DESCRIPTION OF SAMPLE
330 people living with mental health problems and/or mental illness completed the survey.
71% had mental health problems/illnesses, and around 25% had a concurrent disorder.
All territories and provinces except for the Northwest Territories and Nunavut were represented (See Table 1).
The greatest representation was from Ontario, followed by British Columbia, Alberta, and Nova Scotia.
The majority of participants lived in their own apartments, with most living in housing stock that was not solely dedicated to people living with mental health problems and/or addictions (37.8%); see Figure 1 for an expanded listing of housing arrangements.
20 respondents identified as Aboriginal, 12 of whom lived in housing that was not dedicated solely to people living with mental health problems and/or addictions.
SATISFACTION WITH LIVING ARRANGEMENT
Satisfaction was significantly higher among individuals who rent a room (73%) or an apartment (68%) dedicated to people with mental health problems/illnesses or who own their own home (77%). (χ2 = 45.93, p
= .05)
The highest rates of dissatisfaction were among those living with their families, renting a room or an apartment not dedicated to people with mental health problems, those in shelters, and the homeless.
Primary causes for concern regarding housing arrangement included affordability (29%), maintenance of the physical site (17%), fear of eviction (16.5%), safety (13.5%), and distance from services (13.5%).
Motivators for people who indicated that they would want to move (50.2%) from their current housing arrangement included more independence (41.5%), less distance from family and friends (34%), more mental health services (33%), more physical health supports (24.5%), and less distance to public transportation (21%).
There were significant associations by province and territory with the reasons that motivated people to move.
In Québec and Ontario, the desire to be closer to friends and family, and to public transportation, were significant factors, while these were nissues in Prince Edward Island and Saskatchewan. The need for on-site support workers was a significant motivator in Saskatchewan, Québec, and the Yukon.
CHALLENGES AND SUPPORTS INFLUENCING FINDING, ACCESSING, AND MAINTAINING HOUSING
Affordability (68%), quality (45%), safety (42%), access (39%), and necessary supports (26%) were cited most frequently as challenges to appropriate housing.
Responses to open-ended questions revealed additional challenges such as house cleaning, long waiting lists to access housing, and accessing financial assistance.
Though not statistically significant, trends suggest that individuals with concurrent disorders face greater challenges in finding and keeping housing than do individuals with a mental illness only. Greater
discrimination and financial difficulty were reported by this sub-population.
Affordability was a major issue in many provinces: more than 68% of the respondents in Quebec, British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Nova Scotia, and Alberta cited this as a challenge.
A series of independent sample t-tests revealed that, among those who used the following services – housing support services, mental health services, and services of a community nurse – there was greater agreement with the statement that the services they used helped them maintain housing when compared to those who did not avail themselves of these services. Further analyses using multiple regression showed that receipt of housing support services was the strongest predictor of success in maintaining housing (on its own, R2 = .32)7.
Housing supports, as identified by respondents in response to an open-ended question, included support workers, case managers, peer support, income and employment support, housekeeping, community outreach, budgeting guidance, assistance with healthy living, and availability of on-site counselling.
Income support was cited most frequently as one of the most important support services that should be offered by housing programs. This was followed by access to healthy, affordable food, mental health services, a family doctor, and employment support (see Figure 2 for complete list).
Identification of assistance with dealing with landlords as an important support need was significantly associated with housing arrangements where people living with mental illness were renting a subsidized apartment (frequency 93.8%; χ2= 14.14, p = .02).
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVING HOUSING
82% of respondents agreed with the statement that housing and supports need to be adequately funded to help people keep their housing.
81% agreed with the statement that increasing housing support options with subsidies based on income are needed.
80% agreed with the statement that more housing for single people is required (for a complete listing of the most embraced recommendations, see Table 2).
Aboriginal participants echoed the above recommendations.
The recommendation that more housing for single people is needed was significantly associated with Aboriginal status (χ2= 5.39, p = .02); all Aboriginal participants were in agreement with this recommendation.
31
Table 1. Consumer representation by province/territory.
Province Frequency
(n)
Percentage (%)
Alberta 22 6.7
British Columbia 73 22.1
Manitoba 4 1.2
New Brunswick 3 0.9
Newfoundland and Labrador 11 3.3
Nova Scotia 19 5.8
Ontario 154 46.7
Prince Edward Island 5 1.5
Quebec 15 4.5
Saskatchewan 16 4.8
Yukon 3 0.9
Table 2. Consensus with list of recommendations presented.
Recommendations Percentage
(%) Supports are needed to help prevent eviction of people with mental health
or addictions issues 76.7
More home ownership options are needed for people living with mental
health problems. 63
More housing for single people is needed. 79.1
Increase housing options (rent and owned) where the rent or mortgage is
subsidized based on your income. 80.9
Put more effort into building new housing instead of research and planning. 68.8*
Power needs to be shared between tenants/residents of the housing and
the operators of the housing 51.8*
People should have choice and freedom about if they want treatment - it
should not be a condition of having the housing. 55.2*
People need to be empowered by staff, not directed by them. 67.6
People need access to peer support. 72.7
Housing and supports need to be adequately funded to help people keep
their housing. 81.5
Have housing options specifically for people that aren't stable 67.9 Respite options are needed to give people short-term support instead of
only hospitals. 70.3
Supports are needed to help build a sense of community 74.2 Social/recreation opportunities are needed to help build a sense of
community 70.6
Rapid access to disability and income replacement programs are needed. 73.3
* Significant difference between consumers and family members (please see Findings from Family Member surveys)
Figure 1. Percentage of participants that lived in the various housing arrangements8.
* “Other” includes: senior's home, co-operative housing, living with a family outside their own, friend's place, shelter, care facility, live with extended family, transitional housing, clubhouse, and homeless.
** each “Other” subcategory equals ≤1.3%.
8 Not all arrangements of housing are exclusive categories; some were raised by participants and not part of the original 41%
21%
16%
6%
6%
10%
Rent a social/generic apartment
Rent a dedicated apartment
Own own home
Live with own family
Rent a subsidized apartment
Other*
33
Figure 2. Essential support services rank ordered by frequency (n = 330).
A – income supports; B – access to healthy, affordable food; C – mental health services; D – family doctor; E – employment support; F – life skills training; G – education support; H – recreational activities; I – access to supports that help people find housing, including a central point where you can apply for housing; J – assistance in dealing with landlords