Submission to

the Update of Ontario’s

Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy

June 30, 2015

Income Security Advocacy Centre

425 Adelaide Street West, 5th Floor

Toronto, ON M5V 3C1

The Income Security Advocacy Centre (ISAC)

The Income Security Advocacy Centre (ISAC) is a community legal clinic funded by Legal Aid Ontario. We have a provincial mandate to improve the income security of people living in Ontario through test case litigation, policy development, advocacy and community organizing. And we work closely with Ontario’s 60 geographically-based community legal clinics, which assist low income Ontarians in their local areas to resolve the problems they encounter with accessing programs and services in their daily lives.

Fairness in housing assistance: Affordability and income

Our comments on the update to Ontario’s Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy focus on issues raised in the second section in the consultation guide, entitled “A Fair System of Housing Assistance” (page 10), and on specificaspects of income support programs funded by the provincial government that have an impact on housing affordability.

While the construction and maintenance of low-cost housing is anessentialaspect ofensuring housing affordability, the level of income available to Ontarians to afford that cost is just as important. In order to adequately address problems with housing affordability, government musttake steps in a number of areas outside of the narrow confines of housing policy. Increasing the minimum wage and ensuring a better quality of work through a number of employment standards improvements are important aspects of ensuring housing affordability. As we will discuss below, however, ensuring housing affordability also depends on addressing the very low incomes of people receiving social assistance benefits, andimproving access to benefits and ancillary income supports for urgent homelessness prevention needs.

Improving systems of housing assistance: Shelter rates in Ontario Works and ODSP

A critically important factor in maintaining successful tenancies and ensuring the affordability of housing is ensuring that people have enough income to pay their housing costs. In the case of the nearly 900,000 Ontarians who rely on Ontario Works (OW) or the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP)[i], housing affordability is compromised by the very low benefit rates they currently receive.

According to data provided by the Ministry of Community and Social Services, 84% of people receiving OW and 65% of people receiving ODSP live in the private rental market;only 12% of people receiving OW and only 13% of people receiving ODSP live in subsidized rental housing[ii]. As such, the vast majority of people receiving social assistance benefits for their incomes are subject to the vagaries of the private housing market. Yet people receiving social assistance benefits are among the least able to afford housing costs and respond to cost increases due to the very low benefit rates provided by government.

CMHC rental data indicate that the average monthly rent in April 2015 for a private bachelor apartment in an urban centre of more than 10,000 people in Ontario is $821[iii]. In contrast, a single person receiving OW is entitled to a total maximum basic benefit of $656 per month[iv]. Those receiving ODSP benefits are marginally better off, with a single person receiving a total maximum basic monthly benefit of $1,098; however, paying the average privatebachelor rent would consume fully 75% of this monthly income amount. The problem of low

income is even worse for those living in urban centres such as Toronto, where the average monthly rent is $902[v] and where a significant number of OW and ODSP recipients live.

The Ministry of Community and Social Services has over the past several years begun delivering annual percentage increases to basic OW and ODSP benefit rates on the “basic needs” side and, as such, maximum shelter rates in these programs have not increased since 2012. We acknowledge that the Ministry’s intention in doing so is to ensure that all recipients receive the benefit of annual rate increases, including those whose housing costs are lower than the maximum shelter rates. However, this process doesn’t address the real problem, which is that OW and ODSP benefit rates are too low for people receiving benefits from these programs to afford to live in adequate housing.

  • Improving the ability of people receiving OW and ODSP benefits to pay for their housing costs by significantly increasing basic benefit rates must be an integral part of the province’s Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy.

Better supporting people who are homeless to become stably housed:Improving access to ODSP

One of the four key pillars of Ontario’s current Poverty Reduction Strategy is the goal of ending homelessness. We commend government for setting this ambitious goal and for recognizing that the province has an essential role to play in responding to and fulfilling the housing needs of all Ontarians. However, this goal can only be met by addressing other significant problems, beyond low benefit rates, in the social assistance system.

Astable source of income is essential to obtaining and maintaining housing. People with disabilities are overrepresented in the homeless population[vi] and, for many, ODSP is a necessary lifeline to begin the long process of recovery and rebuilding. According to the Mental Health Commission of Canada, up to 74% of people who are homeless in Canada report having a mental health disability[vii].And indeed, at least 46% of those who receive ODSP benefits are Ontarians with mental health disabilities. But accessing and obtaining ODSP benefits is difficult.

Access to ODSP has been a subject of concern for applicants and advocates since the program was instituted in 1998. Significant barriers have been identified in the program[viii], including a complex application process that many applicants find very difficult to navigate and for which the Ministry provides no support. Community-based supports have sprung up in some areas of the province to assist applicants who are homeless and have mental health disabilities, but they are severely under-resourced. The Ministry’s adjudication process itself has been identified as a problem, with a sustained overturn rate on appeal at the Social Benefits Tribunal that continues to be more than 50%. The Disability Adjudication Unit routinely expects medical evidence beyond what is stated in the legislation and on the prescribed forms. This means that many people with mental health disabilities do not make their way onto these much-needed benefits, and those who do often face an unreasonably long and arduous process to get there.

These problems are compounded by the process currently being used to review the files of ODSP recipients to determine if their medical conditions have improved, and thus their

continuing eligibility for benefits. Rather than creating a new process for these medical reviews, the Ministry continues to use the same flawed initial application process, which is putting the most vulnerable at risk. Improperly done medical reviews undermine the very advances being made under programs like those using the Housing First model by imposing unnecessary barriers that many people with mental health disabilities cannot navigate, resulting in a loss of benefits and subsequent loss of housing.

After years of stakeholder advocacy, the Ministry of Community and Social Services has begun to acknowledge some of these problems. The Ministry has recognised that they need to do a better job of adjudicating mental health disability. They hosted a multi-stakeholder mental health roundtable several years ago that led to a revision of the disability adjudication framework, and now to a review of the application forms themselves through a series of multi-stakeholder consultations. MCSS is also reviewing its policies on medical reviews. But that work has only just begun.

Improving the processes through which disability income support is accessed iscritical to the success of the Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy as well as to meeting the province’s Mental Health Strategy and Poverty Reduction Strategy objectives.

  • The Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy should recognize the need to improve access to ODSP benefits, as part of government’s cross-ministerial and cross-sectoral work to ensure that policies are aligned and programs do not work at cross purposes.

Improving access to housing assistance and reducing wait times / improving systems of housing assistance for clients and service providers: TheCommunity Homelessness Prevention Initiative (CHPI)

In 2012, the provincial government announced the end of the Community Start-Up and Maintenance Benefit (CSUMB)[ix], a critically important benefit available to people receiving OW and ODSP that provided additional financial assistance to pay for large homelessness-prevention expenses like first and last month’s rent deposits,utilities deposits or arrears, rental arrearsorstart-up furniture. A portion of CSUMB funding was moved into the Community Homelessness Prevention Initiative (CHPI), along with funds for five other municipally-administeredhousing-relatedprograms. CHPI is intended to provide municipal service managers with flexibility to allocate housing and homelessness funding in a manner most suitable to the needs of all low-income people in their local communities.

After much public outcry and community-based advocacy, the province increased the amount of funds available to municipalities through CHPI by $42 million, first as a transitional measure[x] and later,as part of the government’s second Poverty Reduction Strategy[xi], as a permanent addition to the CHPI envelope.

The impact of this policy and funding change on people on social assistance and other low income Ontarians has, to our knowledge, not been evaluated or assessed, but we are aware of continuing and serious concerns. We continue to hear that not all of Ontario’s 47 municipal service managers have instituted direct benefit programs similar to CSUMB to deal with the immediate housing-related needs of low income people in their communities.

We continue to hear that different systems put in place for administering the programs create barriers to access to some low income Ontarians. And we continue to hear concerns about arbitrary decision-making by local municipalities that impacts on the ability of low income Ontarians to remain housed.

We understand that the CHPI program has recently entered “Phase 3” of its transition period and that the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing intends to conduct a program review in this phase[xii]. We would urge the Ministry to include the following concerns in that review:

  • Ensuring that all 47 municipal service managers offer direct benefit programs, similar to CSUMB, to provide the funding necessary for low-income Ontarians in their communities to obtain, retain, and maintain their housing. Given the government’s commitment to end homelessness in Ontario, ensuring consistency of access to these programs across the province, regardless of municipality of residence, should be a paramount concern for the province in relation to these programs;
  • Ensuring that these programs are administered in ways that provide fair and equitable access to low-income peoplebased on need;
  • Ensuring that decision-making around eligibility for these programs is conducted in accord with the principles of procedural fairness, such that applicants to the programs have a clear understanding of eligibility requirements, the evidence they must produce in order to apply, the existence of an internal review process to resolve disputes, and the process through which such internal reviews are conducted.Fairness and transparency around municipal decision-making is critically important to maintaining the integrity of these programs;
  • Ensuring that all 47 municipal service managers collect robust data in relation to these programs and that that data is made public to determine whether or not needs in local communities are being met and to ensure public accountability and transparency. Such data collection should include information such as how many people are being served by the program, their source of income, amounts received, and expenses being covered. And demographic data should also be collected in order to determine the impact of these programs on groups who are at heightened risk of poverty, including people from racialized communities / people of colour, Aboriginal and Indigenous people, newcomers, people with disabilities, women, and single mothers.

Income adequacy and stability are critical to housingaffordability

In conclusion, we thank the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing for the opportunity to comment on the review of the Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy, and we urge the Ministry to ensure that income adequacy and stability for those receiving social assistance, including access to emergency funds for housing-related needs, are part of the policy mix moving forward. Ensuring that people have sufficient income is a critically important component of ensuring housing affordability in Ontario.

References

[i]The most current data available from the Ministry of Community and Social Services indicates that, in September 2014, 446,537 Ontarians received income assistance from Ontario Works and 448,515 Ontarians received income assistance from the Ontario Disability Support Program. See Ontario Social Assistance Monthly Statistical Reports for both OW and ODSP available at: http://www.mcss.gov.on.ca/en/mcss/programs/social/reports/index.aspx.

[ii]This data is current to September 2014, which is the most current data available, and is provided quarterly by staff in the Statistics and Analysis Unit of the Ministry of Community and Social Servicesupon request.

[iii]Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. (2015). Rental Market Report: Ontario Highlights. Spring. Page 8. Available at:

[iv]The maximum “shelter” portion of basic benefits for a single person on Ontario Works is $376. For a single person on ODSP, the maximum “shelter” portion is $479. See O. Reg. 134/98: General, s.42(2) at and O. Reg. 222/98: General, s.31(2) at

[v]Ibid.

[vi]See Woolley, E. (2015). “How many homeless people live with disabilities?” Canadian Observatory on Homelessness / Homelessness Hub, York University. February 13.

[vii]Mental Health Commission of Canada: Get the Facts: Website:

[viii] See, for example, Fraser, J., C. Wilkey and J. Frenschkowski. (2003). Denial by Design: The Ontario Disability Support Program. Toronto: Income Security Advocacy Centre. Available at:

[ix]Ontario. Ontario Budget (2012). Strong Action for Ontario: 2012 Ontario Budget: Budget Papers. Toronto: Queen’s Printer for Ontario. Page 44. Available at: http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/budget/ontariobudgets/2012/ch1.html#c1_strong.

[x] Ministry of Community and Social Services. (2012). News Release: Enhancing Housing and Homelessness Supports: McGuinty Government Providing Transition Funding to Help Most Vulnerable Ontarians. December 27. Available at:

[xi] Ontario. Realizing Our Potential: Ontario’s Poverty Reduction Strategy 2014-2019. Page 34. Available at:

[xii]Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. (2012). Community Homelessness Prevention Initiative Program Guidelines. Toronto: Queen’s Printer for Ontario. Page 2. Available at: http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=10065.