View
5
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
1
Bringing It Together
A Gathering on Aboriginal Homelessness in Edmonton
Final Report
Four Winds & AssociatesApril 12/2005
2
Overview of Workshop
On March 22 and 23/2005 individuals and agencies were invited to a “gathering” at Polish Hall to discuss issues related to Abo-
riginal homelessness in Edmonton. The workshop was hosted by the Edmonton Aboriginal Committee on Housing (EACH) and sponsored by the Edmonton Joint Planning Committee on Housing (EJPCOH). Métis Elder Alvena Strasbourg provided leadership and guidance over the two days.
BUDGET
Budget for rentBudget for powerBudget for phoneBudget for cableBudget for groceriesBudget. Budget. Budget.
Didn’t have to budgetlivin’ in agarbagebin.
Betty NordinPhoenix: Hope from the Ashes (Pg. 10)
CHANGES
Got to change my waysor I’m going to dieon the streets.Getting too old living like this.Getting up in some back ally,on a river bank or a fl ea bag hotel,just doesn’t cut the mustardfor me anymore.Scrounging for food, standingin soup line, going through garbage bins.There has got to be a better way of living.Getting up in the morningto see my parole offi cer or I’ll be in trouble again.Never had to live with a clock before.Now I’m always late.Eating in the morning surefeels good.Especially when the food comes frommy own cupboards.Now I’ve got clean clothes andsheets to sleep on.
Man life is good.
Betty Nordin Phoenix: Hope from the Ashes (Pg. 5)
3
Aboriginal Homelessness Trends
The workshop was organised against the backdrop of several notable trends which reveal the seriousness and complexity of Aboriginal homelessness:
1. By all accounts, the rate of homelessness is increasing in Edmonton. The Oc-tober 2004 homeless count in Edmonton identifi ed 2192 individuals as being homeless. Thirty-seven percent (37%) of the individuals identifi ed were Abo-riginal and sixty-six percent (66%) of the Aboriginal individuals were observed to be living on the street;
2. Aboriginal people are over-represented in the homeless population in Edmon-ton. Aboriginal people only represent about four percent (4%) of the total population of the city, but they comprise about forty percent (40%) of the homeless population;
3. Although Aboriginals comprise only a small percentage of Edmonton’s popula-tion, their numbers are rapidly increasing. Between 1996 and 2001, the Abo-riginal population in Edmonton increased by twenty percent (20%), compared to growth of the general population of thirteen percent (13%). Edmonton has the second highest number of Aboriginal people of major Canadian cities, after Winnipeg;
4. The concentration of Native people in Edmonton is part of a larger migration of Aboriginal people from reserves and rural settings to urban centres. In 2001 about fi fty-seven percent (57%) of the Aboriginal population resided in urban areas. Twenty-four percent (24%) lived on reserve and nineteen percent (19%) lived in rural off-reserve areas; and
5. In spite of the size of the urban Aboriginal population, public policy discus-sions have focused almost exclusively on the rural reserve-based population. Much of this hesitancy is rooted in confl icting views about governmental re-sponsibilities for urban Aboriginal people. Because no one level of government has assumed primary responsibility for urban Aboriginal people, “gaps have developed in the policy landscape.”
Purpose and Format of Workshop
Over the course of the two-day workshop, eighty-eight (88) participants—representing forty-fi ve (45) agencies and three levels of government (Federal, Provincial and Mu-nicipal)—discussed the pressures impacting homeless Aboriginal individuals and the agencies that serve them.
The workshop was structured as a series of small group refl ections which moved the analysis systematically from an exploration of the challenges related to the problem of homelessness to the identifi cation of opportunities for specifi c remedial actions.
4
The format was chosen in recognition of the fact that homelessness is a multifaceted problem that represents a complex interaction of individual and systemic factors. The hope was that the workshop would help break the larger problem of Aboriginal home-lessness into smaller issues—some of which may be actionable.
A deep appreciation of the human dimensions of homelessness was at the heart of the workshop—namely that homelessness can be best understood from the perspective of those experiencing poverty and inadequate housing. To this end, the term “pres-sures” was used throughout the workshop to signify the specifi c and tangible nature of the forces bearing down on individuals and institutions. Pressures have sources. They can be “felt” and “named” precisely. They have human consequences.
Five key questions were explored during the workshop:
1. What are the pressures on homeless Aboriginal individuals?2. What are the pressures on our agencies and how are these pressures impacting
our ability to respond to homeless people?3. What are the upstream sources of these pressures?4. How can we start pushing back on these pressures?5. How can we separate the problem of Aboriginal homelessness into winnable
issues that we can act on—either alone or by co-operating with others?
Participants identifi ed a range of pressures impacting homeless Aboriginal individuals and the agencies that serve them. Discussions led to the frank and forthright exami-nation of the challenges facing agencies in their efforts to cope with homelessness.
Some of these pressures were seen as coming from outside of the agencies (exter-nal pressures), that is, from the larger socio-economic and political system. Other pressures were seen as existing within agencies and between agencies. These internal pressures had impacts on the morale of staff as well as on the spirit of cooperation between agencies. As one participant said: “We’re too busy to meet…we’re not talk-ing.”
A wealth of information was gathered over the course of the two-day workshop. Three main themes emerged as points of concern, as well as, opportunities for future action:
• Funding• Co-operation (Working Together)• Availability, Accessibility and Appropriateness of Services
The following draft report provides a summary of the workshop and of the key fi nd-ings from the break-away and plenary sessions. The agenda and the PowerPoint pres-entations that formed the backbone of the workshop are attached as appendices. In addition, a complete list of fi ndings from the small group refl ections is also provided in table form.
5
Summary of Day One March 22/2005 – 1 PM to 4 PM
Day One of the workshop provided an opportunity for the agencies dealing with Aboriginal homelessness to refl ect on the dimensions of the problem of homelessness, as well as, on the progress achieved since the previous Aborigi-
nal Gathering held in July 2003.A number of service organizations including Amisk Housing, Cunningham Place,
Bent Arrow Traditional Healing Society and Ben Calf Robe provided brief presenta-tions of accomplishments achieved over the past year. Presentations were also made by the Edmonton Aboriginal Committee on Housing (EACH), Edmonton Joint Plan-ning Committee on Housing (EJPCOH), the Edmonton Housing Trust Fund (EHTF) and the Urban Aboriginal Strategy (UAS).
In addition to these presentations, participants were given the opportunity to break into small groups to discuss:
• What they accomplished at the working level;• What they did in concert with other agencies; and • What they would have liked to do but could not.
Key Findings
Workshop participants provided numerous examples of success in: (a) providing services (such skill development and transitional support); (b) creating new hous-ing; and (c) forming cooperative relationships. Despite these indicators of progress, participants also identifi ed several signifi cant gaps in service that they were unable to address (See Appendix 1 for a more comprehensive list). These included:
• A lack of settlement and support services for Aboriginal individuals coming to the City from rural areas;
• Lack of housing (especially transitional and supportive);• Lack of specifi c programs and/or policies at the Provincial level that address
Aboriginal homelessness (Policy vacuum);• Lack of involvement from First Nations, Inuit and Métis leaders in addressing
the problem of Aboriginal homelessness;• A lack of continuity in program funding (short-term versus long-term fund-
ing);• A lack of co-operation between agencies because of a competitive environ-
ment for funding; and• A lack of culturally appropriate and accessible services.
6
Summary of Day Two March 23/2005 – 9 AM to 4 PM
Day Two of the workshop focused the collective energies of the participants on the human dimensions of homelessness. The aim was to look “beyond the numbers” to the specifi c and tangible pressures bearing down on homeless
individuals and on the agencies that serve them. The clear identifi cation of these forces was essential because “you can’t solve what you can’t name.”
To this end, the tone of the day was set by the opening remarks of Métis Elder Alvena Strasbourg who challenged representatives from both the Aboriginal and the larger community to identify clearly the upstream sources of the homelessness problem and to acknowledge their collective responsibility for addressing the situa-tion. Her words were mirrored by Mr. Allen Benson (Chief Executive Offi cer, Native Counselling Services of Alberta) who made a brief presentation which pointed out that a lack of funding is not solely responsible for the homelessness crisis. Instead, the problem is rooted in the competition for funding by organisations and by the absence of effective partnerships between organisations. As Mr. Benson said: “It is our prob-lem…not a government one.”
A presentation of powerful black-and-white photographs (by Pieter de Vos, Jr.) depicting individuals living in poverty added to the sense of urgency. The poetry of Betty Nordin—a Métis woman who was previously homeless—provided a poignant counterpoint to the images.
Key Findings
The themes that emerged in Day One were expanded upon in Day Two of the work-shop as participants refl ected on the pressures related to Aboriginal homelessness in a step-by-step and targeted fashion.
In small refl ection groups, participants engaged in a systematic four-stage analy-sis of Aboriginal homelessness that included an examination of:
1. The pressures on homeless Aboriginal people;2. The pressures on agencies;3. The upstream sources of the pressures on homeless individuals and the agen-
cies that serve them; and4. The opportunities to push back on these pressures—either alone or in coopera-
tion with others.
7
STAGE 1: Pressures on Homeless Individuals
Workshop participants identifi ed several pressures im-pacting homeless individuals (See Appendix 2 for a compre-hensive list of pressures). These included:
• Culture shock/migration pressures• Stigma and discrimination• Isolation and marginalisation• Threats to personal safety• Lack of resources to meet basic needs (food, shelter
and clothing)• Health concerns including addictions and mental
health issues• Barriers to the access of services• Poverty and unemployment• Lack of skills/education• Cultural barriers including language barriers
I think that is oneof the reasons people are so afraid to do something…to make a change for themselves. Because once you’ve had something good and you lose it,it’s the most horrible, horriblefeeling to end up with nothing…after you’ve had everything.
Homeless Individual
8
STAGE 2: Pressures on Agencies
Participants engaged in a candid discussion of the forces bearing down on their agencies—and thereby affecting their ability to provide responsive services to homeless people. These pressures fell into two broad interrelated categories—pressures external to agencies and pressures internal to agencies (See Appendix 3 for a comprehensive list of pressures).
External pressures included:
• Lack of funding and increased competition for limited resources
• Government policies• Project-based funding creates a lack of continuity
in services• Rigid funding criteria and reporting requirements• Legislative barriers and bureaucratic complexity
(red tape)• Lack of community support• Lack of housing and essential services—the level of
need exceeds the available resources• Lack of effective partnerships• Lack of coordination and cooperation between
agencies
You’re always waiting. Like today I can’t stand line-ups…you’re waiting for the sandwich…you’re waiting, you’re waiting, you’re waiting. Waiting for what? And when you get to the front, it’s all gone. There is nothing left for you.
Homeless Individual
9
Participants revealed several pressures that were internal to their organisations and which, in turn, were diminishing the capacity of their organisations to provide re-sponsive services:
• A shortage of “time” and a corresponding culture of “busyness” within organi-sations—”Because we are so busy chasing money, we don’t have time to do strategic thinking.”
• Staff burn-out—”There is too much to do.”• Lack of staff appreciation, low morale and high staff turn-over• Low staff salaries and a lack of staff incentives• Internal politics and communication problems within agencies
STAGE 3: Upstream Sources of Pressures
In analysing the vast range of pressures that were identifi ed by workshop participants, three broad categories emerged. These are as follows:
1. Pressures related to funding (manner of, amount of)2. Pressures related to spirit and nature of co-operation between agencies (Work-
ing together)3. Pressures related to the availability, accessibility and appropriateness of
services
In refl ecting on the upstream sources of the pressures on homeless individuals and on the helping agencies, participants identifi ed various causal factors that contributed to the three broad categories of pressures (See Appendix 4 for a comprehensive list of sources of pressures). These included:
Inadequacy/Inappropriateness of Funding (Upstream sources)
• Government priorities—”We’re not part of the decision-making!”• Too many agencies chasing too few dollars—”We’re not organised!”• Jurisdictional disputes— First Nations, Métis, non-Status, Federal-Provincial-
Municipal• Government and community attitudes towards social programs• Funding formulas and lack of continuity of funding
Lack of Cooperation between Agencies (Upstream sources)
• Turfi sm—”People aren’t sharing information because of competition”• Disconnect between First Nations and Métis leadership and the grassroots• Tunnel vision—”We’re too busy to meet with each other.”• Lack of communication between agencies• Funding encourages competition between agencies.• Politics and history• Cumbersome bureaucratic structures discourage collaboration
10
Availability, accessibility and appropriateness of services (Upstream sources)
• Barriers to accessibility, including language and cultural barriers• Lack of a centralised source of information on available services• Lack of culturally-sensitive staff• Complexity of the system—”Too many hoops!”• Policy-makers are out of touch with the real needs• Exclusion of Aboriginal people from decision-making
STAGE 4: Pushing Back on the Pressures
Effective actions are aimed at something we can do something about. They require us to break a larger problem into smaller winnable issues. A problem is not something that can be isolated and tackled on its own. It is made up of multiple issues—some of which may be actionable.
As previously indicated, many of the pressures identifi ed by participants were in-ternal to their organizations (E.g. Low staff morale). Others came from outside their organizations (external). Some of the identifi ed pressures (such as improving staff re-tention) could conceivably be addressed by individual agencies while others (such as changing a specifi c policy) would require the collaboration of two or more agencies.
In analysing the various pressures brought forward by participants over the two days, it became apparent that many of the pressures identifi ed were outside the reach of a single organisation and would require the concerted effort of more than one agency to address. Therefore, the challenge of fi nding ways to improve cooperation and collaboration between agencies became of paramount importance.
Conclusion & a Beginning
Workshop participants identifi ed “grassroots action” and “working together” as being prerequisites to dealing with the issues related to Aboriginal homelessness. To this end, participants resolved to continue exploring op-
portunities for collective action. The most visible expression of this commitment was that the participants arranged to meet on the sixth of April 2005 at the Canadian Native Friendship Centre to further the conversation.
Follow-up Meeting
On April 6/2005, participants from the previous workshop gathered to discuss fu-ture collaboration. The session was hosted by the Canadian Native Friendship Cen-tre and focused on identifying action items. Seven key areas were highlighted (See Appendix 5 for a comprehensive list of action items):
11
1. One-Stop Shop: Participants identifi ed the need to coordinate the serv-ices provided to homeless Aboriginal people in Edmonton. This includ-ed having information readily available to help homeless people access programs and navigate the maze of available services.
2. Involving Aboriginal Leaders: Participants explored strategies for in-creasing the involvement of First Nations, Métis and Inuit leaders in ad-dressing the problem of Aboriginal homelessness in Edmonton.
3. Research: Participants identifi ed the importance of developing a cen-tralized and easily accessible clearinghouse of information and research on homelessness including best practices and models of successful serv-ice delivery from other cities in Canada (e.g., Winnipeg).
4. Outreach Workers: Participants suggested that the agencies providing services to homeless Aboriginal individuals should develop a network of outreach workers that can link the agencies together, as well as provide street-level services.
5. Identify Strengths of Agencies: Participants suggested that an environ-mental scan be conducted to identify the strengths, assets and capacities of the agencies providing services to homeless individuals in Edmon-ton.
6. Focus on Personal Development: Participants suggested that agencies work together to enhance the skills and personal development of home-less Aboriginal people so that they can escape the cycle of poverty.
7. Construction: Participants identifi ed the importance of Aboriginal agencies, government and the private sector partnering to produce af-fordable housing for Aboriginal people. The example of an Aboriginal “Habitat for Humanity” was provided.
The follow-up meeting to Bringing It Together illustrated the dedication of par-ticipants to fi nding creative ways of working together to address the issues related to homelessness among Aboriginal people in Edmonton. A demonstra-tion of this was provided by the fact that the participants established action groups with team leaders to undertake work in the seven areas listed above. This bodes well for a coordinated and coherent response to addressing Abo-riginal homelessness in Edmonton. However, the success of subsequent efforts to move forward a strong agenda for collective action will depend largely on the availability of resources to support partnership-building. It is important that the momentum established over the workshop and the follow-up session be maintained into the future.
App
endi
x 1:
Day
One
(M
arch
22/
2005
)
The
“V
iew
fro
m t
he T
renc
hes”
– S
ervi
ce G
aps
Gro
up 1
G
roup
2
Gro
up 3
G
roup
4
Gro
up 5
Fu
nding
criteria
need to
be revisited
EH
TF sho
uld b
uild
houses a
nd h
ave
agencie
s prop
ose to o
perate
them
Process ne
eds to b
e dic
tated
by
comm
unity
Mo
re p
eople
transition
ing to
major
centres wh
ile the
focus rem
ains on
the reserve
s an
d settlem
ents
KISS process needs to b
e establi
shed
Evalu
ation
needs to
be b
ased o
n servi
ces that fi
t our n
eeds—
not
impo
sed
stand
ards
There is
a gap
in tra
nsition
al supp
ort
for you
th
No spe
cific
prog
rams
/poli
cies at
the
Provinc
ial le
vel t
hat d
eal s
pecifica
lly
with A
borig
inal h
omele
ssness (Poli
cy
gap)
Lack o
f availa
ble shelte
r space for
wo
man
fleein
g ab
usive
situ
ation
s There is
a need fo
r tra
nsition
al supp
ort
for you
th to
independence
Lack o
f involv
ement of
the Ab
origi
nal
(FNMI) lea
dersh
ip.
“Our p
eople
com
e fro
m a
home
. Whe
re are o
ur le
aders?”
Urba
n Ab
origi
nal I
ssue
More fa
milies are getting
involve
d in
othe
r syste
ms (e.g
. Chil
d Welf
are)
because of
what is
esse
ntial
ly a
“hou
sing” is
sue.
Partn
erships
cost m
oney. W
here
is this
fundin
g?
Partn
erships
have to in
clude the
priva
te secto
r (e.
g. Suncor)
Socia
l sup
port
syste
m ne
eded
Too
much red tap
e. Th
ere is
no A
borig
inal S
helte
r in
the
City
Loss
of fun
ding
for sup
portive servic
es
Increase in
servi
ce u
se b
ut adm
in.
costs
are sam
e Short-t
erm
fundin
g, no
t mu
lti-ye
ar.
Repo
rting
process
is on
going
and
tim
e consum
ing
Agen
cies ha
ving
to cha
nge their
focus
due to cha
nges o
r cutbacks in
fund
ing
Lack o
f lan
d in
a central a
rea o
f Ed
monton
for he
lping
serv
ices
No
t en
ough
com
munic
ation
or inf
o. Too
many refe
rrals
(mult
iple)
Interpe
rsona
l diffe
rences a
ffecti
ng serv
ices
Self-servi
ng a
gend
as
Not en
ough
fund
ing to
go aroun
d—agen
cies get protectiv
e Too
many
agencies
doin
g same
thin
g (dup
licati
on o
f servic
es)—
clien
ts do
n’t
know
where to
turn.
Peop
le comi
ng to
the Cit
y bring
their
prob
lems with the
m. (Prob
lems mi
grate
here)
Provinc
ial econo
mic bo
om b
ringin
g peop
le to the
City
but the
re is
no h
ousin
g an
d a
time lag
for ser
vices.
“Ho
meles
s for
3
months u
ntil
assis
tance kic
ks in
” Na
tives g
et sent to
inner-ci
ty Fami
lies sca
ttered
by G
ov’t
Syste
ms
Servi
ces are de
signed
for n
on-Abo
rigina
ls Ne
ed m
ore inf
o. for
Abo
rigina
ls to a
ccess
Ab
origi
nals
shou
ld be in
decision
-mak
ing
position
s No
help
with
dam
age de
posits
Volun
teers
doing
agency job
s Offer
non
-threaten
ing sup
port
Not do
ing eno
ugh
inter-agency wo
rk
Lack o
f hou
sing
(all
levels
of s
uppo
rt) fo
r pe
rsons w
ith
disab
ilities
– p
hysic
al &
mental
Lack o
f sup
port
for w
omen com
ing o
ut o
f pris
ons
Co
nnectin
g with fa
milies
Re
integratio
n/life
skil
ls
Housing
with
sup
port
Gap
in cultu
rally app
ropriat
e servi
ces
Need
urban
Abo
rigina
l Poli
tical
Advocacy G
roup
Home
care (non
-grump
y) Mo
ney for
hom
e ad
aptatio
n (doo
r ha
ndles
/flat fl
oors/
etc.
) Em
ergency Ho
me (im
media
te access)
for wo
man
& fam
ilies
leavin
g ab
use
Preventio
n Prog
rams
for fam
ily viol
ence
Ed
ucation
/life
skills
/emp
loyme
nt traini
ng
Supp
ort for
Abu
ser
Outre
ach
& Supp
ort f
or P
eople
livin
g in
the riv
er vall
ey
Aborigi
nal Y
outh Shelte
r (in
NE
Edmo
nton
) Mo
ney for
chil
dren and
you
th to
have rec. a
ctivit
ies
Comm
unity
kitc
hen
and
crafts fo
r everyone
Raise
AISH
and
SFI
rates
Supp
orts
for accessib
le ed
ucation
for Mé
tis in
dividu
als
App
endi
x 2:
Day
Tw
o (M
arch
23/
2005
)
Pre
ssur
es o
n H
om
eles
s A
bori
gina
l Ind
ivid
uals
G
roup
1
Gro
up 2
G
roup
3
Gro
up 4
G
roup
5
Lack o
f ide
ntific
ation
Discr
imina
tion
Bu
dget
Red
tape
Pe
er P
ressu
re
Abuse
Mental
Healt
h Iss
ues
Addic
tions
Tran
sportatio
n ba
rriers
Isolat
ion
Absence of
Belon
ging
Healt
h iss
ues
Lack o
f persona
l safe
ty Ap
artheid
Lack o
f Kno
wled
ge, R
E: Re
sources
Co-Dep
ende
ncy,
IE- con
necti
ons
Lang
uage/Cult
ural
barri
ers
Lack o
f persona
l, fin
ancia
l and
social
resources
Sense of
fragm
entatio
n he
lplessness
Governme
nt Lab
elling
-Firs
t Na
tion
Intergene
ratio
nal p
atterns o
f Traum
a Cu
lture sho
ck –
from
rese
rve to
city
Lack o
f motiva
tion
Targete
d un
necessa
rily by
autho
rities
Tatte
red
socia
l safe
ty ne
t. Re
siden
tial s
choo
l exp
erien
ces
Profi
ling –
Crim
inal,
Racia
l Create
crisis
motiva
tes the
resou
rces
Silen
t cry
Econ
omy—
Displac
es p
eople
tha
t are
not em
ploym
ent-r
eady
Copy
cat
pressure
Gaps in
servic
es
Servi
ce P
rovid
ers Ru
les
Oppressio
n Lack o
f kno
wled
ge
Isolat
ion
Lack o
f belo
nging
ness
Margina
lizati
on
High
Ren
tal rates
Priva
tization
of P
ublic Serv
ices
Land
lord
discri
mina
tion
Lack o
f Ide
ntific
ation
Go
vernme
nt a
ttitudes
Lack o
f persona
l safe
ty Ca
n’t g
et ba
nk accou
nt
Low
self
estee
m No
t en
ough
skil
ls Youth
have u
nique n
eeds
Healt
h iss
ues
Mental
Healt
h Ad
dictio
ns
Preju
dice
Stigm
a Cu
lture Sho
ck
Violen
ce
Sub-sta
ndard
housing
Ov
ercro
wding
Welf
are am
ounts Ins
ufficien
t
No ren
t control
High
utility
costs
Tran
sportat
ion costs
Lack o
f job
security
Low
vacancy rates
Co
st of
living
Fir
e safet
y Pu
blic He
alth
issues
Lack o
f tim
e Tw
o job
s Low
minim
um w
age
Addic
tions
Barri
ers to li
teracy
Lack o
f ade
quate clo
thing
Sta
ble h
ousin
g Safet
y Lack o
f edu
catio
n Kn
owled
ge o
f system
(Ho
w it
works?)
Fami
ly vio
lence
Lack o
f motiva
tion
Feeling
of n
ot b
eing
wanted
Lack o
f doctors
Discr
imina
tion
Lack o
f resou
rces for
asse
ssmen
t An
ger ma
nageme
nt
Physica
l Health
issues
Threat o
f loss of
child
ren
Racis
m Ba
rriers to transpo
rtatio
n Lack o
f peer supp
ort
Lack o
f awa
rene
ss of
comm
unity
resources
Crim
inal r
ecord
Disabil
ities
Lack o
f Basic
Hygie
ne
Preju
dice
Lack o
f Edu
catio
n He
alth
issue
s Pe
ople
live in
past
Fewe
r Ga
rbag
e Bin
s Un
emplo
ymen
t Me
ntal
Healt
h Ad
dictio
ns
Diffe
rent W
orld
Isolat
ion
Ignoran
ce o
f system
Lack o
f con
trol o
ver slu
mlords
Preju
dice for
lack o
f kno
wing
Ag
encie
s no
t carin
g Cred
it Ch
ecks
Lack o
f option
s Too
Many
criteri
a Ca
n’t a
fford a p
hone
Safe
Storage
Paperw
ork
Requ
ireme
nts
Lack o
f Guid
ance
Cycle
of C
rap
Not enou
gh p
eople
to h
elp the u
nkno
wing
Ch
urches n
ot h
elping
any
more
Low
Supp
ort Levels
– Welf
are (SF
I) Lack o
f Awa
rene
ss The “arro
gance” o
f the System
On
e Pa
rty system
s in
Alberta
– Lead
s to
Dicta
torsh
ip an
d ha
s a trickle
affect of
PROV
emp
loyees
Lack o
f Edu
catio
n Ho
meles
s pe
ople
& Pu
blic
Stats
not Accurate
Barri
ers to Travel
Lack o
f Com
munic
ation
No
t enou
gh in
tervention
sup
port
Lack o
f resou
rces to m
eet ba
sic n
eeds
Lack o
f add
ress
Lack o
f pho
ne
Age ba
rriers–
too
you
ng/to
o old
Lack o
f fam
ily sup
port
Lack o
f edu
catio
n (opp
ortunit
ies)
Unem
ploym
ent
Mental
Illness (und
iagno
sed/un
treate
d)
Lone
liness
Finan
cial p
ressu
res
No ID
stigm
a/contem
pt fr
om societ
y racis
m Tran
sportat
ion
Pride
Ba
rriers to a
ccess
ing system
sup
ports
Scared to
ask
for in
fo.
Abuse/tra
uma
Stereotyp
ing/ra
cism
based
on surna
me
Deficit-ba
sed
criter
ia for
servic
es
All ene
rgy is
going
to surviv
al Ethn
o-str
ess (M
étis vs.
Abo
rigina
l etc)
Low
self-estee
m –
set up
for fai
lure
Barri
ers to o
rgan
izatio
ns syst
ems
Very strict
criter
ia Lang
uage b
arrie
rs
Lack o
f com
munit
y (phy
sical/
geog
raph
y) Lack o
f hum
an resp
onse/con
tact (e.
g. Au
toma
ted p
hone
) Cu
ltural s
hock
Bad
relat
ionships
Th
reats to p
erson
al safet
y
App
endi
x 3:
Day
Tw
o (M
arch
23/
2005
)
Pre
ssur
es o
n A
genc
ies—
that
ser
ve h
om
eles
s A
bori
gina
l ind
ivid
uals
G
roup
1
Gro
up 2
G
roup
3
Gro
up 4
G
roup
5
Time (Not eno
ugh)
Abuse of
Servi
ces/s
ystem
s—revolving
do
or
Fund
ing fo
r Bu
ilding
s No
Fun
ds fo
r servi
ces,
maint
enan
ce
Lack o
f one-st
op sho
p concept
Accoun
tabil
ity (no
stan
dardize
d repo
rting
from
fund
ers)
Huma
n Re
source P
oor
Volun
teers
Burnt Ou
t Lack o
f ope
ratio
nal f
undin
g Inc
reased H
omele
ssness
Decre
ased
resou
rces
Fund
ing availa
bility
(lack
of kn
owled
ge) (Propo
sal W
riting
) Ag
ency M
anda
tes
Fund
ing Criteria
(Poli
cy vs.
Reali
ty)
–Catch 2
2 cycle
s Sta
ff is
tired
No
-way to
reple
nish
batte
ries
“Hearin
g the same
storie
s over and
over-re
ally aff
ects
staff.”
No
process
for staf
f tim
e sta
ggeri
ng
Staff
Safet
y Un
derpaid
Lack o
f staff
appreciat
ion
Meeti
ng the
emo
tiona
l req
uirem
ents
Not alw
ays mo
ney
Lack o
f incen
tives
Shortage o
f staff
Interna
l and
exte
rnal
politics
Po
wer str
uggle
– “Cli
ents
lost i
n the
shuff
le”
Time (busy)
Crisis Me
ntali
ty—“P
uttin
g ou
t fires”
Sand
wiched B
etween
proje
ct dema
nds
& up
per ma
nageme
nt
Too
little
fund
ing
Legis
lative
barrie
rs Locatio
n of
Agency
Comp
etitio
n for
fund
ing
Staff
turn-over
Proje
ct-ba
sed
fundin
g cre
ates a la
ck o
f continu
ity
Lack o
f Com
munic
ation
betw
een
Board
and
staff
“Becau
se w
e are chasing
mon
ey,
there’s
no
time to d
o str
ategic
think
ing”
Burn-out
“Too
man
y respon
sibilit
ies –
not
enou
gh a
utho
rity”
Stove-pipi
ng
Not en
ough
staf
f recog
nition
No
t en
ough
is d
one to k
eep
up m
orale
Lack o
f traini
ng
Some
people
are a
dept a
t netw
orkin
g—“B
ig Bo
ys g
et mo
st of
the Mo
ney”
Incom
e press
ures
on staff
The im
pact
of his
toric
al inj
ustic
e –
resulting
in in
tergeneratio
nal t
raum
a on
Firs
t Nation
and
Méti
s ind
ividu
al,
family, c
ommu
nity an
d Na
tion.
Abuse of
Presc
riptio
n drug
s Lack o
f spa
ce (ina
dequ
ate fac
ilities
) No
t en
ough
focus on
cap
acity
-buil
ding
Lack o
f und
ersta
nding
on
the pa
rt of
clien
ts that agency po
licies
are set
by
governme
nt
Lack o
f com
munit
y supp
ort
NIMB
Y –
Not i
n my
back
yard
Lack o
f corpo
rate
supp
ort
High
needs o
f clients (Num
ber of
issue
s) Re
porting
req
uirem
ents—
always
havin
g to ju
stify
position
Fu
nd-ra
ising
is ti
me con
sumi
ng
Red
Tape
High
dem
and
Lack o
f fun
ding
Clien
t de
pend
ence o
n agen
cies
Long
wait
ing li
sts fo
r servi
ces
Politics
(Int
erna
l/Exte
rnal)
No
tim
e to le
arn
abou
t avail
able
resources
Staff
burn o
ut
Lack o
f tim
e for
follo
w up
Space
No a
pprecia
tion
of wo
rkers &
agen
cies
Staff
safet
y Ov
er-re
liance on
volu
nteers
Lack o
f stable
hou
sing
Lack o
f ade
quate clo
thing
Po
or b
asic
hygie
ne (n
ecessary)
Mental
issue
s (m
ultipl
e) Lack o
f edu
catio
n Disabil
ities
(perma
nent)
Lack o
f Kno
wled
ge o
f help
ing servic
es
(How
it w
orks?)
Fami
ly vio
lence
Lack o
f nutrition
Feeling
of n
ot b
eing
wanted
Lack o
f doctors
Sta
ff bu
rnou
t No
t en
ough
reso
urces:
staff,
etc.
Prob
lem is
not a
lways relat
ed to
fundin
g No
t enou
gh A
borig
inal S
taff
Time (not eno
ugh)
Repeat clientele
Go
vernme
nt p
olicie
s No
t en
ough
profes
siona
l staf
f Em
ployee reten
tion
Budg
et cuts
No extr
a mo
ney for
sup
port
Not enou
gh staf
f with
kno
wledge
Need
tim
e to train
Lack o
f partnerships
Total P
icture shou
ld be
availa
ble
Get together &
organ
ize com
munit
y Inf
orma
tion
not r
eadil
y avail
able
Shou
ld ha
ve cen
tral i
nform
ation
outlet
(all
levels
) Co
ntracti
ng o
f servic
es
Furth
er lo
ss of
links
Profi
t-motive
affe
cting
serv
ice
Not allow
ed to
make m
oney
Money no
t getting
to the g
roun
d lev
el Preju
dice
Racis
m No
n expo
sure fr
om to
p Lack o
f traini
ng—
need
inne
r cit
y tra
ining
centre (Alt
erna
tive sentencin
g)
Arroga
nce
Chain
of c
omma
nd stifles
acti
on
“Tak
e aw
ay the
ir excuses”
Not en
ough
cult
ural
presen
ce
No true op
position
party
Advocacy com
munit
y Lack o
f und
ersta
nding
Re
serve
Racism
Soft
bigotry o
f low
exp
ectatio
ns
Diversi
ty of
Aborigi
nal N
ation
s/poli
tics
Not en
ough
fund
s Facilities a
re in
adequa
te Too
many
rest
rictio
ns –
fund
ing, o
rgan
izatio
nal p
olicie
s Lack o
f staff
Lump
ing o
f Abo
rigina
l people
Lack o
f cult
urall
y tra
ined
staff
Staff
not cultu
rally representative
Sta
tistic
s/accou
ntab
ility requ
ireme
nts
Proje
ct/capit
al fun
ding—
no lo
ng term
fundin
g Wait
ing li
sts
Lack o
f respect/
trash b
etween
agencie
s an
d the peop
le they serve
Lack o
f mon
ey fo
r gas mi
leage li
mits
peop
le serve
d Lack o
f flex
ibility-
e.g. S
ched
uled
visits
Lack o
f recog
nition
that a
dup
lication
of s
ervic
es is
some
times
necessa
ry Servi
ces too
spread
out
Overwh
elmed w
ith w
ork—
peop
le fal
ling throug
h cra
cks
(e.g.
youth)
Access
Barri
ers to reso
urces
Lack o
f exp
erien
ce w
ith fu
ndraising
Lack o
f coo
rdina
tion
betw
een
agen
cies
Not ab
le to a
dapt servic
es
High
turno
ver
Staff
Burn-out—
“too
much to
do!”
Agen
cies are no
t “p
eople
-frien
dly.”
Sta
ff no
t accoun
table
to p
eople
they serve
Low
wages
Placeme
nt o
f agencies
not b
ased
on
accessi
bility
—
based
on availa
bility
High
caselo
ads
Burden
of p
lannin
g, ba
lancin
g an
d co-ordina
ting
dif
feren
t prog
rams
Sti
gma associa
ted w
ith a
gency na
me
App
endi
x 4:
Day
Tw
o (M
arch
23/
2005
)
Ups
trea
m S
our
ces
of P
ress
ures
on
Indi
vidu
als
and
Age
ncie
s G
roup
1
Gro
up 2
G
roup
3
Gro
up 4
G
roup
5
Fund
ing:
Too
many agencies
cha
sing
too
few
dolla
rs
Lack o
f awa
rene
ss of
fundin
g sources
Lack o
f Fun
ding
Bureau
cratic
system
is self
-servi
ng
Uncerta
inty of
fundin
g Short-t
erm
comm
itments
for lo
ng-te
rm
prob
lems
Fund
ing n
eeds to
be targeted
—do
n’t
move the target
Lack o
f clea
r me
asures o
f success—
fundin
g ou
tcome
s need
s to m
atch
peop
les success
Comm
unity
needs cha
nge
Crite
ria d
on’t
fit p
eople
s ne
eds
Wor
king
Tog
ethe
r:
Lack o
f co-op
eration
betw
een
agen
cies
Lack o
f inn
ovative
app
roache
s Lack o
f a C
ontin
uum
of respon
sibilit
y Av
aila
bilit
y, A
ppro
pria
tene
ss,
Acce
ssib
ility
of Se
rvic
es:
Barri
ers to a
ccess
ibility
Lack o
f cen
tralized
sou
rce o
f inf
orma
tion
on a
vaila
ble serv
ices an
d supp
orts.
Lack o
f access
to
life/persona
l skil
ls Lack o
f skil
ls for
urban
livin
g Lack o
f app
ropriat
e servi
ces
Short-t
erm
versu
s lon
g-ter
m servi
ces
Explo
re the
need
befor
e exten
ding
the
wron
g kin
d of
help
Fund
ing:
Co
rporate ag
enda
&
Governme
nt p
riorities
“W
e’re no
t pa
rt of
the de
cision
-mak
ing!”
Lack o
f app
ropriat
e consult
ation
Prob
lems with fu
nding
“N
o Fit
”—Rig
id fun
ding
criter
ia Lack o
f cap
acity
to
draft
propo
sals
Diseng
agem
ent by G
overnm
ent
Only
so m
uch
mone
y in
the po
t &
“We’r
e no
t orga
nized!”
Wor
king
Tog
ethe
r:
Turfism
(peop
le aren’t
sharing
inf
orma
tion
because of
comp
etitio
n for
fun
ding)
Lack o
f kno
wledge o
n ho
w to access
money or w
hat the real
needs are
Disco
nnect betw
een
FNMI/decision
-mak
ers
& grassro
ots
Local k
nowled
ge (loc
al expe
rtise) no
t be
ing h
onou
red
Lack o
f buy-in
to
work tog
ether
Lack o
f resou
rces:
time,
mone
y &
staff
Tunn
el vis
ion: “
We’r
e too
busy to
meet
with each
othe
r, we
’re n
ot talk
ing!”
Avai
labi
lity,
App
ropr
iate
ness
, Ac
cess
ibili
ty o
f Se
rvic
es:
Lack o
f sen
sitive
staf
f Lang
uage is
sues
Lack o
f Cult
ural
sensitivit
y
Co
ncen
tratin
g servi
ces in
inner
city is
prob
lematic
for p
eople
who
wan
t to get
out of
this
envir
onme
nt.
Not consult
ing w
ith p
eople
who
need
servi
ces
Comp
lexity
of s
ystem
– Too
many
guide
lines, t
oo m
uch
paperw
ork
“H
OOPS”
Lack o
f info
rmati
on –
too
much
time
need
ed to
navig
ate syste
m.
Fund
ing:
Avail
abilit
y (not eno
ugh)
Governme
nt a
nd com
munit
y attitud
es
towa
rds socia
l program
s or servic
es
Politics
Juris
dictio
nal d
isputes
RE: F
irst N
ation
s, Mé
tis, N
on-St
atus
Decre
asing
fund
ing—
Governme
nt
structure li
mits
new
fundin
g
Lack o
f buy
-in fr
om p
olitic
al lea
ders
i.e.
Métis, F
irst N
ation
s
Wor
king
Tog
ethe
r:
Governme
nt sets
stru
cture in
stead
of
agen
cies
Decis
ions are be
ing m
ade by a
sma
ll grou
p (Dire
ctors)
tha
t are no
t fro
nt li
ne
workers
Apathy
Cumb
ersom
e bu
reaucracie
s Pa
ssing
the
buck
Comp
etitio
n be
tween
agen
cies
Lack o
f com
munic
ation
Lack o
f accou
ntab
ility for
qua
lity of
servi
ces
Avai
labi
lity,
App
ropr
iate
ness
, Ac
cess
ibili
ty o
f Se
rvic
es:
Paper pu
shing
(wo
rk)
Lack o
f com
munic
ation
Po
licy ma
kers
are ou
t of
touch
No a
dvocacy for
agencies
Fund
ing:
Inc
omple
te prop
osals
Lack o
f skil
ls No
resou
rces (m
anpo
wer,
research)
Have to
speak
the lin
go
Too
comp
licated
Have to
prove mo
ney we
ll-spent
Fund
ing b
ased o
n fau
lty stats
Syste
mic Mistr
ust (Diffe
rent le
vels)
Admi
nistra
tion
sucks up
most of
the mo
ney
Agen
cies are “m
aking
a li
ving off
us”
Histo
ry &
Oppress
ion
Agen
cies wa
nt to
help
but sca
red
W
orki
ng T
oget
her:
Lack o
f com
munic
ation
Lack o
f caring
– A
borig
inal leade
rs Av
aila
bilit
y, A
ppro
pria
tene
ss,
Acce
ssib
ility
of Se
rvic
es:
Fund
ing com
petition
No
t enou
gh M
oney
80% in
Adm
in Wrong
measures
Decis
ion-m
akers ha
ve n
o ide
a “W
ho you
kno
w, n
ot w
hat.”
Cla
ss syste
m Ed
ucation
al ba
rriers
Hirin
g cri
teria
controlled
by n
on-Abo
rigina
l peop
le Histo
ry/Colo
nialism
Foreign
plac
e for
abo
rigina
ls Inc
lusion
/Exclus
ion o
f Abo
rigina
ls FE
D/Prov. A
dmin
respo
nsibi
lity
Treaty,
Méti
s, Off-R
eserve
& O
n-Re
serve
Lack o
f Abo
rigina
l inp
ut in
to p
olicie
s
Fund
ing:
Prob
lematic
Fund
ing fo
rmula
Fed.
& Prov. G
overnm
ents
Politician
s- tax
payer accoun
tabil
ity
Econ
omic
and
politica
l cha
nges
Juris
dictio
n—Fed.
Prov. M
unicipa
lities
Do
wnloa
ding
of respon
sibilit
ies
Fund
ing goin
g to the reserves bu
t people
are
in the
cities
—mo
ney bo
und
to reserve b
udget (not
enou
gh m
oney fo
r reserve
s) My
th o
f mon
ey fo
r all
Aborigi
nal p
eople
Lack o
f fun
ding
continu
ity
Wor
king
tog
ethe
r:
Fund
ing encou
rages comp
etitio
n (Gov’t
desig
ned)
Juris
dictio
n—pig
eon-ho
ling
Build
ing p
rogram
s to m
eet f
undin
g requ
ireme
nts no
t ne
eds of
clien
t Lim
its o
f tim
e—20
% client-re
lated
/80%
pap
erwork
Politics
in A
lberta
Frien
dship
s with p
olitic
al pe
ople
shap
ing fu
nding
Po
litica
l persons in
timida
te grou
ps to
meet
their
int
erests
“Pun
ish the
poo
r att
itude
of s
ociet
y”
Capit
alist
syste
m No
stabil
ity w
ithin
politica
l leade
rship
Acce
ssib
ility
& A
vaila
bilit
y &
Appr
opriat
enes
s of
Ser
vice
s:
Some
agencies
have bo
unda
ry li
mitatio
ns
Dupli
catio
n of
servi
ces (fu
nding
) Term
inolog
y—Fu
nders
and
the
Con
stitutio
n Th
ree sepa
rate
Abo
rigina
l Group
s Ph
ysica
l Accessib
ility—
you
get wh
at you
’re give
n: (no
input in
to p
rogram
design
) Evalu
ation
used
to ju
stify
cuts
to fu
nding
Crite
ria n
ot cult
urally-a
ppropriat
e. Liv
e &
die b
y sta
tistic
s bu
t sta
tistic
s are wr
ong
Gov’t
has app
ropriat
ed successf
ully run
Aborigi
nal
agen
cies
App
endi
x 5:
Fol
low
-up
Sess
ion
(Apr
il 06
/200
5)
Fo
llow
-up
Ses
sio
n (A
pril
06/2
005)
Po
tent
ial A
ctio
n It
ems
Gro
up 1
G
roup
2
Gro
up 3
One-S
top
Shop
Vis
ion Statem
ent:
All in
digenou
s peop
le ha
ve a
one-st
op fa
cility
tha
t provid
es com
fort,
safet
y &
supp
ort
throug
h the provision
of w
ell coo
rdina
ted servic
es that
will he
lp prep
are the
found
ation
for a
susta
inable
, valu
ed u
rban
life.
Ste
p On
e: Call
for a m
eetin
g to esta
blish a stee
ring
comm
ittee:
Identify
thin
gs w
e can
do?
Netw
orkin
g &
Comm
unica
ting
More coll
aborati
on
How
many
group
s me
eting
? Ho
w to con
nect
tem
Bette
r wa
y to o
rgan
ize
Ideas/sh
aring
/share ris
k/be
nefits
Two
grou
ps –
coll
aboration
s Co
mmun
ity m
appin
g –
housing
/ h
ousin
g ser
vices
Joint
Holistic
Hu
b –
One-s
top
shop
– cen
tralized
Histo
ry –
Aborigi
nal p
illar –
one sto
p shop
ping
Urba
n Ab
origi
nal S
trateg
y / Trust F
und
Fund
ing o
ne stop
shop
Winn
ipeg mo
del –
train
stat
ion –
thu
nderbir
d ho
use
Good
lead
ership
comm
unity
Po
litics
/ cha
nges
Busin
ess pla
n –
1 sto
p shop
Talk
to p
eople
– b
ring
peop
le Ab
origi
nal U
niversity stu
dents to ta
lk to the h
omele
ss ab
out t
he their
needs
Tran
sition
al ho
using
– roo
m / pic
ture
wall
One pe
rson
can
help
make cha
nge
Stand
/ q
uality of
life
Bring
it to
the grou
ps o
f the p
lan and
get
comm
itment
One Sto
p Ste
ering
Com
mitte
e Re
search/Acti
on team
Partn
ers for
Kids
& You
th –
have a
multi-disc
iplina
ry typ
e of
workers to d
o the
work.
Team
app
roach
to d
ealin
g with h
omele
ssness
Prior
itize
Steering
Com
mitte
e –
start
right awa
y (vo
luntee
rs –
key sta
keho
lders)
Or
ganiz
ation
to
supp
ort
Prop
osal
– On
e Sto
p Shop
Poten
tial A
ction
Item
s: Fo
rget
differ
ences/t
urfism
Lack o
f com
munic
ation
Sharing
infor
matio
n fro
m resea
rch etc.
(studie
s) Talk
to a
gencies
Ou
treach
worker (I p
er a
gency)
Housing
Re
lation
ship
build
ing
Refer
rals
Help
with h
omele
ss coun
t, etc
. Ha
ving a me
eting
1 p
er m
onth to
share inf
orma
tion
Know
ledge o
f servic
es a
vaila
ble
Frien
dship
Cen
tre –
Cen
tre o
f refe
rrals
Havin
g op
en com
munic
ation
s with / in
agencies
Cana
dian
Nativ
e Frien
dship
Centre
look
ing to
put a
d in
exam
iner
Research is
not accurate –
based
on
visibi
lity (lo
ok A
borig
inal)
One-S
top
Shop
(Our N
ew E
dmon
ton
Servi
ces To
People
) Frien
dship
Cen
tre –
refe
rral
Research C
entre
Ea
ch a
rea N
W, W
– servic
es avail
able
in their
area
Satel
lite off
ices &
one ma
jor d
owntow
n Ma
pping
projec
t Inv
olving
Abo
rigina
l Leade
rs Accoun
table
for their
own
peop
le Eld
ers inv
olvem
ent
Research &
Outreach
Meeti
ng o
f agency - Ap
ril 2
7th at N
ative Sen
iors or Frie
ndship
Centre
Sharing
infor
matio
n Do
ing refe
rrals
Putting
a call o
ut –
hou
sing
/ ho
meles
s, coun
sello
rs, refe
rral w
orkers
Stren
gths o
f Agency &
Perso
nal D
evelo
pmen
t Co
mmun
icatio
ns b
uildin
g &
Recogn
ition
to a
gencies
Co
nstru
ction
: Ab
origi
nal H
abita
t for
Hum
anity
; Co-op
Hou
sing;
Heali
ng Cen
tre
Providi
ng skil
l develo
pmen
t / me
ntoring
Bu
ilding
Inv
olvem
ent in
the process
Aborigi
nal a
pprentice
ship
prog
ram
One-S
top
Shop
: De
velop
Cen
tres with it
all
Train
ed / cult
urall
y sensitive
Involv
ing A
borig
inal L
eade
rs:
Educate the lea
ders
on a
ddressi
ng is
sues / create
awa
reness
Find
solut
ions
Wha
t is their
role
on
deali
ng w
ith is
sues
perta
ining
Ca
ll a assemb
ly to add
ress
Research &
Outreach:
Find
out needs
Develop
research
projec
ts / drop
in
Stren
gths o
f Agencies
& P
erson
al De
velop
ment
Gather a
gency inf
orma
tion
Invite
agencies
to
partn
er in
accom
plishing
goa
l (e.g
. life
skil
ls,
housing
, and
emp
loyme
nt, p
hysic
al &
mental
healt
h.)
Deal
with is
sues
that
are dir
ectly
rela
ted to
home
less iss
ues
Servi
ce D
irecto
r –
contact pe
rson
Constru
ction
: Bu
ild the Tee P
ee
Intak
e process
Housing
com
plex / ap
artm
ent
Secure in
come
: SFI
or A
ISH
Perso
nal D
evelo
pment –
life skil
ls, p
hysic
al, m
ental
– spir
itual
well
being
Sta
biliza
tion
Emplo
ymen
t or edu
catio
n preparation
App
endi
x 5:
Fol
low
-up
Sess
ion
(Apr
il 06
/200
5)
Fo
llow
-up
Ses
sio
n (A
pril
06/2
005)
Po
tent
ial A
ctio
n It
ems
Gro
up 4
G
roup
4 (C
ontin
ued)
G
roup
5
One-S
top
Shop
: Ca
nadia
n Na
tive Frien
dship
Cen
tre
Resources &
Outre
ach
Medic
al (den
tal,
docto
rs, p
harm
acy,
coun
sellin
g); F
ood
bank
s / clo
thing
ban
k; Em
ergency shelt
er –
veh
icle to p
ick o
ver flo
w Eld
ers provide
d ( s
piritu
al gu
idance –
coun
sellin
g); D
etox room
Shou
ld be w
reck p
roof
Involv
ing A
borig
inal L
eade
rs:
Need
a spo
kesperson
for U
rban
Abo
rigina
ls grou
ps, a
gencies
, people
Who
are
they? Where a
re the A
borig
inal p
eople
from
? (need
to d
o resea
rch o
n urba
n Ab
origi
nal p
eople
)
Invite
the
lead
ers in
to d
iscuss:
urba
n Ab
origi
nal i
ssues
presen
t pla
n Ho
w do
the
y wa
nt to
be inv
olved
? Feed
the
m an
d they w
ill come
Tim
efram
e –
to m
eet to d
iscuss providi
ng h
ousin
g for
urban
Abo
rigina
l – con
structiv
e ad
vice we
can
work
on
No m
ore po
litica
l rhetoric
Inv
ited
by their
own
peop
le Sharing
Research
: Sharing
- hig
h prior
ity / rein
venting
the w
heel
– low
Int
ernet we
bsite
– o
ne site
Re
quire
ment tha
t wh
en g
iving
fund
ing th
at research
be ma
de a
vaila
ble to
the pu
blic
Link
to u
niversities
and
coll
eges
Aborigi
nal a
nd n
on-Abo
rigina
l research
Ab
origi
nal i
nform
ation
gue
st site
Make it
more accessi
ble in
stead
of r
ewriting
the research
or reinv
entin
g the wh
eel
Do n
ot o
ver am
ount o
n resea
rch
Outre
ach
worker N
etwork
Identify
the h
omele
ss Re
verse
the
dire
ction
of i
nform
ation
↑ in
stead
of ↓
Ea
ch agency shou
ld ha
ve a
n ou
treach
worker –
and
they shou
ld be n
etworkin
g with o
ther o
utreach
workers
They sho
uld b
e loc
ated
whe
re the
hom
eless
are.
Stren
gths o
f Agencies
/ P
erson
al De
velop
ment:
Resource g
uide
Create
an awa
rd fo
r agen
cies that d
o wo
rk in
the cit
y De
velop
an
interne
t site
for all o
rgan
izatio
ns –
ma
intain
ed every year –
(hard
& soft
copy
avail
able)
Re
search o
ther u
rban
cen
tres –
what
are they
doing
successes
sharing
best practic
es share challen
ges &
failur
es
Frien
dship
Cen
tre sho
uld d
o this
Central A
gency
Accre
dited
traini
ng
Education
for agen
cy, l
eaders
/ sta
ff Cit
y wide
recog
nition
to
agen
cy staf
f Co
nstru
ction
: Ro
tating
cha
ir for
meetin
gs –
to
develop
lea
dersh
ip Ge
t the ide
a fro
m TV –
“Ex
treme
Mak
eovers
– Ho
me E
dition
” Pa
rtner
with City
busine
sses to p
rovid
e safe,
aff
orda
ble, a
dequ
ate ho
using
for ho
meles
s pe
ople.
Desig
n of
build
ing con
duciv
e to social
inter
actio
n, redu
ce is
olatio
n Facility
/ reside
nce shou
ld ha
ve servic
es availa
ble
to the
m on
-site
e.g.:
child
care,
recre
ation
, etc
Sense of
city
Large fam
ily u
nits
Stude
nt u
nits
Tran
sition
al un
its
Stude
nts / un
iversi
ties can
do d
esign
of b
uildin
g (4
th year archite
ctural s
tude
nts)
One-S
top
(One Step
): Sin
gle entry in
to the
system
(vir
tual
one sto
p)
All in
forma
tion
at every lo
catio
n (w
eb b
ased
) Inv
olving
Abo
rigina
l Leade
rs:
Get on
their
agenda
(An
nual
Assem
blies)
Strategy on
who
migh
t contrib
ute
Meet
them
on
their
turf
Research &
Outreach
Politica
l research
– fo
cus on
how
-to
Outco
me b
ased –
best practic
es
Clearing
hou
se –
data
in o
ne lo
catio
n Stren
gths o
f Agencies
& P
erson
al De
velop
ment
Stren
gths in
ventory (persona
l) to serve as
resources on
a cross
– agen
cy b
asis
Risk
free tra
nsfer
of c
lients –
not to lo
se fu
nding
Fu
nctio
ning
netw
ork
Constru
ction
: Who
is in
terest
ed
Get together
Locate
skill
develop
ment resou
rces
Recommended