Transcript - Addressing Gender Equity Gaps - Expanding Housing & Support Services for Women, Non-Binary & Transgender Cty SC

Addressing Gender Equity Gaps - Expanding Housing & Support Services for Women, Non-Binary & Transgender Cty SC - March 12, 2026

Sound check. 1 2 3. Sound check. 1 2 3. to today's meeting of the expanding housing for and support services for women and non-binary non-binary and transarian gender community subcommittee meeting um of March 12th. Uh we are just waiting for one more member to get to quum today's meeting. We'll wait for about 15 minutes before uh either rescheduling the meeting or proceeding. And so we're just in that holding pattern right now. Thanks so much uh to our member joining us online and we're just going to wait for another member to join us in the room or join us virtually. Thank you. Good afternoon. As we have quorum present for today's meeting, I'd like to call this meeting of the expanding housing and support services for women non-binary and transgender community subcommittee to order. And as a reminder, if we could all switch our electronic devices to a nonaudible function. Uh first up on our agenda today is just uh approval of our agenda. We have a quick two item agenda. Uh the first is an information report that was requested via motion at our last meeting and the second is our terms of reference which I believe were deferred at our last meeting for future conversation. Um so a bit more of a discussion based meeting or a Q&A kind of opportunity today uh on our agenda. And with that if I could get a mover and a seconder to approve the agenda for today's meeting we can begin. Seeing councelor Morin Wilson and uh if I could look to Vice Chair McFousen for the Yeah, seconding that. Perfect. Thank you. Um and if no one has any amendments on the agenda, I'll just kind of pause to look around for a show of hands. Not seeing any. I'm right in the middle, so I have to do a left and a right look for for everything. Uh we can go ahead with that vote and that'll just be a show of hands. So all in favor and that carries unanimously. Uh before we can jump into uh the rest of our agenda, we just have declarations of interest. Uh are there any declarations of interest from committee members today? Seeing none, uh we're just going to go ahead to the minutes of our previous meeting. Can I please have a mover and a secondary to adopt the minutes from our previous meeting of November 3rd, 2025? Uh and is there any discussion? So if we could have two folks to move and second that. Councelor Crretch, Councelor Morin Wilson. Thank you. I think so. We also have our vice chair offering to move. If not, um but I believe if we can take whoever is the mover, a seconder on that one that was there there and then uh vote to just receive those minutes and adopt those minutes. Show of hands, please. And that carries unanimously. Thank you, everyone. So, uh, that moves us to our items of information. Uh, at our last meeting, we requested an update, particularly an update on gender-based data and policies in the Hamilton's housing and homelessness portfolio. And I'd like to call on Robin Perry, senior project manager of homelessness system integration to provide a brief overview. Thanks so much. Thank you. As you said, Robin Perry, senior project manager, and this is in response to the motion made last subcommittee meeting. So this prov um report provides an overview of how the city as service manager for housing and homelessness programs uses gender-based and intersectional data to guide uh planning, policy and funding decisions across the system. Um it highlights that gender considerations are already embedded across many programs, service standards, funding decisions through existing data systems, community consultation and partnerships with community service providers. And uh these insights help inform system planning, funding allocations, and the development of service standards that respond to the diverse needs of the community. At the same time, the report acknowledges opportunities to strengthen and formalize this work. Um and staff are currently advancing improvements such as IDEA framework and stronger engagement with people with lived experience while aligning this work with broader city initiatives including the community safety and well-being plan and the gender-based safety audit. Thank you for that. And I know there was some discussion about uh as we both reviewed the terms of reference at the last meeting, but also we're having conversations about the future of this committee, getting an understanding of what common practices are in place right now, what does the data collection regime look like given that there have been changes and a delay between this committee's meeting in the previous term and this term. Just kind of starting with that baseline. And so this report does provide that. Are there any questions or comments from committee members based on the report? Anything we'd like more information on? Um any questions that came out as a result of this or just opportunities kind of to to prompt? And yes, uh Julie, thanks so much. Um I had a question about um how it's separated out under the funding in the housing and homelessness system. There's a section for single women, single men, and then families. And I I was just wondering if there's an opportunity to identify are those families like led by women um or are they partnered because I think those women face um you know intersectionally if if women are alone with their kids and don't have another partner um and they lose their housing they could be at risk for also losing their kids and and just like considerations like that. So that was my question. Thank you. Yeah. Um so I I wanted to bring that up as well because in the one chart we see investment types by um um divvied out by single women and single men. Um and then later it mentions um we refer to the uh percentage breakdown by gender. But um the percentage breakdown by gender as you're noting it's not just single women. So women are over represented in the family sector. They are over represented in the um the um demographic category of asylum seekers and refugees. Um and about more equally represented in youth um in the youth sector, indigenous um and a couple of other sectors. But yes, there is so um women overall are not just single women where uh men are over represented in the single category. single men. There are more single men than there are men heads of household in the family sector, for example. So, yeah, it's not um we've got some categories laid out, but it's nuanced because there's so many overlapping identities there for sure. Oh, and Michelle, feel free to Sorry, my going back and forth is going to be a little bit there, so if you're jumping in, feel free to there. Thank you. Um, thank you, counselor. I'm Michelle Baird, uh, director of housing services division. Julie, the other piece to answer on your question, specifically around families and the definition of family, it can vary. So, these could be women led households and quite often they are, they might not be, they could be couples really. Um, it depends on the situation. So, it's not specifically women led households. Julie, any further questions or followup on that or up to you where we go next. Thank you. Uh and then I think Councelor Moren Wilson, you put a flag on and I'll I'll throw myself at the bottom of that list as well. Councelor Moren Wilson. Thank you. Thank you for this report. I just want to make sure I understand what it's telling me in whole and in part. Um under the the key facts there is a statement that says um um the work has largely been undertaken through issue specific and ad hoc approaches rather than a formally adopted equity framework and therefore gaps may emerge as community needs emerge. So I I am trying to better understand we're acknowledging we are bringing a gender lens on funding applications um and as a service manager but is it telling me that we don't have an overarching um gender intentional gender approach and um Is the is it telling me that as we're moving to update our homelessness action plan with the province, there's going to be some change that's coming about in the in the future as a consequence of idea or could you just put that narrative together for me? I'm sorry through the chair. Uh I can speak to that one. Greg Tedesco, manager of homelessness policy and programs. Um so currently um you are correct uh in the sense that maybe part of the easiest way to explain this is that so many of our um programs are funded through different sources and so through each of those there are different um kind of guiding policies and procedures that we have to align with. Um that's not to say that we haven't had a broad framework overall for how we're doing that. So, one example would be um in 2019 into 2020, even though we were establishing a new funding framework for um federally through reaching home and implementing that locally for uh homelessness programming, um we did include um our approach proincially as well to have a baseline standard of uh funding go to women focused programming at that time. So trying to kind of have that uh impact more than just kind of one program area or one funding area. I think one of the one of the challenges is that um at the municipal level um you know we've kind of when when we mentioned the ad hoc approach this has been uh work that we've undertaken kind of divisionally to look at the assessment to look at the calculation obviously again going back to within the federal and provincial uh guidance as well. But as we've seen more municipal funding come into homelessness systems and homelessness response as well, I think this is where now our work has shifted to again taking that broader approach. This is where um Robin mentioned the work that we're currently undertaking with the community safety and well-being plan um and the gender-based safety audit work there as well to really look at bringing forward not just an approach that we are moving forward with in housing services but something that is reflective and can be utilized um through different departments at the city as well when we're looking at not just funding decisions but engagement continuous improvement um so that we are uh working from um a consistent model for that moving forward. And so I think part of this acknowledges, you know, over the last few years, I think since the onset of COVID in in 2020, there have been a number of um kind of incremental uh increases over time and some large scale change in the housing and homelessness system. And I think right now we're kind of at that point where we're um kind of going back and looking at where are we now and where can we be doing this work moving forward. where are we making sure that there is you know equity when we're looking at not just the funding but the um interventions that we're funding and the outcomes that we're seeing and so I think this is where we're trying to connect those those dots of those again kind of individual pieces of work to something more broader as we're moving forward so it is our intent moving forward that um again we will have something that is uh I think more consistent and holistic overall that we can utilize moving forward from a gender an equity sense um to not just look at program by program but as a system overall as we're we're looking at that that connected system. Thank you. So, if I've I've heard that correctly, part of the the challenge um as a municipality is that we're having to respond to funding and funding programs that identify their own methodology and their own priorities and whether or not they give um emphasis to or even identify the gender component of housing. So, we're doing our best internally to try and um accommodate and recognize that, but at the end of the day, uh we we have to as a service manager the the determination if you will is somewhere else. And then the second part of if that's correct the second part is work is un is underway uh based on the gender-based safety audit an idea to to maybe identify across all divisions that ultimately affect the well-being and perhaps housing outcome of uh according to gender. uh that holistically tries to recognize the perhaps specific needs and circumstances uh such that even in our funding applications they are fully informed across all divisions about those realities. Do I have that correct through the chair? I would say that's that's correct. And and I would say to add on to the last point around the the gender-based safety audit work. Um as you might know, there's a link to that report um in this report as well that includes a number of action items from housing services. And I think when we identified that and worked with the team on that, I think we saw that as that opportunity to bring that forward. I think we're kind of at the at the onset of that conversation and what that could look like, but hopefully bringing forward a practical um kind of application of this moving forward to say not just again uh how do we uh approach this as one single division and as one department, but are there lessons that we can learn here that can be applied as you're saying to to other divisions, departments across the city for how we're um you know measuring impact, measuring intent and then doing that again as as we've said kind of in a consistent way um so that we can establish that baseline uh for what we see moving forward um because again I think you know it it it is it is it does vary um across the system based on those funding sources and going back to that previous example I think we've we've tried to do that in the past again by setting a baseline of kind of all of our funding for that call for applications when we launched that in 2019 into 2020 um but I think it's again getting that uh as we've seen the the system grow, the funding grow uh municipally here for investments into into homelessness services. Again, really doing our part to establish that uh framework moving forward that we can assess um our system and and what we're doing moving forward with that. So, if I have time for one more question. Yeah. So, um, as a governor andor as a future just resident, what what would I be looking for that is indicative of of this um system change coming from the corporation? Is it um is the will council be apprised of changes? Um, will we are we working or dependent on community organizations to advance those changes? Like how what will I be looking for um and be held accountable to in terms of the the gap filling the gap? Like like does it come in in the forms of informing our future budgets? like what am I looking at in order to hold us accountable for uh progress on this front in identifying and filling gaps through the chair. I think we're we're hoping to use the information provided in this report as a as a baseline and a jumping off point. So when we talk about um you know where funding is going across the system um again kind of using that as our baseline to to really get a sense of where are we now, right? where where are we now? Where are our investments going? Where are their gaps? And then be able to use that to say um moving forward within the the funding that we know is confirmed moving forward, how do we best utilize that to not just um you know not just how do we do that to to meet the needs that are being identified in the community and and also to highlight where there continue to be gaps. um because we know that uh even with the the interventions that we've outlined here and and the amount of um you know funding we have available, there still remain gaps and we've noted this through you know operations for supportive housing which has been a continued conversation that we've had here um and at other uh general issues committee as well. But so I think moving forward and as we're looking at um you know really assessing uh kind of what happens next out of our temporary um whether it's the temporary shelter expansion which includes temporary Barton Tiffany shelter and the 192 beds um we have some opportunities there to to look at um what does the future of our system look like and how do we identify that and I think that is a a core piece of this work moving forward is the gender and equity piece and applying that um to that work in a holistic IC way and so anything that we do um involving that moving forward is is something that would come to to council. Thank you. Thanks Tess. I saw your hand up there. Thank you. So first I want to thank you Robin for preparing this information. Um certainly very interested in better understanding as the city moves through this process with uh community safety well-being um and the work of the gender- based audit how the city perhaps will look at adopting a formal intersectional gender-based analysis framework that will help decision- making. Um in the report, you know, I there was there was some talk about how um decision making or yeah, how decisions are made and there was a a heavy lean on data obtained through hyphus and pity which we know is not without challenges. Um these challenges arguably have a greater impact on women and gender diverse individuals um where experiences of homelessness are less visible. Um and the data you know leverage to drive system change does not take into account the realities of hidden homelessness or housing procarity. Um, we also know within our sector that uh many of the gender-based violence shelters are supporting individuals who have who've identified their main source of entry as homelessness. And certainly, you know, we are acutely aware of the correlation between violence and homelessness, but um often within the GBB sector are supporting families who, you know, strictly are identifying homelessness and not experiences of violence. Um so again it's just another example of how the data is not always represent representative of the true demand for service and you know certainly there's been progress made with coordinated access by name priority lists um but I'm also when we when we lean on data heavily lean on data it it sort of makes me reminiscent of you know when Mary's Place was the only shelter uh for women and gender diverse individuals and this narrative in the community that there's nine beds and only a small proportion of of um the community of Hamilton experiencing homelessness. The data collection systems only capture one piece of the puzzle. So the outcome results in a system that that unfortunately cannot respond effectively and appropriately to the root realities that we're facing. So I I do have a couple questions around this. Um, and one of my my questions is in relation to uh trans and non-binary gender diverse individuals and their access. Um, Whip currently is engaged in an ongoing data project similar to to the PIT C count so we can understand demographic trends over time. Um, we're looking at understanding the accessibility needs within the shelter system as well as better capturing the needs of trans, non-binary, and gender diverse individuals experiencing home homelessness that are seeking emergency shelter. And I see that the report did indicate 2%. Um, but my my question is this. Are we as a community effectively pursuing the data and information necessary to ensure equitable access to emergency services for trans, non-binary, and gender diverse individuals in the community? And if not, if we if we don't feel that we're we're doing so effectively, how do we ensure we're collecting the relevant data necessary um to ensure that this is a priority moving forward? Thanks Tessa through the chair. There was there's a lot there. Yeah. And you may raised some excellent points. Um maybe I'll work backwards. So um there's definitely a acknowledged and recognized gap in terms of uh collecting data around uh for um trans and non-binary folks in the system. Um some of the the steps we've taken thus far are expanding drop-own boxes both within Hyus and within um standardized intake forms so that people could identify um how as they wanted to identify um that was also part of the um the pity count as well. Um we've changed contract language to be more inclusive. Um our system used to be very binary and now the language has changed in um the expectations and in the language. Um the emergency shelter standards also has an a section um for best practice in terms of um providing service for people um from the community. Um but there's definitely a lot more work to be done. Um, and that's sort of the um I think like the uh the theme of this report is as service manager it's not a oneanddone situation. It's always a continuous quality improvement cycle. So we try things we we and then we revisit revisit them. Is this working? Is this enough? Is this reflecting is the data lining up with what we qualitatively know um know to be true. Is are both of those things lining up with the people with lived experience and what they tell us to be true of their experience. So um we have done some but there's lots of room for improvement on that for sure. Um we've also looked at um you know we always so to answer your uh previous question I think it also ties into that around like the um the uh challenges of just relying on something like hyphus or the pitsy. So we attempt to also supplement that with um lived experience and we're working on strengthening our people with lived experience strategy this year. Um certainly people with lived experience are consulted on a project by basis uh project by project basis. There are um community tables um that represent people with lived experience that we consult. But again we're looking at a more um overarching corporatewide framework to say this is what we do for every project. Um we've also got um qualitative uh research. So when we when our service providers don't just provide information via hyphus, there are many many tables um where they're providing qualitative information, quantitative information and context for both of these things. Um we've got our community advisory boards that again provide more of a qualitative um and narrative experiences. And then there's the you know national and international research that you know the jurisdictional scans for other cities and what they're experiencing. So um yeah there's absolutely challenges with just relying on quantitative data or just from hyphus. It doesn't tell the whole picture but it is a contribution to what we know to be true of people accessing services. Any followup Tessa or further questions on that? Yeah sure. Um, thank you. And I would agree. I think this is a it's almost this report is a make work project in terms of what are what are our next steps. And I'm just wondering has there been any then consultation with the 2s LGBTQ community, trans, non-binary, gender diverse folks to see if that 2% is in fact an actual actual representation. And the reason why I ask this is um for us in in terms of operating shelters that's not necessarily reflective of what we might be seeing andor what we're hearing in the community. And when we opened Dorothy Day, the amount of calls we received from um individuals um who um trans non identify as trans or non-binary um who you know housing procarity is the reality out of fear of accessing the current shelter system. We know that there's a greater need here. So, I'm I'm interested if there's been any cons consultation to date that would suggest that this data isn't representative of the reality in our community. I think we can pretty confidently say it's not a representative reality of our community based on what the research says and what people are telling us about oh um you know I know hy says this but that's not reflecting the reality because of this context. Um I think that um like it's difficult because in the consultations I've done with the career community on project specific bases we weren't necessarily uh querying that specific question but um I I don't think it's the only factor driving a decision around what services do we provide to the community based on that. So, um, we're not I I don't think it it doesn't drive questions around gender when we just look at, well, what's the specific I don't we don't um we we um that's not the only information going into data decision-making. We don't just look at this, well, what's the split of gender of everyone accessing hyphus and then the money gets divided accordingly. Um and you can see that actually I think in the chart in the report around what types of things we uh provide based on gender identity and it's not a simple alignment between well this percentage are men and this percentage are women therefore you know there's the money there's that you can see that um each sector has a really rich um and diverse history in terms of its economic um investments and cult culturally what they've prioritized Um but it is definitely something we have to keep in mind that we don't fall into that danger and that gap for sure. But I think um as you can see from the chart I think it's the first table there. It's not it's not just a simple split between uh based on statistics. Yeah. Thank you. Are there any other questions from committee members on this report at this time? Not if I could just pass the chair to councelor Moren Wilson just because it's a little bit easier in the room to to do the chairing there and then I'll just ask a couple quick questions. um through you chair just trying to understand the table mostly in the report um and understanding that in level of investment uh to level of need to level of existing service provision. So in the paragraphs preceding the table it talks about what we think highle numbers are. Previous questions just said hey how confident are we in some of those you know that 2% number some of those other numbers but to some extent we have the need there in percentages and then we talk about the investment level but we're not talking about in this report at least breaking out the number of beds or the the outcomes that that funding led to as well as the existing um level there. So for example, did we do a call for expanding shelter to men's or women's specifically given an an underserving beforehand? Did this level of investment correct that? Did it not correct that? Will we be continuing to do this level of investment going forward or is that a one-time piece? Just trying to get a better overtime understanding of the outcomes relative to the level of investment if that makes sense. Uh thank you for the question. So, I'm going to take this one and go both historically and then the move forward. So, in our most recent uh CFA or call for um expansion, it was really not gender specific, but rather an urgent need for broad expansion um overall. And so it wasn't targeting a particular population although we knew um we do know that certain sectors of the population certainly need expansion but it was an urgent need to do something and do something on a temporary basis. As we go through the broader uh transformation at the system level overall we'll be very targeted and specific with respect to we're looking for this within this population this within this etc. and not just uh numbers but what does that look like and then we need to expand that not just from the homeless serving sector but if we go up into social housing for example affordable housing community housing if we look at who is on our weight list in our ETH weight list right now uh for the most part um women with women individuals with an SP status so fleeing violence uh are the individuals who being housed. So, we need to see that when we are accepting applications and moving forward with affordable developments that the affordable developments that the city is supporting are ones that are going to meet the needs of those individuals. And it's not just numbers of bedrooms or shelter beds for women, but what does that look like? Meaning a holistic community where there are community spaces, where there are opportunities for group connection. And so, it's designing the space to meet those needs. whereas you're right in our last CFA it was very much just an expansion of numbers and it was who could do it that was the sector that got the investment and so understanding through you uh acting chair that this is a bit of a work in progress are moving to like as the city's building competency and maturity we're doing things differently we're collecting data differently we're thinking about these inputs differently so we can do things differently what does that act like similar to council Maren Wilson's question I guess what do those tangibles look like so For example, in the 2024, I think housing action plan, I may have given you the wrong report name, but it was linked in the report and then it links to a data table and it walks through our plan from here's the number of rent subsidies we gave out every quarter and here's the number of beds we're trying to build and it goes from shelter to preventing homelessness, all the different ways that we're responding in more of a comprehensive way. Would the hope then be to start getting gender-based data as an intake there so we can say hey we gave out this many rent subsidies this year and there's either an optional or like you know a declaration because I don't like from the information report that's not getting entered into highest that's not forming part of these um highle summaries is it uh so for example if there was a clear gender division in the number of people applying for a rent subsidy in the city that's not going to show up in these reports here because it's not kind of captured in the shelter system for example. So just trying to understand where does this idea to capture gender in the housing sector kind of where are the bound where are the walls on that and where does this project get scope from the staff side of thing because I I I see a clear link or we have these clear tangible targets that don't have a gender- based kind of target with them or don't have that and so we have existing targets that maybe we could add that refinement to but maybe that's not where staff is thinking the next step of this looks like uh through the chair I'll take that one I guess so you're absolutely right that right now we do have gaps with respect to where gender is attached and not. And I think the more important part of that is certain programs are more effective and more appropriately targeting some groups than others. And so I think that is a takeaway for us of um where the co-op allocations go, for example, where the rent uh supplements go when folks are coming in through tenant support program, what it what is the breakdown of the individuals that are there. for some of these for example they're fairly new programs for us but we could bring back reports to council and I think that that makes good sense to come here but perhaps even broader to to demonstrate what we are doing and how we are closing that gap think oh sorry seeing there's further further answers yeah sorry one thing that I'll just add on that too is that we are um the city of Hamilton is a member of built for zero through the Canadian alliance and homelessness as well. And through that uh process and through that relationship, we are actively engaged on um data reporting with a focus on equity and inclusion um and equity deserving groups to look at again best practices across Canada um and and ways that we can um look at improving uh some of our reporting um that also notes again where some of those gaps are. Right? So when we're when we're saying uh data or information um and even lived experience engagement even the the data that we collect is lived experience engagement uh on at a baseline right so so when we're saying that I think again taking that more holistic approach to um really identifying um the strengths of that information we have again noting those gaps and where we might need to to dig a little bit deeper um with some of that but just wanted to highlight that is an active conversation that we are um participating in now um to to help inform some of those conversations moving forward as well. I also just wanted to add that we do have equity targets within uh most of our housing allowance and rent sub programs and that sort of thing. So it's not not there but I just think like corporatewide it doesn't have to be there but I think in practice uh gender equity and an equity lens is pretty much it's pretty strongly in the DNA of the homeless serving sector. Yeah. No, thank you for that. And I think wherever it's possible to share both the statistical data, even if there's errors or guesswork or some, hey, this is maybe not the most accurate thing ever, but also the outcomes that we're looking for as well as the current state of affair. I think those three things together paint a complete picture. Otherwise, it's really hard to do any comparison work if not all three of those things are in the same picture. Um, and I see there's more. I do just have one other question, so I happy to finish this one off. Yeah. Okay. Um, and I think what I'm saying is very much gonna that's the piece of it we were just chattering here to say that we have a lot more data I think and I I know we do in fact than we share um both with the community and with partners as well as up through council and through committees. Uh I think we both have data with respect to where our programs are serving but also what the need is. If I think about uh ATTH for example, we have not broke we have not brought a breakdown of the ATTH data to council. We all come forward to say what our list looks like. But yes and so um on our access to housing list we would come for example annually we come forward to let you know this is how many households on the list. However we don't break down for you what those demographics look like. Who are those individuals and how are they finding themselves on the list? Are they overhoused, underhoused? Housing uh is precarious for them right now. To Tessa's point, we have over 400 families, for example, that have SP status flagged on their ATTH. So, these are for the most part women led families or women as individuals who are fleeing violence. And so, we're looking for opportunities for them. So I think we can do a better job I would say of bringing forward what the community need looks like as well as the programs that we offer and the data we have with respect to who's being supported. What does that look like from a metrics perspective? Th Thank you. Really appreciate that. And I think just best practices have been talked about a lot and best practices I think have been talked about a lot. Ensuring that the service being provided is meeting the needs of uh individuals who maybe accessing it with diverse need like whatever a non-standard kind of approach that service delivery. I also though think we're learning about best practices in a different way. We're learning that some of these programs better respond to the needs of someone who's experiencing procarity in housing. Um so for example, housing with supports is the conversation that comes up the most common where we can clearly say that housing with supports is a lot more successful than a shelter bed in a congregate setting. Like we that's a very we know that there's different levels of funding available both through the municipality but also through seniors levels of government, nonprofits, grants, etc. to do those different things. So it's not just what's the best program but it's what's the program that we can afford is also a part of this or where's the funding available and then there's what's the community need. Um I'm seeing in the table in the report again it seems that and even talks about this a little bit in the kind of discussion above that the supports for women in recent years are more longer term typically um and then within the men's sector there's more short-term supports if that's a fair summary. And I I guess I'm wondering if that trend could be spoken about not just in terms of how did we get there, but what are the implications of that for data um and advocacy around that data? So, for example, if what we're learning is that we provide lots and lots of um shelter beds for men, but there's not as much in the women's sector. Is that saying we need to increase the shelter beds in the women's sector so there's parity? Or is that saying, hey, we have a solution that's working over here, but it costs more, it has different outcomes. like how do we beds and outcomes and not make sure that we're comparing things that make sense to compare and not just doing a bedtoed comparison. Um so to answer your question counselor what you're seeing there is that we have we have solutions that we know that work. You're absolutely right and what is being reflected is the large number of beds. So from a supportive housing uh standpoint for example or transitional housing we have been able to support that at both the YW.CA and through Dorothy Day good sheepard we have our other supportive housing project being king William um smaller number of beds and mixed but you're seeing that it appears we have more solutions or more long-standing solutions for women. It happens to be that those are our two larger supportive housing transitional living projects right now. Those projects could be very meaningful and have impact for males as well. Um we're just it we struggle as you know in finding support dollars to support men to support anyone in support of housing quite frankly. Thank you. And I think the just the last thing for me is that is I was actually talking about it from the opposite where we see yes maybe that there's an underinvestment in one area but we see that we're say there's more shelter beds available in the men's sector and we don't look at this problem and say oh well let's just get a parody or like the par need if we have solutions that are working that are more long-term that have supports that cost different amounts. So appreciating that um data piece, but just wanting to also make sure that we're not learning the other lesson as well um that oh we should be seeking par at all costs when sometimes par in outcome is different. Um I'm happy to take back the chair because I think a couple other folks were raising their hand. Um cancer crutch, were you trying to jump in there? So my questions are going to be altogether different. I think I'm trying to pick up a little bit on what other people have been saying, but I go to the gaps and analysis in terms of the gaps in the mitigation analysis, trying to understand that portion of it. I mean, this maybe bleeds into the next item on our agenda. I don't want to try and steal the excitement for that, but I um rather practically and bluntly there's a subcommittee called the community benefits protocol subcommittee and the work it does is basically developing a community benefits protocol for the city. In part when this committee was struck, it was about around a need for there to be a focus on this kind of work and then we've changed the way we do things at the city to some extent now. So there is somewhat more of a focus on this kind of work, but we don't have a concrete plan that set out sets out the things we need to do, the gaps, how we're going to do it with timing, that kind of thing. Like I think that's the work that this committee needs to do is to be able to to develop something that says, okay, this is embedded here in in a process outside this subcommittee that um eventually will just have an iterative function, right? It'll come back. we'll have the kind of data we need because the questions you ask are important questions but they need answers like if we do have we are serving X percentage of women non-binary folks in the system but the funding is proportional that that should be a measure of of what's going on and how the funding works and we should be reporting that information publicly. So I think there's lots of data we have we can be reporting on. We should be tracking this year to year and then reporting back on where the gaps continue to be. What are the measures of our success and and how are we doing, right? Um that's ultimately I think what needs to happen here and a and a way to prioritize this work. So what I hear I think loosely you're saying right is that we do some of this work. We have some ways of doing this. We are tracking this. This is a priority to some to some extent. But that's kind of it where we're at it right now in terms of it's it's part of the language we use but we don't have a formalized um system of evaluation understanding measuring um and then reporting back that would allow us to perhaps say okay this committee's consulted on that work we've done a good job and now we're going to pass it off to coming back as part of a regular housing services report. So I guess I'm trying to understand like this leaves us in a bit of a muddy space right now is my point. Right. So where do we go from here in terms of trying to get something where it satisfies the purpose of this committee which is about prioritizing expanding housing for that group of individuals. Right? So I guess I'm that's my my stuck point here is I think we've gotten a ways but I think we have like to craft something that we can hold on to, right? That isn't just this report. what does that look like? You know, so I'm just looking to you to ask that. I think that's the that's the the crux of the issue for me is we do have a plan of work to do. Um what is that plan? How do we fund it? What does it look like? What are the time horizons and so on? Um you see what I'm saying? Like we need something concrete. So how can we even get that? I'm not sure if I'm if I'm understanding correctly, but we we do have those plans um as Greg was mentioning earlier to the individual funders. So like for our federal envelope of money, for a provincial envelope of money um and you know um they tend to be five-year cycles. They have priority populations. They have outcomes that we need to report monthly and we are doing that work and we have done that work. I think what you're asking for is for an overview of all those things all together in one report. Here are the statistics, the outcomes and and how it's all balanced. Is is that the question? That's part of it. But but but it's that's part of it, right? And so how can we how can we advance the work, but what is the city's responsibility? Like I could put it to you this way and I don't care what the federal government has to say. We're the municipality, right? Like I could put you that way. Like having that statistics are really really important. But like what are we doing here to say okay identify the gaps um advocate for the gaps um what are our own standards I guess what I'm trying to say what are our standards right because just because the federal government says these are the standards that we use when we fund you for a specific housing project like who cares um that's helpful information to have but it doesn't identify how the city of Hamilton understands this to be a priority piece of work and even if what we recognize is that it's constantly falling short because of the way that the other things are defined or because there's not enough funding available available or because of the metrics, the way that we develop housing. I think it's more transparent about that. So, I'm saying I think we need to have a set of standards and a plan that we're constantly coming back to and then a reporting that we're doing on that. So, yes and no. Yeah. So, like the 10-year um housing and homelessness action plan. Yeah. I'm not talking about I mean that's not for me to say, Michelle. So I think what I'm hearing you ask for and I am thinking about it like what is this because you're right that we are doing some of this work. Uh so the housing and homelessness action plan is in draft at this point and it is in a renewal place right now. I don't think that's the that's it. That's a high level this is where we're going. This is where we want what we want to achieve. What I think what we need is an agreed upon set of metrics with respect to what we are evaluating, but more importantly a decision-making framework when we're making investments across that housing spectrum. How are we making those investments with the uh with using a gender lens quite frankly with respect to the work understanding what the need is, what works and why where and then applying a a framework when we're making decisions to evaluate projects to make sure that we're considering that through it and then reporting that and why we're doing things in the way we are in alignment with what that framework would look like when we're coming forward to council. Yeah. Like I'm not saying we have to have a protocol like the community benefits protocol subcommittees but maybe we do right to have some kind of a document something to refer to something that provides a framework because I think what I think we're how what happens a lot is the work we do in the housing sector especially in this part of the housing is dictated by the levels of government to us. If we have something that we've developed here around how to support this work going forward, then we're able to speak back to those levels of government and when these things happen, we come back to the council and say, "Hey, we asked for this or this was what we proposed as our value set or this is the framework that we provided along with our our proposal. This is what the federal government gave back to us. This is what they're going to fund. Here remains the gap." Now, council has a choice. Do we want to fund the gap here at the local level? Can we not fund afford to fund the gap at the local level? What does that look like? And as time goes on, how do we track that? How's that gap widener or get smaller? What other measures are we taking to address it? But if we can't see that, right, or have a sense of that and prioritize that work about how we can expand the support because I think everyone agrees that there are potentially a disproportionate number of individuals who are needing attention, right? So that disproportionality is always a metric where we're working with, right? There's not enough resources and there's a disproportionate number of individuals who require the help um that may not be able to get it. So, how are we showing that all happening at one in one place? Because I think the purpose of this committee is to try and expand, right? Try and provide more. Um, but if this committee can't do it, okay, uh, individually as a committee, we can't be doing that operationally as a subcommittee, that might be tricky to do. Okay, cool. Um, what does it look like as an exercise to track it? Why does it look like as an exercise to bring those asks to council, right, and to prioritize that work? So, I think this report gets us some part of the way to that. But I think that the main in my mind anyways mandate of what we're trying to do here is needing needs some more formalization and needs something that um comes from I think what Tessa was saying right talking to people finding a bit more out about what people need um and developing something here that's got that's a foundational something foundational we can rely on. I know that's going to be a big piece of work or maybe a significant piece of work and that's okay. that may be something we have to undertake though as a city is to go out and do that work and consult and do that work. Come back here, get some feedback from people on it and come up with something that we feel good about. Um, and then people can say, okay, maybe this is hard to do at a subcommittee level, but we've got something that we feel good about that we can pass over to this other committee and the committee can carry on that work. See my point? because I think that I'm just expressing the anxieties people are having and um looking at terms of reference and looking at this report and seeing all the kinds of things that are here and thinking hm like what what would work for us to be able to make a big leap forward here and to make some progress. Yes, we're we're completely in agreement to do it. We're actually now talking about how how do we make this happen? So definitely need it able to commit to making something happen. we'll come back with what does that timeline look like and what's involved. Yeah, maybe now is not the mo time to put emotion forward, but the point is I'm just I'm just talking. So now maybe is not the time to put emotion forward, but um because I don't want to try and create language on the floor. I don't think it's really a a charming time for anyone. And so I won't do that. But I think it's it's worth worth thinking about between now and the next time we call the subcommittee or maybe I can put this forward before it comes to the next uh level up. I can put something together and work with the clerk on what does it look like to report back and work with you on that. What language does it look like to report back on a plan because I just feel like we've been having a conversation as sort of a circle for years at the subcommittee now and we haven't had a clear point of moving any work forward to this point like we're having a conversation here but we need to be moving somewhere and how do we move anywhere forward and I think this might be one way of doing that. So I'll leave it there. Thank you. I see there's other hands. I'll just say just for folks listening, we're getting into a bit of a a discussion on the terms of reference. So, I have uh a response from councelor Crutch's kind of prompt and then I have councelor Moren Wilson on the list. Going to see if we can get everyone else's kind of comments on this information report. The conversation's kind of becoming about the terms of reference. So, I'm going to suggest you might want to receive this and put the terms of reference on the floor. So, if you do want more kind of questions or comments, just making sure that now would be a good time to raise your virtual hand or flag just so we can get that speakers list done because when the speakers list runs out, I'm going to suggest we we switch reports that we're formally talking about. But before we get there, we have a couple more steps. So, go ahead. Uh I'll just uh through the chair just briefly say that in the spring we are also bringing uh our annual ending chronic homelessness report to the general issues committee. Um that one does take uh again like a very uh broad perspective of our uh all of our funded programs and the outcomes there. Um, and again, maybe this is leading too far into the next conversation, but I think there's an opportunity to uh for this uh subcommittee to potentially also review that information and then look at um some of those key areas where we might look at uh and this group might look at kind of digging deeper into um whether it's gender specific information um through that as well. So, just wanted to flag that that report is coming forward in the spring uh to general issues committee as well. Councelor Moren Wilson. Thank you. I really appreciate where councelor Cretch took us because I I think it ties together um the string of comments um respectfully that I that I have heard which is what should we be looking for? How are we measuring success? How do we know um um how do we know as a a corporation that all of our funding asks and our policies and actions to implement are informed by this? And I guess that was what I was struggling with is I have full faith that you folks are doing it. What I was am less certain about is there's an intentionality uh corporately um to inform um our our housing work and our our homelessness action plan. And um I think anytime we can consistently report on statistics um to show uh variability of circumstance and need that necessarily uh for me uh as a single governor helps validate other gender specific uh discussions whether mean whether it applies to public transit uh whether it applies to public space design Um, so I think it would be fundamentally important to have and we are housing we are having a housing master plan or or something that's coming forward um soon. So uh I guess I would I would just reiterate um the need for something formal uh for for us to move forward with that is intentional by design and in language. Um, thanks. Just doing a look around to see if there's anyone else who wants to comment or ask a question on this information report. Uh, if not, I do believe I forgot to get a mover in a seconder at the beginning. So, I'll do that now. Um, if there's a mover and a seconder to receive this information report. Um, thanks Councelor Crretch and thank you Tessa. Uh all in favor. This is just a show of hands vote to receive that information and that carries unanimously. Thank you everyone. Uh that brings us to our next item on the agenda which is I believe our terms of reference. Um and before I start the discussion this time I'll get a mover and second. In fact, why don't we use the same mover and seconder that we just had if that's all right um to put this on the floor. Um, and yeah, I'll I'll entertain some discussion on this. We have started a conversation about terms of reference. And kind of to recap, we we were a bit of a late start to this committee. We've talked about this a bit before. The purpose of having these terms of reference, typically they're just approved at the first meeting of a committee. We realize that we're having our first meeting near the end uh or like near the end of this council cycle and not necessarily having a chance to maybe do a full four years of work. And so we delayed uh approving the terms of reference to kind of get going in case receiving sorry receiving the terms of reference um as they are approved by council and they are our terms of reference in case we wanted to have a chance to kind of have a meeting or two first and reflect on some edits given that we won't be maybe having 20 meetings over a term of council. We may be having somewhere between 3 to seven. Um and so just trying to get some experience before commenting on those terms of reference. So we don't have to come to a final decision today. I think this is something that if we're going to make changes, we should do within this year. But I think this is a good time to hear feedback and if folks are ready to maybe suggest a direction. Certainly would be good to hear that if folks have questions or want to kind of have a bit more of a discussion about what they think is strong or what's maybe lacking. Uh this is this is a bit of a discussion item um with the hope of informing some recommendations on the terms of reference for our next term of council because I think we're all we're all on the same page that we do want to tweak them is I think what we've heard. We we got to that understanding. Um, and with that, I'm just going to kind of pause to see if there's anyone who has had a chance to maybe have some questions or thought, thinks there's anything they're really happy that's there, maybe thinks there's any changes they'd like to see made. And I'm happy to maybe pass the chair to councelor Moren Wilson for a second. I'm I might jump off just seeing a pause. Um so for me I think what I read from the terms of reference is this is a place where staff uh doing data collection and operational work can meet with community members specifically uh the women uh the women's housing planning collaborative was the identified stakeholder and community members with lived experience. This is meant to be a place where those kind of three group as well as counselors kind of those three iterations the city both staff and council uh community members doing this work and community members with lived experience all get to come together to have these conversations about how we're doing now that we've started doing more uh the conversation has become a little bit a level of more meta not what we're doing but how are we deciding what to do how are we allocating resources how are we making these decisions that kind of methodology piece that councelor Cretch was talking about like how how are we informing these decisions but also where does the information go? Should we have a dashboard? How does this get made public? Is this a yearly report? Does this get done quarterly? Is it done on project specific reporting? Um, or is it worth having a highle report in a city that's declared a, for example, gender-based violence emergency? Should there be a different level of reporting with some of this information? So, to me, I think the terms of reference should better focus in on that data collection piece. Um, and I think from what I'm hearing is it it does blur that kind of frankly that operational line where staff are making decisions about how to gather this data and how to inform it by having community members come in and say here's my experience about how that data has been collected to inform that kind of traditionally operational decision. And so how to clearly define that space that's a little bit different than other subcommittees where there is maybe a bit more um sector specific knowledge coming in that we're hearing from the folks on the committee coming in. They're working in services, for example. They're not kind of coming as a broad community member with a concern. They're coming with very sector specific knowledge and providing comments about how we do something as a city as opposed to what we're doing. And so, how do we scope the terms of reference to make sure the right people are around the table to inform those discussions, but also because the discussion is a little bit maybe more deliberative or consultation based, what should the terms of reference be to enable that? We're having a broader conversation about, for example, community leaison groups. um is the structure of a subcommittee the right structure to inform that consultation or as a round table or something you know just wanting to put that out there. So for me the data collection piece is what's come out as top of mind and the focus of this committee. Um and I think that should be really front and center in any terms of reference and that collaboration piece being how do we want that collaboration to actually happen is I think something that the terms of reference could be a lot clearer on uh to help inform that work. uh take back the chair and seeing that prompted some things for other folks. Canceler crutch, I'm not going to say anything earthshattering here, but just that I agree. I think that it might be useful for us to have an outcome for this committee and to make a decision about whether this committee is something that should be a long-standing item or like other subcommittees that should have a term of work and then kind of wrap up um at some point. Like should there be a purpose to having this committee going on forever? Um, and that's fine if it is, if there's a body of work for it to do. But right now, um, I don't like like this is the same issue that we kind of faced, even though I know the name was different with the downtown task force versus the downtown subcommittee. We changed it. It's more effective now in terms of doing that. This is what we're doing with the community benefits protocol subcommittee. It has a end goal in mind. Then when end goal is is met, the subcommittee will dissolve and we might get something like just the community benefits subcommittee to an enact protocol that might come out of that. So just looking to to think that through as a as a what is the end goal of this now that we've been at this for a couple of years now few years now I would say uh I think that it's important to to check in and say are we making progress are we doing something is there a goal are we do we have an exit plan do we have a longevity and sustainability plan so I think it's important to check in on those things I don't have an answer for those but I'm just saying that I think that's what I see here thank you and really appreciate hearing from folks on this one Julie and then I see Tessa as Great. Thanks. I just wanted to chime in and say that I agree uh about the data piece, but then also about the outcome piece. I feel like it would really focus the work of the committee and then if there was a specific outcome that could inform um you know the citizen committees people that make sure those right people are at the table too. So um thank you. Thanks for that. Uh Julie Tessa, thank you. I'm newer to the committee so I can't really speak to the history and and my understanding is that um there was a a a stop in it there was a hiatus in this committee and so I think that there is work to be done but I would agree in terms of um needing an outcome needing to a little bit more of some practical tangible goals um perhaps a work plan um so we can focus the work and and see momentum in progress because there's nothing worse than a committee coming together and just sort of um becoming very uh secicular and um not seeing any sort of momentum. So I would support uh developing a work plan if you will um with some very tangible outcomes. Thank you for that. Uh Robin, uh this is more of a word of encouragement just because I was around for the last subcommittee um that they uh did put their uh outcome towards expanding supports for gender and non-binary folks in the homeless sector and they did get everything that came forward to the subcommittee was ultimately funded and it was expanded on parody in a variety of areas um comparatively within the emergency shelter system. So just a word of encouragement that they were able to accomplish many goals in the I think the only four or five times they met last session. So just wanted to raise that. Thank you very much for that. I'm just going to pause to see any hands up. So I think there's a bit of a piece here where uh our staff who are supporting us need direction if we'd like further information to make this decision. So if there's future reports we want or we want feedback on where it would be helpful from staff's perspective to get insights um we need to ask for that in some way shape or form that's formal. But we as committee members also have to think about kind of where are the gaps that we also see and where do we would like to see as maybe future committee members in a future term of council or folks carrying on this work for the next few months and then transitioning it. What is what is that work plan actually looking like and bringing our own ideas to that as well. we can have another meeting to have that discussion. But I do think this is one of the meetings where there might be some homework to do ahead of time. Whether that's over email thinking about some things or coming with a list of ideas because if we don't ask for a report to come, it won't be there. And if we don't bring our own kind of generated ideas, they they also won't be there ready for that meeting. Um and so it is sometimes important to do some of that thinking ahead ahead of the meeting so we can come in and have a deliberation or a discussion on a choice or a decision. Do folks have a thought on maybe some timing? I know there was a conversation about future reporting to council about uh the housing I apologies with the namings here but the housing response uh more more broadly coming in Q3. Is there a gender breakdown that maybe makes sense to kind of come to this as a subcommittee around then where there could be another information report to tie this back into or is there not a report cycle kind of from the staff side of thing that it makes sense to tie a meeting to and it's better done just based on the terms of reference timing. So just for clarity the ending chronic homelessness report that's coming back is actually coming back in spring 26. So, in the next couple months, in my head, I'm like, what quarter is that, too? Um, so that will be coming shortly. We could look at bringing something here with a more detailed breakdown of the data that's in that report. I think would make sense if other folks are interested in that and that makes sense. I think again having an information item on the agenda and a discussion of the terms of reference like having a conversation about data in practice might inform a conversation about data in theory is I I think the hope or seeing the actual data that you're working with at a point in time um the committee has a better sense of what what the tools are to work with. So that would be my I guess gentle suggestion to the committee is thinking about a a meeting around the timing of that report around the timing of that if that's possible to come forward with some additional information and then we also do some homework ahead of time as committee members regarding terms of reference and come ready for that discussion with some goals as well. Well, and if folks want to circulate some comments or ideas ahead of that meeting, that's also possible to do. Um, if there's something that you're reading or looking at or wanting to have people with some familiarity with before that conversation. Just going to pause there, see if there's any committee members or comments from staff about. I'm not trying to force a meeting sooner than folks are ready to have one, but if there is a report coming forward already, I do think having data presented is is somewhat useful. And just for clarity, our plan was to bring the report to GIC in June. So ideally like this meeting would be before that if possible. Does a committee members comfortable with our next meeting being targeted in May or June? Yeah, that I'm seeing some nods. Generally speaking, uh we can work with our clerk's team to work with everyone's calendar to see what's available. I I think if we if we are not able to meet that GIC and we go a couple weeks after, I personally don't think it's the end of the world. Appreciating that it would be best, but if people's calendars get that, we're just not trying to create a headache for anyone. Um, I'll um we do have a mover in a second to receive the terms of reference. I haven't seen a lot of hands jump on the speakers list, so I'm not trying to cut things short, but I we will have to have a vote on those terms of reference eventually. And then I don't believe we have a ton else left on our agenda for today beyond our Obl. So I see our uh clerk trying to jump in because I missed something. Um I'm just going to suggest through you uh uh Chair Wilson that um the report back in Q2 with the um information that's going to G GIC or summary of that information and the data information on the housing strategy that you bring put on the floor now of a motion to direct staff to report back here in Q2 so that that can be added to their work plan formally. Would you recommend receiving the terms of reference and then putting that right on the floor? It doesn't matter which order you put put it in to be honest. Sure. Uh why don't we start with the terms of reference just because those are hanging over us. I think we had councelor Cretch and Tessa as our mover and secondary for those and that's just a motion to receive this. Uh these are terms of reference right now and then we know that we're going to have a discussion about what we might make any recommended changes at our next meeting. And so if everyone's in favor that's just a show of hands vote. If you're in favor, oppose now. And seeing a unanimous hearing to receive that item. Um, and then if I could get a mover and a seconder for future report back or I can step out of the chair and move that, but it might just be simpler. Councelor Moren Wilson's happy to move and councelor Cretch happy to second. um that again my apologies for not holding for not holding proper nouns but the ending homelessness I believe uh Q2 report uh be brought to a Mayor June uh meeting of this subcommittee as would be the motion moved by councelor Moren Wilson and seconded by councelor Crretch. I'll just pause to make sure we're all good with staff and our clerk's team that that's an okay motion and the language is captured. So just to clarify, is it the the same report that you're wanting to bring forward here or So the report that will come forward here is a more detailed breakdown of the data that will be shared through the ending chronic homelessness report is my understanding that. Yeah. And just while that's getting written out, does anyone have any questions about that direction at all? No. Okay. Would you like to share? I think uh would f are folks comfortable with that motion having the May June meeting and having that data there. We can have it on the screen or no I'm seeing lots of nods. I think we're all good. Uh moved by councelor Morin Wilson, seconded by councelor Kretch. All in favor? Uh show of hands and that carries unanimously. Thank you everyone. Um we now are moving on to item eight on our agenda which is uh amend our amendments to our outstanding business list. So, these are items that are considered complete and needing to be removed. Uh, the report that we received as item 7.1 uh has now been received and it is complete. Can I have a mover and a seconder to remove that from the OBL? Thank you, Councelor Crutch and uh Vice Chair McPadent. Uh, and all in favor? Show of hands there. That's everyone. That carries unanimously. going to pause now as we're nearing the end of our agenda just to see if there's any motions or notices of motions from committee members. Any conversations they'd like to start for future meeting seeing shakes ahead. With that, that brings us to the end of our meeting. Um there being no further business, this meeting is adjourned at 2:13. Thank you everyone for making some time to have these discussions today. Uh and excited for our next meeting to kind of continue that conversation and make some recommendations with respect to those terms of reference. Thank you all for your participation.

Full Transcript