your email contact list.

THEN email your homelessness and housing messages to that address to reach the full list or to reply to a posting.

This list is not moderated; there is no editorial review.

Please try to keep messages to 200KB or less, including attachments, so that all subscribers are able to receive them.

The listserv does not permit Blind copy, BCC addresses or the use of too many Send To addresses. The best thing is to email to this list on its own.

The Alliance to End Homelessness does not verify the accuracy of submitted messages nor necessarily endorse the opinions expressed by message authors. Message authors are solely responsible for content of their messages.