Edmonton Social Planning Council

Category: Social Issues: Poverty

  • 2011 VC Poverty Reducation

    Title:Canada’s cities reducing poverty: response to federal poverty reduction plan report.
    Corporate Author: Vibrant Communities Canada
    Subject:Poverty – general
    Publisher:Vibrant Communities Canada
    Place of Publication:Waterloo ON
    Date of Publication:2011
    Abstract:

    A submission from Vibrant Communities Canada and 12 partner communities in response to the Federal Poverty Reduction Plan: Working in Partnership towards Reducing Poverty in Canada Report of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

    Language:English
    Material Type:Report

    F. SOCIAL ISSUES/F.04 POVERTY/2011 VC_poverty_reduction.pdf

  • 2010 Time for Action

    Title:Time for action: working together to end poverty in Alberta.
    Author(s):Kolkman, John|split|Ahorro, Joseph|split|Varlen, Kory|split|Moore-Kilgannon, Bill K
    Corporate Author: Edmonton Social Planning Council
    Public Interest Alberta
    Subject:Poverty – general
    Publisher:Edmonton Social Planning Council
    Place of Publication:Edmonton
    Date of Publication:2010
    Abstract:

    The Edmonton Social Planning Council and Public Interest Alberta released a new report that shows 53,000 Alberta children lived below Statistics Canada’s low-income cut-off (after-tax) in 2008, and that number is probably higher today due to the effects of the recession on our economy. “It is just plain wrong that in one of the wealthiest parts of the world we have so many children that are struggling in poverty,” said Bill Moore-Kilgannon, Executive Director of Public Interest Alberta. “Other provinces with fewer resources are working together with their communities to come up with many different solutions, timelines and real achievable targets to address this situation. Certainly it is ‘Time for Action’ here in Alberta as well.” “The report clearly shows that we need to do much more than wait for the economy to rebound,” says John Kolkman, Research Coordinator for the Edmonton Social Planning Council. “The majority of children living in poverty (53.8%) lived in families where the combined work activity equalled full-time for the full year.” “The good news is that a number of government programs do make a real difference. Government transfer programs lifted 36% of children above the low-income cut off in 2008 (up from 25% in 1989),” says Kolkman. “The bad news is that many important programs are being cut or scaled back and we see increasing social assistance case loads, up 45% from two years earlier (October 2010 statistic). Alberta food bank use in 2010 is at a 12 year high.” “We are very pleased to see a growing number of people who want to see Alberta adopt a strategy to reduce, prevent and eliminate poverty in Alberta,” says Bill Moore-Kilgannon. “Many municipal, business and community leaders strongly support the unanimous recommendation of the Standing Committee on the Economy to establish a designed-in-Alberta poverty reduction strategy.

    Language:English
     Material Type:Report

    F. SOCIAL ISSUES/F.04 POVERTY/2010 time_for_action.pdf

  • 2010 Reducing Student Poverty

    Title:Reducing student poverty in the classroom: school-based antipoverty strategies the federal government can learn from and act on.
    Author(s):Bireda, Saba|split|Moses, Joy
    Subject:Poverty – child poverty|split|Education – planning, policy|split|Children – services, planning|split|Child care – general
    Publisher:Center for American Progress
    Place of Publication:Washington, DC
    Date of Publication:2010
    Abstract:

    Since the time when the most pressing problem facing educators was pigtails being dunked in inkwells, the American school house has maintained a tradition of delivering the 3 Rs—reading, ‘riting, and ’rithmatic. Those halcyon days, if they ever existed, are long past. Today’s educators face a myriad of concerns including the high concentrations of poverty that limit opportunities for young Americans to succeed in too many of our schools. That’s why the American school house must play a critical role in addressing at least one more R—reducing the negative consequences of poverty by becoming a central component of federal, state and local antipoverty strategies. Schools that are educating high numbers of disadvantaged students must employ innovative strategies to promote academic achievement. Many of these strategies are what we believe have a direct impact on student learning, such as offering incentives to recruit and retain highly effective teachers, implementing challenging yet accessible curriculum, and providing additional learning opportunities beyond the traditional school day. Yet it is just as important to address outside-school influences, specifically poverty that can also significantly impact student achievement and success. Factors from inadequate housing, food instability, and financial insecurity place stresses on young people that distract them from their studies and can cause them to disengage from school entirely. When poverty intersects with poor performing schools the outcome for low-income students can be devastating, from dramatically lower test scores as compared to their higher-income peers, to staggering dropout rates. Further, there are a number of government programs that help address the basic needs of school-age children but families often face barriers to participating in these programs. Some of these barriers include: * Lack of outreach and accessible information about the programs * Transportation challenges of visiting and signing up for these programs at different (and sometimes remote) locations * Burdensome application requirements, such as unnecessary repeat visits to program offices and unnecessary document requests * The stigma associated with applying for programs These problems are multiplied and made more complicated for those families that qualify for more than one public-benefits program. Communities across the country are finding that pairing antipoverty strategies with schools result in positive student outcomes as well as improve the delivery of public benefits. Although these are not traditional relationships, schools can play a pivotal role in providing the important economic services that stabilize families— services that can also eliminate some the challenges that undermine student academic achievement. Already school-based antipoverty initiatives in places such as New York City, Michigan, San Diego, and New Mexico highlight the success students can realize, not only in the classroom but also as it concerns their overall sense of well-being, when the traditional role of the school is expanded to include services targeting poverty. For a number of years the city of San Diego had one of the nation’s lowest rates of participation in the federal SNAP/Food Stamp program (about 35 percent of eligible residents). The low participation rate was pegged to a number of factors, from inconvenient and hard-to-reach enrollment locations, to lack of assistance to help families fill out cumbersome and confusing forms. To boost participation in the program, county officials enlisted the help of the San Diego School board, which in turn agreed to allow four of its schools located in high-poverty neighborhoods to serve as food stamp screening centers. This school-based program has been able to remove a number of enrollment barriers, including easing the sense of anxiety experienced by many families, by providing locations with which they are familiar and comfortable. While advocates are still working to help increase participation rates, more than 600 San Diego families have been counseled on eligibility requirements through the school-based initiative. The SNAP/Food Stamp program is just one of the many federal, state, and local government programs and services available to low-income students and their families. Unfortunately, families who can benefit most from these programs often encounter challenges and barriers to participation that are similar to those that existed for San Diego’s SNAP program. Dealing with multiple agencies in different locations, requiring different application processes can be overwhelming for many families. Streamlining the process by allowing for central connection points for services will maximize outcomes. Schools are ideal locations because they have unparalleled access to poor students and their families—they are located in the neighborhoods in which families live, are recognized and familiar community institutions, and have established relationships with low-income students and their families. In short, schools are ideally positioned to become effective central connection points for a broad range of social welfare services. Consequently, in this paper, we urge: * Congress, with its current concerns about reducing costs, to attach to an appropriations bill (or other vehicle) a requirement that relevant federal administrative agencies produce a report to Congress that outlines a plan for expanding the use of central connection points and simplifying and consolidating public benefit application requirements. These efforts should include advancing school-based antipoverty strategies. * The White House Domestic Policy Council and the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships to get involved in efforts to develop a plan, and take a leadership role to help spur Congress to action. * Congress to invest in community school models and to create a new innovation fund designed to explore the potential benefits of delivering public benefits through schools. * State and local governments to establish interagency committees to replicate and expand upon existing school-based antipoverty models and maintain new modes of providing services through schools. We’re confident that after reading our analysis and recommendations policymakers in Congress and the Obama administration will realize the positive impact that school-based antipoverty programs could have on the education and well being of low-income children across our country.

    Language:English
     Material Type:Report

    F. SOCIAL ISSUES/F.04 POVERTY/2010 reducing_student_poverty.pdf

  • 2010 National Poverty Report Card

    Title:Reduced poverty = better health for all
    Variant Title:2010 report card on child and family poverty in Canada: 1989 – 2010
    Corporate Author: Campaign 2000
    Subject:Poverty – child poverty
    Publisher:Campaign 2000
    Place of Publication:Toronto
    Date of Publication:2010
    Abstract:

    Canada’s economic recovery hinges on federal leadership to pull recession victims out of the poor house and prevent Canadians from plunging into deeper poverty, says Campaign 2000’s new report card on child and family poverty. Reduced Poverty = Better Health for All looks at the nation’s most recent child and family poverty rate compared to 21 years ago, when Parliament unanimously resolved to end child poverty by 2000, and finds that 610,000 children (2008 LICO after-tax) and their families lived in poverty even before the recession hit. The child poverty rate of 9.1 per cent is slightly less than when it was 11.9 per cent in 1989. Lessons from past recessions tell us that poverty will rise before the recovery is complete.

    Language:English
     Material Type:Report

    F. SOCIAL ISSUES/F.04 POVERTY/2010 National povertyreportcard2010.pdf

  • 2010 Rough Sleepers

    Title:Providing personalised support to rough sleepers: an evaluation of the City of London pilot.
    Author(s):Hough, Juliette|split|Rice, Becky
    Subject:Income security programs – general|split|Housing – temporary, emergency, homelessness
    Publisher:Joseph Rowntree Foundation
    Place of Publication:London UK
    Date of Publication:2010
    Abstract:

    This study evaluated a new way of working with long-term rough sleepers. It examined the impact of a pilot project offering personalised budgets to rough sleepers in the City of London, and explored the reasons for the project’s success.
    Fifteen people who had been sleeping rough for between 4 and 45 years were offered a personalised budget. By the time of the evaluation, the majority were in accommodation (seven) or making plans to move into accommodation (two). The personalised budget fulfi lled several functions. It helped to establish a trusting relationship with the project coordinator; gave people an incentive to move into and stay in accommodation; and supported people in maintaining tenancies by responding to crisis and planning for a future.
    The authors conclude that the personalised support provided to individuals was as important to the success of the project as the provision of personalised budgets. The personalised approach has brought people elements of choice and control not provided by standard offers of support, alongside intensive support from one trusted worker.

    Language:English
     Material Type:Report

    F. SOCIAL ISSUES/F.04 POVERTY/2010 rough_sleepers.pdf

  • 2010 Panhandling Edmonton

    Title:Panhandling: a street study.
    Corporate Author: Boyle Street Community Services
    Subject:Unemployment – general|split|Employment – general|split|Urban issues – studies|split|Housing – temporary, emergency, homelessness
    Publisher:Boyle Street Community Services
    Place of Publication:Edmonton
    Date of Publication:2010
    Abstract:

    Boyle Street Community Services was contracted by the REACH Edmonton Council for Safe Communities to prepare a report on panhandlers and their needs. The survey’s purpose was to provide intelligence about panhandlers, including:

    Demographic information

    The reasons why they were on the street/or why they were panhandling.

    Their principal needs, including basic necessities, housing, employment, addictions, etc.

    Interventions which would be most helpful; understanding which services individuals might already use and what might be beneficial to them to increase stability and reduce or prevent panhandling.

    Conditions/situations of panhandlers, such as disabilities, etc.

    Language:English
     Material Type:Report

    F. SOCIAL ISSUES/F.04 POVERTY/2010 panhandling_edmonton.pdf