Edmonton Social Planning Council

Author: Web Administrator

  • The Senior Cohousing Handbook: A Community Approach to Independent Living

    Book by Charles Durrett, 2009

    Reviewed in April 2009 Research Update & featured in Summer 2009 fACTivist newsletter

    Senior cohousing is a model of independent-intradependent living that is vastly different from assisted living facilities and retirement communities, and distinct from communes and intentional communities. The cohousing model incorporates both private dwellings and common facilities, designed specifically for a community of residents – in this case, seniors – interested in building a supportive community together.

    Now, I‘m only in my mid-20s, but this book actually made me want to move into a Senior Co-housing community! The book is full of interviews, pictures, design plans, and stories of suc-cessful (and a few unsuccessful) cohousing com-munities. What resonates most strongly is the contentment, satisfaction and fulfillment of actively participating in a community as an alterna-tive to our independent, and often isolated, family households.

    Cohousing for seniors takes the uniqueness of aging into account. Some communities, for ex-ample, incorporate an extra suite for a full-time caregiver to occupy, should one of the residents find themselves in need of that type of support. Mutual care and support seem to be the norm in the communities profiled in this book. As one resident explained, “In the house where I‘m living now, if I fall off a ladder, who‘s going to know? In cohousing, even if you‘re in your own house, you‘re going to know if you don‘t see somebody”. Senior cohousing provides community supports in many different forms, such as shared meals, community activities and events, easy opportunities to informally visit and socialize, and the opportunity to help one another with chores and errands. The model provides the peace of mind of knowing that there is always somebody that you know and trust if you really need help, and because all community members will be in need of some supports at some point, providing care or help is not viewed as burdensome, but rather as a form of insurance.

    These social features seem to be what make the cohousing model stand out from other models. In many of the examples, a group of potential community members engaged in a long process of visioning, designing, and building their community. Community principles, obligations, decision-making processes, and conflict resolution are discussed and agreed upon at the outset, meaning that residents come to cohousing with a commitment to one another, and an idea of the shared values of the community. Participating in the design process means that the community can be structured both to fit and to be flexible. Some communities have prioritized features like easy access to shopping and services, accessible floor plans and elevators, extra-quiet individual units, and energy efficiency and environmental sustainability. Communities can include both higher and lower income seniors, and the vast majority of cohousing communities are financially self-sustaining.

    This book does a great job of illustrating the potential of the senior cohousing concept. It gives examples of what has worked and what has failed, and provides resources and answers questions for people looking to start or to join a senior cohousing community. The handbook contains examples from Denmark, the USA, and around the world. In addition to looking at some of the advantages and risks, the handbook answers common questions regarding the physical design, the social design, financial considerations, the planning process, and the day-to-day life in a cohousing community.

     

    Canadian Co-Housing Communities

    Here is a sample of a few of the co-housing communities across Canada:

    • Prairie Sky Cohousing Cooperative (Calgary)
      Alberta’s first cohousing community, based on the principles of caring, respect, and sustainability.

    • Saskatoon Cohousing Group (Saskatoon)
      Newly forming seniors cohousing development of 20-24 homes to be located near downtown.

    • Cranberry Commons Cohousing (Burnaby, BC)
      A closely knit community of families, singles, and seniors with individual homes and extensive shared facilities.

    • WindSong  (Langley, BC)
      An environmental award winning development with 34 family homes, community gardens, greenspace and common space on 6 acres of land.

    • Northern Sun Farm Co-op (Sarto, MB)
      A rural intentional community with a focus on alternative energy, appropriate technology, simple lifestyles and self-reliance.

    For more information, check out www.cohousing.ca

     

  • Poverty Reduction Policies and Programs

    Series of provincial and territorial reports by various authors, edited by the Canadian Council on Social Development, 2009. 

    Reviewed in July 2009 Research Update

    • Did you know that, unlike in most parts of Canada, poverty rates in rural Nova Scotia are higher than those in urban Nova Scotia?
    •  Did you know that 22% of Yukoners have reported having financial difficulties securing food?
    • Did you know that 50% of children of Aboriginal descent in Saskatchewan live in poverty?

    This series of reports takes an in-depth look at poverty, poverty reduction policies, and community action on poverty in 9 provinces and 2 territories (remaining provincial/territorial profiles are forthcoming).  The reports are each written by different authors, and highlight trends and statistics, explain the historical context, and examine current initiatives.

    The Alberta report examines our province’s historic boom-bust economic cycle and patterns of poverty. It looks at government responses to poverty: the development of a social safety net, subsequent erosion of supports, and more recently, the challenges posed by the latest economic boom. The Alberta profile also takes into account the growing role of the voluntary sector in addressing poverty, and questions what this might mean for poverty reduction in the province.

    We know that many of the provinces and territories have similar struggles to those we face in Alberta when it comes to poverty and the attempt to eliminate it. This series of reports shows how other jurisdictions across Canada are dealing with poverty – both at the local and provincial levels. Unique programs, innovative solutions, and strategic partnerships are being creatively implemented from coast to coast to coast.

    For example:

     

     

     

    The Newfoundland and Labrador report documents how the consistent work of community groups and government, together with a depressed economy after the collapse of the fisheries shaped the political, social, and economic context in which the province’s Poverty Reduction Strategy – one of the first in Canada – was created. The Poverty Reduction Strategy followed years of collaborative effort marked by both victories and losses for anti-poverty advocates. While there is still a long way to go in terms of dealing with poverty in Newfoundland, the report notes that a lot of progress has been made since the implementation of the provincial strategy in 2006: more people are working, fewer are reliant upon Income Support, and the number of people living below LICO is falling. What can Albertans learn from the experiences of Newfoundlanders?

    The BC report similarly looks at the history of poverty and poverty policy responses in the province. It looks at how frequent political shifts and the boom/bust economic cycle in the province have affected social programs and the well-being of communities. It notes that while there are some initiatives on behalf of the government to address poverty, several population groups are now experiencing increased risk of poverty.  Like in Alberta, government seems to have taken a backseat; and it has been civil society actors that have played – and continue to play – the central role in poverty prevention and reduction in BC.

    This resource is useful for anybody interested in learning more about poverty and poverty reduction programs across the country. Each provincial/territorial profile is written by local experts, and the references contain information about many of the groups and individuals that work both behind-the-scenes and on the front-lines in poverty reduction. You can download the individual reports from the website of the Canadian Council for Social Development (although beware, there have been some troubles with this website of late), or you can access hard copies in our library.

  • Reducing poverty a sound investment in uncertain times : Failing to invest now will lead to higher societal costs down the road

     

    by: John Kolkman, ESPC

    The provincial budget on Tuesday should invest in a comprehensive strategy for reducing Alberta’s high rates of child and adult poverty. The slowing economy makes such investments even more important. There has been a modest drop in child poverty in recent years due to a strong economy and some reinvestment in social programs. However, even these gains will be put at risk if the Alberta government makes the wrong choices in its budget.

    The last time the Alberta economy hit some turbulent waters back in the early 1990s, the government’s response was to make deep cuts to social programs, including social assistance, affordable housing and benefits to Albertans with disabilities. The results were predictable. Homelessness increased. Poverty spiked. So did the number of children in government care.

    This time the Alberta government must make better choices. Fortunately, the province is in a much stronger budgetary position today than during the early ’90s. By the time of the deep cuts of 1993, the Getty government had been running multibillion-dollar budget deficits since the mid-1980s. By contrast, until this year, there has been a spectacular run of consecutive multibillion-dollar budget surpluses.

    The Stelmach government has not yet had to dip into the $7.7 billion in the Sustainability Fund or the $7 billion in the Capital Account. While this will likely change with next year’s budget, that’s exactly what those accounts were intended for. They were designed as short-term savings accounts to be used to cover sudden or unexpected declines in government revenues as are currently being experienced.

    Cutting social supports will only make poverty worse and further depress government revenues. By contrast, investments in poverty reduction will help stimulate the economy. Lower-income Albertans will spend increases in social benefits on necessary goods and services, thus creating jobs and economic activity.

    The Stelmach government has made promising beginnings in improving the well-being of low- and modest-income Albertans. The decision to eliminate the health-care premiums tax on Jan. 1, 2009 added $900 million to the bottom lines of employers, employees and all but the lowest-income Albertans. Eliminating health premiums came at an opportune time, acting as a cushion against a slowing economy.

    Last month, the provincial government joined several cities, including Edmonton, in committing to a plan to end homelessness in 10 years. We’ll know on Tuesday whether the dollars needed to make this plan work will actually be invested.

    But much more can be done to correct a situation that, according to the 2006 federal census, saw more than one in 10 Alberta children (one in six children in the City of Edmonton) living in poverty during the height of Alberta’s recent boom.

    There’s still significant room to improve provincial benefit programs for low-income Albertans. For instance, Alberta could join several other provinces that have their own child tax benefits to supplement federal child tax benefits. Child tax benefits (including the supplement for low-income families) already contribute much more to alleviating poverty than provincial social assistance payments. Enhancing child tax benefits, including introduction of a parallel Alberta benefit, is the most important thing that can be done to lift more children out of poverty.

    Eligibility for Alberta’s Family Employment Tax Credit should be expanded to mirror the federal Working Income Tax Benefit. These benefits reward work effort by supplementing the income of those earning low wages. Four out of five low-income Albertans work. At present, provincial benefits are restricted to working families with children. They should be available to all low-income earners, including single adults and childless couples.

    Provincial low-income benefits should be tied to living costs, and not increased only when the government finds it expedient. Two years ago, the Stelmach government took the commendable step of linking the minimum wage to changes in the Alberta average weekly earnings index. Inflation-proofing should be extended to programs such as Assured Income for the Severely Handicapped, social assistance, and the Alberta Seniors’ Benefit.

    Arguably, the Stelmach government has done more in two years to improve the economic well-being of low-income Albertans than the Klein government did in 15 years. What is lacking is a comprehensive approach to tackling poverty.

    Last December, the Ontario government released a poverty reduction strategy, following the lead of other provinces, including Quebec and Newfoundland. The Ontario strategy calls for a 25-per-cent reduction in child poverty over five years, lifting 90,000 Ontario children out of poverty. If Ontario — facing a more challenging set of economic circumstances — can make a firm commitment to poverty reduction, surely Alberta can.

    The Alberta government already makes extensive use of business planning principles. This involves setting targets, implementing a plan to meet the targets, and then measuring results. The same sound business planning approach is needed for the successful implementation of a strategy to reduce poverty.

    The economic slowdown makes the adoption of a comprehensive poverty reduction strategy even more urgent. Doing nothing will cause poverty rates to rise as vulnerable workers lose their jobs and household incomes decline. Failing to invest now will lead to even higher societal costs down the road. Based on studies in Ontario and elsewhere, persistent poverty could be costing Alberta $5 billion to $10 billion a year in lost economic potential and extra costs for things like emergency medical services, child protection and policing.

    Political rhetoric and statements of good intentions just don’t cut it. Instead, the upcoming Alberta budget should include strategic investments in poverty reduction that will benefit all Albertans in the long-term.

    John Kolkman is the Research and Policy Analysis Co-ordinator of the Edmonton Social Planning Council. www.edmontonsocialplanning.ca

  • End of Boom Taking Toll on Edmonton’s Social Health: ESPC Releases Updated Publication Tracking Social Trends

    The Edmonton Social Planning Council (ESPC) today released the 2009 edition of its signature publication Tracking the Trends.  The 128-page publication examines in detail demographic, education and employment, living costs and housing, income and wealth, and poverty trends that together comprise the social health of Edmontonians.   Newly incorporated into the 2009 edition is a look at well-being in Edmonton at the neighbourhood level using 2006 federal census data.

    “Whether planning programs and services in our community, or developing policies, timely accurate information is critical to ensuring plans reflect reality,” said Susan Morrissey, the ESPC’s Executive Director.  “The objective of Tracking the Trends is to be a one-stop resource for identifying and analyzing a broad range of social and economic trends in the Edmonton city and region to help inform decision-making,” she added.

    “In the two years since the last release of Tracking the Trends our city and region has gone from an economic boom to a recession.  This is beginning to take a toll and will likely reverse the steady improvement in social health experienced since the mid-1990s ,” said John Kolkman, the ESPC’s Research and Policy Analysis Coordinator. Kolkman co-authored the report along with Anette Kinley.

    “As much as possible the 2009 edition of Tracking the Trends attempts to capture this changed reality by including partial year data,” said Kolkman.  “So far in 2009, the number of social assistance recipients is up 19%, food bank usage is up 40%, unemployment of vulnerable groups like Aboriginals is up sharply, and two and a half times more Edmontonians are receiving employment insurance benefits compared to last year.”

    A highlight of the 10th edition of Tracking the Trends is the neighbourhood maps.  “Putting 2006 Census data into maps gives a much clearer picture of the diversity amongst Edmonton neighbourhoods than any table or chart could,” says Kolkman.

    “These maps show the greatest disparity in socio-economic status is not between provinces or cities across Canada, but between neighbourhoods in our own city,” Kolkman said, pointing out that the most and the least socially vulnerable neighbourhoods in Edmonton are often located mere kilometers apart.  “Tracking neighbourhood trends can help decision makers to direct more resources to these vulnerable neighbourhoods,” he concluded.

    For more information contact:
    John Kolkman, Research and Policy Analysis Coordinator
    (780) 423-2031 x350

     

    For a full copy of the 2009 Tracking the Trends CLICK Here.

    website: https://www.edmontonsocialplanning.ca

  • 77,595 Alberta Children Live Below the Poverty Line : Report Calls for a Comprehensive Poverty Reduction Strategy

    A  new provincial report on Child and Family poverty released today by the Edmonton Social Planning Council (ESPC) reveals that 77,595 children are living in families below Statistics Canada’s Low Income Cut Off (LICO). This means one in ten children in Alberta live below the poverty line.

    The report, We Can Do Better, also shows that low income children in Alberta live deeper in poverty than children in other parts of Canada, and four out of five live in families where their parent or parents are working.  35,585 of these children live in a family with at least one parent working part-time or full-time part of the year, a further 20,855 had one parent working full time, full year and a further 3,840 had both parents working full time, full year.

    John Kolkman, the ESPC’s Research and Policy Analysis Coordinator, noted that, “child poverty is a daily reality in all Alberta communities, and made worse by this province’s high cost of living. Children living in lone parent, aboriginal and recent immigrant families are particularly vulnerable and significantly more likely to live in families struggling with low incomes.”

    “This report challenges us to look beyond the numbers and see that dollars spent to reduce poverty for children and families are investments in the current social infrastructure and the future of our communities,” said Janice Melnychuk, Executive Director of Vibrant Communities Edmonton. “Once people learn that we have 25,010 children in the City of Edmonton who live below the poverty line (one in six) we hope that the next step will be for our municipal leaders, businesses, community organizations and citizens to recognize that we can work together with the provincial and federal government to reduce poverty and build healthy vibrant communities.”

    “We are pleased to be able to bring together various partner organizations from around Alberta to build awareness of the situation of child and family poverty and to look for real comprehensive solutions to poverty in this wealthy province,” said Bill Moore-Kilgannon, Executive Director of Public Interest Alberta. “As the Alberta representative of Campaign 2000, a national coalition of organizations advocating for the elimination of child and family poverty, we feel Alberta should be joining with other provinces like Quebec, Newfoundland, New Brunswick and Ontario in setting firm poverty reduction targets and implementing policies and programs that will achieve these goals.”

     This report coincides with the release of the national report on child and family poverty by Campaign 2000 on Parliament Hill in Ottawa and with several other reports being released in provincial capitals on the same day.

    The full report is available on our website – www.edmontonsocialplanning.ca

  • Campaign 2000 asks Prime Minister Harper to keep interests of children on the agenda for fall session

    TORONTO, Nov. 17 /CNW/ – Campaign 2000, a cross-Canada coalition of morethan 120 organizations, is sending this letter to the Prime Minister, Leader of the Opposition, Jack Layton, Gilles Duceppe and Elizabeth May, urging the to keep the interests of children and families at the forefront of their agenda as they prepare for the new session of Parliament.

    Below is an open letter we are sending to the Right Hon. Stephen Harper Prime Minister of Canada.

     

    Campaign 2000 asks PM Harper to keep interests of children on the agenda                       for fall session of Parliament

                      – An Open Letter to Prime Minister Harper
                                  November 17, 2008
                                 From Campaign 2000
           (Laurel Rothman and Members of Campaign 2000 Steering Committee)

        ————————————————————————-

        Dear Mr. Harper:
     
    As you prepare for a new session of Parliament, we are writing to urge you to keep the interests of children and their families at the forefront of the agenda. Campaign 2000 is a broad, non-partisan coalition that represents hundreds of thousands of Canadians from coast to coast to coast. Campaign 2000 will want to see concrete commitments to the reduction of child and family poverty and to the development of a system of early childhood education and care services in this next session. It’s critical that the federal government takes the lead, because far too many children and their families still live in
    poverty.

    Campaign 2000 will be releasing our 2008 Report Card on Child and FamilyPoverty to the public on Nov. 21st, and we call on you to work with all levelsof government and civil society to adopt a comprehensive poverty reductio strategy. Without action from your government, the current economic downturn
    means that poverty rates will increase.

    A range of Canadians have agreed on what is needed to achieve a economically robust and socially inclusive Canada. Most agree that incom support programs, including an enhanced child benefit and strengthened Employment Insurance; early childhood education and care services; affordablehousing and good jobs are key elements of a poverty reduction strategy.Canadians are eagerly looking for leadership on these issues.(1) A overwhelming majority (92%) say that if other nations like the UK and Swedencan significantly reduce poverty, so can Canada. Three-quarters of Canadians (77%) say that the lack of affordable child care is a serious problem inCanada today and 83% think that governments have an important role to play insolving this problem.

    We recognize that at this time the state of the economy is paramount an will dominate debate. While investments in physical infrastructure project will be an important component, we believe that public investments in th social infrastructure can and should be an equally important component inaddressing economic uncertainty. Social investments help stabilize markets and protect families from further hardship as consumption by Canadians account for 57% of the economy.(2) Investments in low and modest income families are particularly strategic because they use their money in local communities topay rent and purchase food as well as other necessities which help grow local economies.

    It is more important than ever that our governments take the lead. We are counting on you and the leaders of the opposition parties to make sure that the needs of children and families are at the forefront when addressing the problems facing Canada.

        Sincerely,

        (signed)
        Laurel Rothman, National Coordinator, Campaign 2000

        Signed on behalf of members of Campaign 2000 Steering Committee (in
    alphabetical order by last name):

         –  Sue Delanoy, Communities for Children, Sask.
        –  Jody Dellaire, Child Care Advocacy Association of Canada
        –  Sid Frankel, Faculty of Social Work, University of Manitoba
        –  Martha Friendly, Child Care Resource and Research Unit
        –  Randy Hatfield, Human Development Council, NB
        –  Wayne Helgason, Social Planning Council of Winnipeg, MB
        –  Colin Hughes, Metro Toronto Campaign 2000/Children’s Aid Society of
           Toronto
        –  John Kolkman, Edmonton Social Plannin Council  webiste: www.edmontonsoicalplanning.ca 
       –  Jacquie Maund, Ontario Campaign 2000
        –  Andrew Jackson, Canadian Labour Congress
        –  Adrienne Montani, First Call: BC Child and Youth Advocacy Coalition
        –  Bill Moore-Kilgannon, Public Interest Alberta
        –  Marvyn Novick, Professor Emeritus, Ryerson University
        –  Rob Rainer, National Anti Poverty Organization
        –  Pauline Raven, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, Nova Scotia
        –  Simon Rosenblum, June Callwood Campaign Against Child Poverty
        –  Laurel Rothman, Campaign 2000 and Family Service Toronto
        –  Penelope Rowe, Community Services Council, Newfoundland and Labrador
        –  Helen Saravanamuttoo, Canadian Association of Social Workers
        –  Rebecca Siggner, Social Planning and Research Council, BC

        cc:
        The Hon. Stéphane Dion, Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada
        Jack Layton, Leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada
        Gilles Duceppe, Leader of the Bloc Québécois
        Elizabeth May, Leader of the Green Party

        —————————-
        (1) Hennessy, T., & Yalnizyan, A. (October 2008). Ready for Leadership:
            Canadians’ Perception of Poverty. Toronto, ON. Canadian Centre for
            Policy Alternatives.
        (2) Author’s calculations. Statistics Canada, Provincial and Territorial
            Economics Accounts, data tables catalogue 13-018-x. Table 2