Edmonton Social Planning Council

Category: Resources: Food Security

  • fACT Sheet — Food (In)Security During COVID-19

    fACT Sheet — Food (In)Security During COVID-19

    [et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ custom_margin=”0px||0px||false|false” custom_padding=”0px||0px||false|false”][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.3″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px||||false|false” custom_padding=”3px||5px|||” border_width_bottom=”1px” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_post_title meta=”off” featured_image=”off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” title_font=”||||||||” custom_margin=”||3px|||” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][/et_pb_post_title][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_image src=”https://edmontonsocialplanning.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/COLOUR-BLOCKS_spaced-300×51.png” title_text=”COLOUR BLOCKS_spaced” align=”center” _builder_version=”4.7.7″ _module_preset=”default” max_width=”100%” module_alignment=”center” max_height=”50px” custom_margin=”0px|0px|0px|0px|false|false” custom_padding=”10px|0px|10px|0px|false|false”][/et_pb_image][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px|auto|0px|auto|false|false” custom_padding=”37px|0px|44px|0px|false|false”][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.5.6″ custom_padding=”0px|0px|0px|0px|false|false” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_font=”||||||||” text_text_color=”#000000″ custom_padding=”||32px|||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9kYXRlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJkYXRlX2Zvcm1hdCI6ImRlZmF1bHQiLCJjdXN0b21fZGF0ZV9mb3JtYXQiOiIifX0=@[/et_pb_text][et_pb_button button_url=”https://edmontonsocialplanning.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/fACTsheet-Food-Security-COVID-19-1.pdf” button_text=”Download our Food Security fACT Sheet” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” custom_button=”on” button_text_color=”#ffffff” button_bg_color=”#008ac1″ custom_margin=”||19px|||” custom_padding=”||5px|||”][/et_pb_button][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ text_line_height=”1.6em” header_2_font=”||||||||” header_2_text_color=”#008ac1″ header_2_font_size=”24px” background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”95%” module_alignment=”left” custom_margin=”44px|0px|2px|-96px|false|false” locked=”off”]

    What is Food (In)Security?

    As defined by the United Nations’ World Food Summit of 1996, food security exists when “all people, at all times, have physical, social, and economic access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food to meet dietary needs for a productive and healthy life.”

    Food insecurity occurs when individuals or families lack access to food due to financial, physical, or social barriers. The accessibility of food can occur at community and national levels as well as within individual households. Thus, food security achieved at the community level does not necessarily prevent individuals from experiencing household food insecurity. Factors to consider when assessing food security include the availability and accessibility of food, alongside adequacy (i.e. nutritious, safe, and environmentally sustainable food) and acceptability (i.e. culturally acceptable food).

    Household food insecurity occurs due to financial constraint and exists on a spectrum that can be divided into three categories: marginal (concern about running out of food, or a limited food selection), moderate (compromise in quality or quantity of food), and severe (miss meals, reduce food intakes, or multiple days without food).

    Living with food insecurity can have detrimental impacts. According to the non-profit Community Food Centres Canada, food insecurity affects physical and mental health, relationships with loved ones and children, while also being attributed to increased social isolation, barriers in finding and maintaining employment, difficulty finding meaning and purpose in life, and impediments in the expression and sharing of culture.

    Who Is Most Impacted by Food Insecurity?

    Before the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020, nearly 4.5 million Canadians were experiencing food insecurity. According to Food Banks Canada’s 2019 HungerCount, food banks across Canada had over 1 million visits, of which nearly 375,000 of them being children. In Alberta, food banks recorded over 89,000 visits, with more than 35,282 of them being children. Food bank use nationwide had stabilized with roughly the same number of visits as in 2018. Within Edmonton, 13.8% of residents were food insecure in 2017-2018. In 2019, 63,323 people received a hamper from Edmonton’s Food Bank or one of its affiliates.

    Indigenous and racialized people are also disproportionately impacted by food insecurity. Black households are 3.5 times more likely to be food insecure than white households, and almost half of all First Nations families are food insecure.

    Of those who access food banks to meet their needs, the 2019 HungerCount reported that 34% were children, 48% were single adult households, 18% were single parent households, and 57.4% were on social assistance or disability-related supports.

    COVID-19’s Impact on Food Security

    The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated existing food security challenges for Canadians. According to Statistics Canada, almost one in seven Canadians (14.6%) experienced food insecurity in May 2020—an increase from 10.5% just two years earlier. Canadian households with children were particularly more likely to experience food insecurity, representing nearly one in five households (19%). As a result, food bank visits increased by 20%. Notably, not everyone who is food insecure accesses a food bank, so it’s possible these numbers are even higher.

    Emergency Funding and COVID-19

    When the COVID-19 pandemic spread, all levels of government introduced a number of relief measures to help Canadians weather the public health emergency. This included funding to address food security.

    In April 2020, the Government of Canada announced $100 million in funding through the Emergency Food Security Fund to Canadian food banks and other national food rescue organizations to help improve access to food for people experiencing food insecurity. Of this funding, $50 million went to Food Banks Canada while the remainder went to Second Harvest, Community Food Centres Canada, Breakfast Club of Canada, and Salvation Army. These organizations work in the areas of food rescue, food education and advocacy, school clubs, and community meals, respectively. In October 2020, the federal government announced another $100 million in funding to address food security.

    In May 2020, the Government of Alberta gave $5 million in funding to food banks across Alberta—part of the $30 million in emergency social service support that went to more than 460 agencies.

    Locally, the Edmonton Community Foundation delivered emergency funds to various community organizations through the COVID-19 Rapid Response Fund (over $4 million) and the Emergency Community Support Fund ($2.4 million). More than $500,000 and $600,000 from these two funds, respectively, were delivered to 46 different projects that addressed food security challenges.

    Food Rescue Initiatives

    In an era when millions of Canadians experience food insecurity, diverting food waste—especially perfectly edible food that might end up in the dumpster of a grocery warehouse due—is seen as a key measure to provide emergency relief for those in need.

    In August 2020, the Government of Canada announced a $50 million investment through the Surplus Food Rescue Program to distribute food—that would otherwise go to waste—to vulnerable Canadians that would otherwise go to waste. This food surplus was one outcome of the pandemic that had forced the closure of restaurant and hospitality industries, leaving many producers without a key market for their food commodities. Not-for-profits like Food Banks Canada and Second Harvest would redistribute 12 million kilograms of fresh fruit, vegetables, meat, fish, and seafood to food insecure families that would otherwise have been wasted.

    Locally, Edmonton’s Food Bank gleans 4.8 million pounds of food waste annually, equivalent to 60—80% of its annual meals.

    Leftovers Edmonton also diverts food waste for emergency relief, and in 2019 rescued enough food to provide 164,000 meals to charity.

    The Role of Community Gardens

    While fresh food provides more nutrition than packaged or processed food, only 40% of supplies distributed to food banks is fresh. As a result, community gardens have seen renewed interest.

    The University of Alberta’s Campus Community Garden, located in the East Campus Village since 2003, promotes urban agriculture by teaching campus community members sustainable gardening practices. It also contributes to food security by providing a portion of its harvest to the Campus Food Bank.

    The use of community gardens as a way to enable greater access to locally grown food and mitigating any potential disruptions to the global supply chain also saw increased interest as the COVID-19 pandemic took hold.

    In response, the City of Edmonton launched the Pop-Up Community Gardens Pilot in the spring of 2020, adding 350 garden plots in 29 temporary garden sites, designed to give residents a chance to start gardening or expand on an existing one. The city provided the planter boxes and soil to each site while gardeners were responsible for plants, seeds, and tools. Sites were chosen based on the number of grocery stores and/or the number of multi-family buildings within the neighbourhood. These gardens have the potential to increase food education, strengthen gardening skills, and enable more consumption of nutritious fruits and vegetables.

    While these pilot initiatives demonstrate positive outcomes like social connectedness, healthier eating habits, improved mental health, and increased physical activity, they are unlikely to significantly impact food insecurity rates in Canada.

    Multicultural Responses to Food Insecurity

    Food insecurity disproportionately impacts Indigenous, newcomer, and racialized populations in Canada. It’s important, therefore, that food security measures are responsive to their needs as they are more likely to experience social isolation due to food insecurity. Within Edmonton, a number of new initiatives aim to address these concerns.

    Food hamper programs were set up by organizations such as the Somali Canadian Education and Rural Development Organization (SCERDO) and the African Diaspora COVID-19 Response. This response team was set up by the Africa Centre in collaboration with ten other groups within the African community providing food hampers to their members in order to gain better access to nutrition (which includes providing culturally relevant foods like injera and yucca powder). They also help members to navigate government support programs, provide psychosocial and emotional support, as well as career support for those facing job loss.

    In addition, the C5: Collaborative for Change (Bent Arrow Traditional Healing Society, Boyle Street Community Services, Edmonton Mennonite Centre for Newcomers, Norwood Child and Family Resource Centre and Terra Centre for Teen Parents) set up a food hamper program in response to the pandemic, delivering food to 550 families—2,000 individuals every two weeks.

    These measures are in addition to the ongoing services that existed before the pandemic. For example, the Multicultural Health Brokers Co-op has a Grocery Run Program. This program is designed to address food security challenges among immigrant and refugee communities (particularly perinatal, pregnant, and post-partum women) as a result of barriers to transportation, language, or unfamiliarity with mainstream food products. The program has seen an increase from 100 to now 450 families accessing the program each week.

    Food insecurity in Canada is primarily linked to income or financial insecurity.

    Final Reflections

    The reasons individuals and families experience food insecurity are complex, and include physical, economic, and social barriers. Within Canada, food insecurity is primarily linked to income or financial insecurity: unemployment, low-wage or precarious jobs, and social assistance rates that do not provide a livable income for recipients.

    Measures to provide immediate food relief for emergency situations are important and valuable work, but long-term policies to address income insecurity must also be part of the solution to tackle food security both during and beyond, a global pandemic. These measures include a living wage, universal basic income, and protection from sudden changes or shocks to income sources.

     

    [/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.4″ custom_padding=”0px|20px|0px|20px|false|false” border_color_left=”#a6c942″ custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_testimonial author=”Posted by:” job_title=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3IiLCJzZXR0aW5ncyI6eyJiZWZvcmUiOiIiLCJhZnRlciI6IiIsIm5hbWVfZm9ybWF0IjoiZGlzcGxheV9uYW1lIiwibGluayI6Im9uIiwibGlua19kZXN0aW5hdGlvbiI6ImF1dGhvcl93ZWJzaXRlIn19@” portrait_url=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3JfcHJvZmlsZV9waWN0dXJlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnt9fQ==@” quote_icon=”off” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”job_title,portrait_url” _module_preset=”default” body_text_color=”#000000″ author_font=”||||||||” author_text_align=”center” author_text_color=”#008ac1″ position_font=”||||||||” position_text_color=”#000000″ company_text_color=”#000000″ background_color=”#ffffff” text_orientation=”center” module_alignment=”center” custom_margin=”0px|0px|4px|0px|false|false” custom_padding=”32px|0px|0px|0px|false|false”][/et_pb_testimonial][et_pb_text disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_text_color=”#000000″ header_text_align=”left” header_text_color=”rgba(0,0,0,0.65)” header_font_size=”20px” text_orientation=”center” custom_margin=”||50px|||” custom_padding=”48px|||||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9jYXRlZ29yaWVzIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiUmVsYXRlZCBjYXRlZ29yaWVzOiAgIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJsaW5rX3RvX3Rlcm1fcGFnZSI6Im9uIiwic2VwYXJhdG9yIjoiIHwgIiwiY2F0ZWdvcnlfdHlwZSI6ImNhdGVnb3J5In19@[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]
  • fACTivist Feature Article: Family Class Sponsored Immigrant Seniors in Canada: Income Dependency Challenges

    fACTivist Feature Article: Family Class Sponsored Immigrant Seniors in Canada: Income Dependency Challenges

    [et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ custom_margin=”0px||0px||false|false” custom_padding=”0px||0px||false|false”][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.3″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px||||false|false” custom_padding=”3px||5px|||” border_width_bottom=”1px” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_post_title meta=”off” featured_image=”off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” title_font=”||||||||” custom_margin=”||3px|||” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][/et_pb_post_title][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_image src=”https://edmontonsocialplanning.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/boxes_1.gif” title_text=”boxes_1″ align=”center” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”-2px||-1px||false|false” custom_padding=”||7px|||”][/et_pb_image][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px|auto|0px|auto|false|false” custom_padding=”37px|0px|44px|0px|false|false”][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.5.6″ custom_padding=”0px|0px|0px|0px|false|false” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_font=”||||||||” text_text_color=”#000000″ custom_padding=”||32px|||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9kYXRlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJkYXRlX2Zvcm1hdCI6ImRlZmF1bHQiLCJjdXN0b21fZGF0ZV9mb3JtYXQiOiIifX0=@[/et_pb_text][et_pb_button button_url=”https://edmontonsocialplanning.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/FACTIVIST-SUMMER-2020.pdf” button_text=”Download the Summer 2020 fACTivist” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” custom_button=”on” button_text_color=”#ffffff” button_bg_color=”#008ac1″ custom_margin=”||41px|||” custom_padding=”||5px|||” hover_enabled=”0″ sticky_enabled=”0″][/et_pb_button][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ text_line_height=”1.6em” header_2_font=”|600|||||||” header_2_text_color=”#008ac1″ header_2_font_size=”24px” background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”95%” module_alignment=”left” custom_margin=”-1px|0px|2px|-96px|false|false” locked=”off”]

    Note: this is excerpted from Summer 2020 edition of our fACTivist publication. The Edmonton Social Planning Council, in collaboration with volunteers and colleagues within the sector, strives to provide stakeholders and community members with updates on ESPC’s activities and projects, including articles and initiatives that address a variety of pertinent issues that affect our community

    Written by Jenn Rossiter, in collaboration with the Multicultural Health Brokers Cooperative and Age of Wisdom 

    Canada is a welcoming nation that embraces newcomers, and supports diversity and healthy families within its communities. However, when immigrants arrive they often encounter regulations and policies that make settling in a new country difficult. This can be especially tough for senior immigrants who face additional challenges to access income programs that could help them gain independence and security in their new surroundings.

    Senior immigrants typically arrive in Canada through the Family Class pathway, which allows Canadian citizens or permanent residents of Canada who are aged 18 years or older to sponsor family members (e.g. a spouse, child, parent or grandparent, or sibling).

    Every sponsorship is subject to a federal Sponsorship Agreement, which specifies how long a sponsor must financially support the incoming family member (called the undertaking period). This timeframe has been steadily increasing, causing undue stress and uncertainty for those involved. At the moment, parents and grandparents (PGPs) who arrive via Family Class sponsorship are required to remain financially dependent on their sponsor for 20 years. This affects their lives in countless challenging ways.

    The undertaking period for Family Class sponsorships has changed four times since the Immigration Act, 1976. From the late 70s, the undertaking period was between 1-10 years. However, the government found that sponsorship breakdowns were too frequent, leaving immigrants to rely on federal supports and costing the government money. In 1997, new regulations were introduced that put stricter financial requirements on a sponsorship, and set the undertaking period at 10 years.[i] The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act replaced Canada’s Immigration Act in 2002, and changed the undertaking period to either 3 or 10 years, depending on the relationship between sponsor and applicant. For example, the undertaking period for a spouse was only 3 years, whereas the undertaking period for PGPs remained 10 years.

    In 2012, the federal government realized that 70% of PGPs’ income came through the federal Old Age Security pension (OAS) and the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) programs.[ii] Of several amendments, the government doubled the sponsorship undertaking period for PGPs to 20 years, starting in 2014. This was meant to help ease government costs associated with federal and provincial social assistance programs, but also added financial responsibility to the sponsor—an annual increase of approximately 19% per household.2  Financial dependency can place a heavy burden on one family and household; these income supports could help alleviate anxieties, but program regulations are creating challenges.

    Eligibility for OAS is based on residence and legal status requirements. Qualifying seniors must be over 65, be a legal resident, and have lived in Canada for at least 10 years. There are two levels of OAS: the full pension and the partial pension. In addition to the above requirements, recipients can qualify for the full pension if they have lived in Canada for a minimum of 40 years. The partial pension qualification, in addition to the basic requirements above, is determined by a calculation using the number of years lived in Canada, beyond the minimum of 10.[iii]

    The GIS program is available to support seniors who qualify as low-income. Unfortunately, low-income rates among senior immigrants in Canada is nearly double that of non-immigrants, averaging at around 21%.[iv] Despite this, PGPs are typically not eligible to receive GIS until they have resided in Canada for a minimum of 10 years, are eligible for OAS, and their undertaking period has come to an end. For those immigrating after 2014, this means they cannot access GIS until they have been in Canada for a minimum of 20 years.

    Generally speaking, PGP applicant eligibility (after 2014) could be summarized by the following:

    For a senior immigrant who has legally resided in Canada for less than 10 years:

    • Individuals are not eligible for OAS.
    • Individuals are not eligible for GIS.

    For a senior immigrant who has legally resided in Canada for 10-19 years:

    • Individuals may be eligible for partial
    • Individuals are not eligible for GIS.

    For a senior immigrant who has legally resided in Canada for 20 years or more:

    • Individuals may be eligible for partial or full
    • Individuals may be eligible for GIS.

    To illustrate this, consider a Canadian citizen who has just been approved to sponsor their 70-year-old mother. The mother will be 80 years old before she can apply to access any of these income supports, and could likely only access partial OAS at that point. She will have to wait until she is 90 years old to apply for GIS, and an incredible 110 years old before applying for the full pension! These extended wait times for seniors to access supports and benefits are inhospitable, and are negatively affecting families.

    If the mother qualified for the partial OAS benefit after 10 years of residence, she would only receive ¼ of the full pension amount, meaning that, with current calculations, at the age of 80 she would receive a modest $153 each month[v]—an amount that would remain fixed for the remainder of her lifetime. All the while she will have been relying on her child to financially support her, paying for basic needs (food, shelter, clothing) and other necessities (health, transportation). Contributing such a small amount of money each month can leave PGPs feeling like a burden. This causes a lot of financial and emotional strain on a family, not to mention the impact of unexpected changes in health and income that are almost certain to occur in a household over a 10 or 20 year period.

    These issues only begin to explore some of the extensive financial obligations and stresses that fall on PGPs and sponsors, and the challenges that PGPs face in trying to become independent residents in Canada. Canada is a country that welcomes newcomers, but this financial stress should be reduced to benefit its population, in a way that truly does support healthy families and communities.

    References

    [i] Citizenship & Immigration Canada (1998), http://publications.gc.ca/collections/Collection/Ci51-86-1998E.pdf

    [ii] Government of Canada (2013), http://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2013/2013-05-18/html/reg2-eng.html

    [iii] Government of Canada, https://www.canada.ca/en/services/benefits/publicpensions/cpp/old-age-security/benefit-amount.html#h2.2-h3.2

    [iv] Statistics Canada (2019), https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/75-006-x/2019001/article/00017-eng.htm

    [v] Government of Canada, https://www.canada.ca/en/services/benefits/publicpensions/cpp/old-age-security/guaranteed-income-supplement/eligibility.html

    [/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.4″ custom_padding=”0px|20px|0px|20px|false|false” border_color_left=”#a6c942″ custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_testimonial author=”Posted by:” job_title=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3IiLCJzZXR0aW5ncyI6eyJiZWZvcmUiOiIiLCJhZnRlciI6IiIsIm5hbWVfZm9ybWF0IjoiZGlzcGxheV9uYW1lIiwibGluayI6Im9uIiwibGlua19kZXN0aW5hdGlvbiI6ImF1dGhvcl93ZWJzaXRlIn19@” portrait_url=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3JfcHJvZmlsZV9waWN0dXJlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnt9fQ==@” quote_icon=”off” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”job_title,portrait_url” _module_preset=”default” body_text_color=”#000000″ author_font=”||||||||” author_text_align=”center” author_text_color=”#008ac1″ position_font=”||||||||” position_text_color=”#000000″ company_text_color=”#000000″ background_color=”#ffffff” text_orientation=”center” module_alignment=”center” custom_margin=”0px|0px|4px|0px|false|false” custom_padding=”32px|0px|0px|0px|false|false”][/et_pb_testimonial][et_pb_text disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_text_color=”#000000″ header_text_align=”left” header_text_color=”rgba(0,0,0,0.65)” header_font_size=”20px” text_orientation=”center” custom_margin=”||50px|||” custom_padding=”48px|||||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9jYXRlZ29yaWVzIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiUmVsYXRlZCBjYXRlZ29yaWVzOiAgIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJsaW5rX3RvX3Rlcm1fcGFnZSI6Im9uIiwic2VwYXJhdG9yIjoiIHwgIiwiY2F0ZWdvcnlfdHlwZSI6ImNhdGVnb3J5In19@[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]

  • Research Update: Understanding Support Barriers for LGBTQ2 People

    Research Update: Understanding Support Barriers for LGBTQ2 People

    [et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ custom_margin=”0px||0px||false|false” custom_padding=”0px||0px||false|false”][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.3″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px||||false|false” custom_padding=”3px||5px|||” border_width_bottom=”1px” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_post_title meta=”off” featured_image=”off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” title_font=”||||||||” custom_margin=”||3px|||” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][/et_pb_post_title][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_image src=”https://edmontonsocialplanning.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/boxes_1.gif” title_text=”boxes_1″ align=”center” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”-2px||-1px||false|false” custom_padding=”||7px|||”][/et_pb_image][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px|auto|0px|auto|false|false” custom_padding=”37px|0px|44px|0px|false|false”][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.5.6″ custom_padding=”0px|0px|0px|0px|false|false” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_font=”||||||||” text_text_color=”#000000″ custom_padding=”||32px|||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9kYXRlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJkYXRlX2Zvcm1hdCI6ImRlZmF1bHQiLCJjdXN0b21fZGF0ZV9mb3JtYXQiOiIifX0=@[/et_pb_text][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ text_line_height=”1.6em” header_2_font=”||||||||” header_2_text_color=”#008ac1″ header_2_font_size=”24px” background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”95%” module_alignment=”left” custom_margin=”6px|0px|2px|-96px|false|false” hover_enabled=”0″ locked=”off” sticky_enabled=”0″]

    Note: this is excerpted from the May 2020 edition of our “Research Update” publication. The Edmonton Social Planning Council, in collaboration with our volunteers, strives to provide stakeholders and community members with up-to-date reviews, prepared by our volunteers, on recently published social research reports and publications.

    Reviewed by Hanna Nash

    In Provider Perspectives: Understanding Support Barriers for LGBTQ2 People, NorQuest College researchers Cindy Boucher and Kassi Boyd examine the difficulties and perspectives of front-line workers when providing services to Edmonton’s homeless, or at-risk of homelessness, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and two-spirit (LGBTQ2) community.

    When exploring the specific obstacles affecting staff in relation to their work with homeless or at-risk members of the LGBTQ2 community, Boucher and Boyd discovered three central difficulties experienced by most organizations in Edmonton: a lack of resources for staff, limited contact with self-identified LGBTQ2 members, and continued fear from members of LGBTQ2 groups to identify themselves and their unique needs to organizations. The results of Boucher and Boyd’s study is restricted to interviews held with 35 individual front-line service providers in Edmonton. Research from the organizations themselves was limited and difficult to procure.

    Organizations offering help to these individuals facing homelessness often do not have relevant policies, procedures, or guidelines readily available for staff to reference. In addition, most staff reported that they did not feel that they were adequately educated in current LGBTQ2 culture and systemic barriers to fully understand how homelessness is influenced by gender identification and sexual orientation. Although most interviewees expressed an interest in receiving education on the LGBTQ2 community, most support staff indicated that they were unaware of ways to become more informed. This in turn creates a lack of consistent aid available for those who are vulnerable as they are subject to individual staff biases, and by the onus for staff to access external resources and knowledge.

    Self-identification is not a requirement for clients who seek help. Not being aware of which clients are part of the LGBTQ2 community creates added challenges for support staff when helping individuals specific to this community. Many support staff could not indicate the number of LGBTQ2 clients they may have had, or in fact whether they had ever helped an LGBTQ2 client. This additional difficulty prevents front-line staff from understanding a client’s specific needs and struggles. Furthermore, most organizations rely on a generalized client-focused approach, whereby staff assess each client and provide resources regardless of who they are. Although this blanket approach is done in the interest of aiding in a non-discriminatory fashion, it does not take into consideration the specific challenges the LGBTQ2 community faces, such as risks to physical or mental health.

    This leads to the third most identified barrier. As many members in this community have experienced traumatic events related to their gender identification and sexual orientation, many choose not to self-identify. As a result, these LGBTQ2 members often do not feel safe in expressing their individual circumstances, and believe that they are risking their safety by exposing themselves to a front-line service worker. Front-line service staff identified this as a barrier to current and continued help for the community, suggesting that without increased self-identification, resources specific to their needs will likely not be made available to them or their community. Assets, particularly government funding, will likely only be made available with proof and justification for a population. This study also demonstrated that although many front-line staff respect an LGBTQ2 individual’s right to conceal their sexual orientation or preferred gender, staff were generally unable to give specific reasons or examples for why an individual would refrain from self-identifying.

    Boucher and Boyd provide many insights into the difficulties front-line staff experience when trying to provide aid to homeless or at-risk LGBTQ2 people. Further research into specific populations within the community could provide governments and society with an enhanced understanding of the impediments faced by front-line service providers. For example, this study does not distinguish the unique concerns between age groups, gender, or health within this population.

    Additionally, as this research was undertaken with the help of front-line staff who volunteered to speak to Boucher and Boyd, it presents a difficulty in truly understanding the position that organizations take when aiding members of the LGBTQ2 community. Boucher and Boyd do take into consideration that the people who volunteered to take part in their study are most likely open to supporting the LGBTQ2 community, and consequently, much of this research is based upon individual biases and interests rather than the outcomes of clearly identified and consistent policies of organizations providing aid.

    Boucher and Boyd’s research addresses the concerns that have been overlooked by society and the very organizations that exist to help those who are most vulnerable. If organizations were held accountable to implement specific policies and procedures, perhaps front-line service staff would be more effective in helping the LGBTQ2 community.

    Publication SourceBoucher, C. & Boyd, K. (2018). Provider Perspectives: understanding support barriers for LGBTQ2 people. NorQuest College. Retrieved from: http://homewardtrust.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Boucher-and-Boyd-2018.-Understanding-support-barriers-for-LGBTQ2-people.pdf

    Volunteer Research ReviewerHanna Nash enjoys ballet performances and other live theatre, as well as outdoor sports and travelling to new countries. Hanna is interested in sharing information and knowledge to Edmonton’s diverse communities.

    [/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.4″ custom_padding=”0px|20px|0px|20px|false|false” border_color_left=”#a6c942″ custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_testimonial author=”Posted by:” job_title=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3IiLCJzZXR0aW5ncyI6eyJiZWZvcmUiOiIiLCJhZnRlciI6IiIsIm5hbWVfZm9ybWF0IjoiZGlzcGxheV9uYW1lIiwibGluayI6Im9uIiwibGlua19kZXN0aW5hdGlvbiI6ImF1dGhvcl93ZWJzaXRlIn19@” portrait_url=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3JfcHJvZmlsZV9waWN0dXJlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnt9fQ==@” quote_icon=”off” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”job_title,portrait_url” _module_preset=”default” body_text_color=”#000000″ author_font=”||||||||” author_text_align=”center” author_text_color=”#008ac1″ position_font=”||||||||” position_text_color=”#000000″ company_text_color=”#000000″ background_color=”#ffffff” text_orientation=”center” module_alignment=”center” custom_margin=”0px|0px|4px|0px|false|false” custom_padding=”32px|0px|0px|0px|false|false”][/et_pb_testimonial][et_pb_text disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_text_color=”#000000″ header_text_align=”left” header_text_color=”rgba(0,0,0,0.65)” header_font_size=”20px” text_orientation=”center” custom_margin=”||50px|||” custom_padding=”48px|||||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9jYXRlZ29yaWVzIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiUmVsYXRlZCBjYXRlZ29yaWVzOiAgIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJsaW5rX3RvX3Rlcm1fcGFnZSI6Im9uIiwic2VwYXJhdG9yIjoiIHwgIiwiY2F0ZWdvcnlfdHlwZSI6ImNhdGVnb3J5In19@[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]

  • Research Update: Measurement and Evaluation Practices in Canada’s Charitable Sector

    Research Update: Measurement and Evaluation Practices in Canada’s Charitable Sector

    [et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ custom_margin=”0px||0px||false|false” custom_padding=”0px||0px||false|false”][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.3″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px||||false|false” custom_padding=”3px||5px|||” border_width_bottom=”1px” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_post_title meta=”off” featured_image=”off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” title_font=”||||||||” custom_margin=”||3px|||” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][/et_pb_post_title][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_image src=”https://edmontonsocialplanning.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/boxes_1.gif” title_text=”boxes_1″ align=”center” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”-2px||-1px||false|false” custom_padding=”||7px|||”][/et_pb_image][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px|auto|0px|auto|false|false” custom_padding=”37px|0px|44px|0px|false|false”][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.5.6″ custom_padding=”0px|0px|0px|0px|false|false” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_font=”||||||||” text_text_color=”#000000″ custom_padding=”||32px|||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9kYXRlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJkYXRlX2Zvcm1hdCI6ImRlZmF1bHQiLCJjdXN0b21fZGF0ZV9mb3JtYXQiOiIifX0=@[/et_pb_text][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ text_line_height=”1.6em” header_2_font=”||||||||” header_2_text_color=”#008ac1″ header_2_font_size=”24px” background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”95%” module_alignment=”left” custom_margin=”0px|0px|2px|-96px|false|false” hover_enabled=”0″ locked=”off” sticky_enabled=”0″]

    Note: this is excerpted from the May 2020 edition of our “Research Update” publication. The Edmonton Social Planning Council, in collaboration with our volunteers, strives to provide stakeholders and community members with up-to-date reviews, prepared by our volunteers, on recently published social research reports and publications.

    Reviewed by Shawna Ladouceur

    This article summarizes findings from a 2018 survey conducted by Imagine Canada. Imagine Canada is a national organization providing programs and resources to strengthen charities, promote corporate giving, and support the charitable sector through accreditation, corporate recognition, public policy advocacy, and research.

    Organizational stakeholders, policymakers, the media, and individual Canadians want to see how the charities they support are affecting the populations they serve, as well as the impact on broader systems. But given the diverse range of potential approaches to measurement and evaluation, an even wider range of possible uses for the results produced, and the incredible diversity of stakeholders and audiences with whom to engage, charities seek a common understanding around norms and expectations. Imagine Canada works with charities to establish a cohesive narrative for this increasingly important conversation, and this survey laid groundwork for the development of this common understanding with an in-depth look at the current state of evaluation.

    Seeking to benchmark current practices, categories for this survey included: aspects measured and evaluated; methods employed; how results were used; the role of funder relationships; enablers and barriers affecting evaluation capacity and ability to make use of findings; opinions about evaluation and measurement; the role of evaluation-related networks; the effect of dedicated evaluation staff; and the role and effect of employing external evaluators.

    An overview of survey results indicated 96% of charities evaluate their work in some way. Method and resources employed can be affected by: the size of the organization—small (<$150,000 annual revenue), medium ($150,000 -$5 million), or large (>$5 million); charitable subsector (grant making, fundraising and voluntarism; arts, culture, & recreation; education; social service; and health); and region of Canada in which the charity operates. Aspects measured include: outputs, outcomes, quality, long-term/systemic impacts, return on investment, and other measures. A range of both quantitative (administrative data, statistical compilations, surveys, web statistics, and experimental studies) and qualitative methods (interviews, focus groups, logic models / theories of change, and case studies) are employed, with measurement tools used seemingly correlated to aspects being measured.

    Results from evaluation can be used in many different ways. For the purpose of this survey, these were subdivided into four major categories and eighteen distinct uses. Categories included: stakeholder reporting/ communications; organization/ program-planning and decision-making; learning; and organizational performance. The most common of the eighteen distinct uses were: reporting to the organization’s board of directors, funders, or other supporters; evaluating achievement of objectives; learning from outcomes; revising existing programs; and supporting the development of new ones.

    When examining evaluation capacity and ability to make use of findings, the survey exposed both enablers and barriers. Listed in order of influence, these included: support from organizational leadership; staff buy-in; staff knowledge, skills, tools, etc.; stakeholder buy-in; funder support; external evaluators/ consultants; capacity of funded/ supported organizations; staff time; and financial resources. These factors function as barriers when absent, and enablers when present.

    An examination of funder relationships found that 90% of charities surveyed received some form of external funding. Charities that received funding dedicated to evaluation tended to a more comprehensive review. Regular communication between funders and fundees appeared to be key to making best use of evaluation results, and served to promote a positive view of this relationship.

    Key survey findings indicated that satisfaction with evaluation capacity and ability to make use of results were strongly correlated with enablers and barriers. Of note, opinions about evaluation did not seem to vary according to what charities evaluate, how they evaluate it, or how they use evaluation results. Involvement with evaluation networks increased overall satisfaction. Charities with dedicated evaluation staff were more likely to draw on a number of specific methods and resources, have significantly more positive opinions about evaluation, and to see potential enablers and barriers as enablers. While this survey found that charities working with external evaluators reported being less satisfied with evaluation capacity, they actually tended to demonstrate greater capacity, evaluating more involved aspects of their work and drawing on more sophisticated methods. Speculation as to this phenomenon is presented as multifactorial and seemingly complicated.

    This survey provided a starting point on which to base a coordinated narrative for the conversation charities are having with Canadians. Such narrative will certainly serve to increase trust and confidence, strengthen charities, and promote giving in support of the charitable sector. Given the heavy statistical nature of this report, this review can only provide a broad overview of the large repository of valuable statistical information presented in this survey. Please see the full report for detailed analysis.

    Publication SourceLasby, David. (2019). The State of Evaluation—Measurement and Evaluation Practices in Canada’s Charitable Sector. Imagine Canada. Retrieved from: https://www.imaginecanada.ca/en/research/state-of-evaluation

    Volunteer Research ReviewerShawna Ladouceur is a Registered Nurse who sees the impacts of the social determinants of health in ways that demand action. She has extensive experience working directly with vulnerable populations in the inner city. Her personal interests include skiing, hiking, biking, running, reading and travelling.

    [/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.4″ custom_padding=”0px|20px|0px|20px|false|false” border_color_left=”#a6c942″ custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_testimonial author=”Posted by:” job_title=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3IiLCJzZXR0aW5ncyI6eyJiZWZvcmUiOiIiLCJhZnRlciI6IiIsIm5hbWVfZm9ybWF0IjoiZGlzcGxheV9uYW1lIiwibGluayI6Im9uIiwibGlua19kZXN0aW5hdGlvbiI6ImF1dGhvcl93ZWJzaXRlIn19@” portrait_url=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3JfcHJvZmlsZV9waWN0dXJlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnt9fQ==@” quote_icon=”off” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”job_title,portrait_url” _module_preset=”default” body_text_color=”#000000″ author_font=”||||||||” author_text_align=”center” author_text_color=”#008ac1″ position_font=”||||||||” position_text_color=”#000000″ company_text_color=”#000000″ background_color=”#ffffff” text_orientation=”center” module_alignment=”center” custom_margin=”0px|0px|4px|0px|false|false” custom_padding=”32px|0px|0px|0px|false|false”][/et_pb_testimonial][et_pb_text disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_text_color=”#000000″ header_text_align=”left” header_text_color=”rgba(0,0,0,0.65)” header_font_size=”20px” text_orientation=”center” custom_margin=”||50px|||” custom_padding=”48px|||||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9jYXRlZ29yaWVzIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiUmVsYXRlZCBjYXRlZ29yaWVzOiAgIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJsaW5rX3RvX3Rlcm1fcGFnZSI6Im9uIiwic2VwYXJhdG9yIjoiIHwgIiwiY2F0ZWdvcnlfdHlwZSI6ImNhdGVnb3J5In19@[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]

  • Tracking the Trends 2018

    The Edmonton Social Planning Council (ESPC) today released the 2018 edition of its flagship publication Tracking the Trends.  The 131-page publication provides a detailed analysis of social and economic trends in Edmonton. Information is provided about population demographics, education and employment, living costs & housing, income & wealth, poverty & government transfers, and key indicators of Edmonton’s social health.

    “Timely, accurate information is critical to informed decision-making,” said Kolkman. “Tracking the Trends 2018 is a one-stop resource for identifying and analyzing a broad range of social and economic trends impacting those with low and modest incomes in our community,” he concluded.

    Download: Tracking the Trends 2018

  • 2012 Right to Food Brief

    Title:Brief presented to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food: May 7, 2012.
    Author(s):Campbell, Bruce
    Corporate Author: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
    Subject:Food security – hunger, health|split|Food security – local food systems|split|Food security – planning, policy|split|Food security – statistics, studies|split|Government of Canada – programs, services|split|Housing – rental|split|Housing – studies, surveys|split|Labour standards, legislation – general|split|Pensions – planning, policy|split|Pensions – reform|split|Poverty – general|split|Women – rights and equality
    Publisher:Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
    Place of Publication:Ottawa
    Date of Publication:2012
    Abstract:

    This brief analyzes the impact of key measures in the 2012 federal budget on poverty and inequality, and by extension, on food insecurity in Canada.(Taken from brief)

    Language:English
    Material Type:Policy Document

    N. FOOD SECURITY/2012 Right-to-Food-brief.pdf