Consolidation of Social Housing Management Agencies
Recommendation:That the following report be received for information.
Report Summary
- This report responds to an Administrative Inquiry from Mayor
B. Smith for improved operations between the Capital Region Housing Corporation and the City of Edmonton Non-Profit Housing Corporation. The General Managers of those agencies have recommended that a “Tri-Board (Capital Region Housing Corporation, City of Edmonton Non-Profit Housing Corporation and Greater Edmonton Foundation) Strategy/Liaison Committee” be reinstituted to explore how to work together to meet current and future housing needs and deal with changing government roles in housing.
Previous Council/Committee Action
- At the June 28, 1999 Community Services Committee meeting, the following motion was passed:
That the June 7, 1999 Community Services Department report be received for information.
- At the June 22, 1999 City Council meeting, the following motion was passed:
That the June 7, 1999 Community Services Department report be referred to Community Services Committee for discussion.
- At the April 6, 1999 City Council meeting the following motion was made:
“In 1993, the Government of Alberta initiated a program to encourage the consolidation of its many social housing management agencies into more efficient and cost effective operations. According to Alberta Municipal Affairs, operating efficiencies have been achieved. Other benefits realized from these mergers include better services to clients and a more coordinated approach in providing social housing.
The Capital Region Housing Corporation and the City of Edmonton Non-Profit Housing Corporation are two social housing management agencies in Edmonton. Both are linked to the City of Edmonton. Both serve a similar low-income, non-elderly clientele.
In view of growing social housing demands in Edmonton and the need to make better use of existing resources to assist in meeting those demands, I would like a report from the Community Services Department on alternative methods (e.g. mergers, shared services, etc.) to improve operations between these two agencies. The report should include terms of reference including potential benefits (e.g. improved customer service, more efficient internal processes, financial benefits that could be realized). I would like the report submitted to the May 18, 1999 City Council meeting.”
Report
- On June 30, 1999, Board and staff members of the Capital Region Housing Corporation (CRHC) and the City of Edmonton Non-Profit Housing Corporation (homeEd) met with Community Services Department staff to develop a response to the Mayor’s Inquiry (see list of attendees – Attachment 1).
At that meeting, the Department indicated its objective to be development of a Terms of Reference for an Administrative Report to City Council by September 30, 1999 on alternative methods to improve inter-agency operations. However, board representatives of both agencies voiced reluctance to develop a Terms of Reference. Instead, the suggestion was made to have the General Managers of both agencies meet to explore the possibility of shared services. This position was endorsed by all agency representatives at the meeting.
On November 3, 1999, Kent Fletcher, CRHC General Manager and Terry Loat, homeEd General Manager met in response to the June 30, 1999 Board members agreement. Prior to the meeting, Ken Fearnley, Executive Director of the Greater Edmonton Foundation (GEF) had indicated his Board’s interest in pursuing a more coordinated approach to social housing service delivery with the CRHC and homeEd. The two General Managers agreed to report back to their respective boards and recommend reinstatement of the former “Tri-Board (CRHC, homeEd and GEF) Strategy/Liaison Committee” (see “History of the Tri-Board Committee - Attachment 2). They also agreed to expand their co-operative approach to addressing current and future housing issues, changing client profiles and dealing with the changing role of all levels of government in social/affordable housing, including devolution.
Background Information Attached
- Persons attending the June 30, 1999 meeting at City Hall
- History of the “Tri-Board (CRHC, homeEd, GEF) Strategy/Liaison Committee”
(Page 1 of 2)
Attachment 1
Persons Attending the June 30, 1999 meeting at City Hall
Capital Region Housing Corporation
- Dennis Wellar, Board Chair
- Richard Dubetz, Board Member
- Bob Whyte, Board Member
- Kent Fletcher, General Manager
The City of Edmonton Non-Profit Housing Corporation (homeEd)
- Lynn Hannley, Board Chair
- Kildy Yuen, Board Member
- Peter Abramowich, Board Member
- Laura Mitchell, Board Member
- Terry Loat, General Manager
Community Services
- Kathy Barnhart, Manager, City-Wide Services Branch
- Daryl Kreuzer, Senior Planner-Housing
- Susan Coward (Facilitator)
Attachment 1 - Page 1 of 1
Attachment 2
History of the “Tri-Board (CRHC, homeEd, GEF) Strategy/Liaison Committee
The “Tri-Board (Capital Region Housing Corporation (CRHC), City of Edmonton Non-Profit Housing Corporation, Greater Edmonton Foundation(GEF)) Strategy/Liaison Committee” was struck after a meeting of the full boards of these three social housing agencies on March 21, 1997. The Chairpersons and senior administrators met subsequently on a few occasions in 1997 to begin exploring how to work together to address current and future housing needs, changing client profiles and changing government roles in housing.
Other work priorities, including financial challenges confronting the City of Edmonton Non-Profit Housing Corporation in 1997 and changes in board memberships, contributed to the Tri-Board Committee not meeting in the past few years.
In the interim, a better profiling of existing resources to meet priority housing demand was pursued by two of the Tri-Board Committee agencies, the GEF and the CRHC. Discussions between those two agencies identified the transfer of the “Town House Apartments” from the GEF subsidized seniors apartment unit portfolio to the CRHC community housing portfolio to enable those units to be re-targeted for occupancy to mentally-ill persons with low-income housing needs. A housing needs assessment completed by the Edmonton Joint Planning Committee on Housing (EJPCOH) had previously confirmed that there was in Edmonton:
- A significant excess demand for “supportive management options for persons with mental health histories”[1]; and
- A significant excess supply of “independent living options for low-income seniors”[2].
The recommended reprofiling of the Town House Apartments was highly consistent with the following recommendation in the EJPCOH Short-Term (1998-99) Plan stemming
from that needs assessment:
“That the EJPCOH, in co-operation with Alberta Municipal Affairs, Management Bodies, and other social housing providers, identify under-utilised or improperly targeted social housing units and explore the use of such units to meet the needs of other target groups”.
Also explored between the GEF and CRHC since 1997 was the integration of payroll and benefits packages. However, because of the different plans offered and the requirements of collective agreements, this proved to be unfeasible.
Despite not meeting in the past few years as a Tri-Board Committee, representatives of all three agencies have been extensively involved in working cooperatively with the EJPCOH, the Government of Alberta and community based agencies to provide housing and needed supportive services to many low-income households. Time and resource commitments from each have been extensive. Interagency planning through the EJPCOH has had other successful outcomes. As a result of the above-noted EJPCOH recommendation, the Government of Alberta finally transferred the Town House Apartments to the CRHC portfolio. Two other innovative projects developed through this inter-agency planning approach were the transfer of the McCauley Lodge from the GEF to the Operations Friendship Housing Society, and the development of a supportive management model between CRHC and the Edmonton City Centre Church Corporation for the McCauley Apartment buildings.
Attachment 2 - Page 1 of 2
[1] The Study defined “Supportive Management Options for persons with mental health histories” as “long-term, non-labeled, physically-adequate, subsidized apartment accommodation with limited community supports”. Based on waiting lists and turnaway rates due to the lack of available supply, the Study identified a significant demand for additional housing units for this target group (183 units). The Study also identified a relatively small number of vacancies (10 units) in the existing 212 unit total public and private, not-for-profit housing supply suited for occupancy to this particular housing target group in Edmonton.
[2] The Study defined “Independent Living Options for low-income seniors” as “long-term, physically-adequate, non-supportive subsidized rental housing”. Based on waiting lists and turnaway rates due to the lack of available supply, the Study identified a significant demand for additional housing units for this target group (223 units). However, the Study also identified an even larger number of vacancies (363 units) in the existing 4,329 unit total public and private, not-for-profit housing supply suited for occupancy to this particular housing target group in Edmonton.