Good afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity to speak about Canada's homelessness response and specifically the role of the federal government's Reaching Home initiative.
For context, Raising the Roof is a non-profit charity committed to providing housing solutions to Canadians by developing and preserving affordable housing and offering housing at deeply affordable rates with corresponding wraparound support services wherever possible. We have an integrated model that includes workforce development through social enterprise contractors during construction and ongoing support services for tenants through local social service agencies that know their community, know their needs and have the system navigation expertise to connect them to both their own services and other complementary services in the community. It is from this perspective as an owner, operator and service provider that we are providing input to the committee today.
First, I want to acknowledge that Reaching Home has played an important role in helping communities across Canada respond to growing and increasingly complex homelessness challenges. It has strengthened community-based planning and supported frontline organizations delivering critical services in increasingly difficult conditions. Across the country, communities are facing pressures unlike anything we have seen in decades: rising housing costs, worsening mental health crises, toxic drug supply impacts, growing encampments and an increasing number of people falling into homelessness for the first time.
The reality is that homelessness is rarely caused by a single issue. As Dr. Stephen Gaetz of the Canadian Observatory on Homelessness has often said, homelessness is a “fusion” policy issue. It sits at the intersection of housing affordability, mental health, addictions, health care, income security, child welfare, justice systems, education and employment. If we are serious about reducing homelessness, our systems and funding models must reflect that complexity.
One of the biggest challenges today is that homelessness-serving organizations are being asked to coordinate responses in the absence of true systems integration. Health care, housing, mental health, addictions, employment, justice and income support systems all operate in silos. Discharge planning, service coordination and data systems remain fragmented across departments and sectors. As a result, frontline organizations are left bridging gaps that should not exist in the first place.
We see the consequences every day. Shelters are becoming de facto mental health facilities. Outreach workers are responding to addictions crises without adequate clinical supports. Housing providers are increasingly expected to deliver complex health and social interventions without the operational funding required to do so effectively. At the same time, many people experiencing housing instability are looking not only for housing but also for pathways back into stability, purpose, community and employment.
That is where the next evolution of Reaching Home should go. We need to move from a crisis response model toward a more integrated prevention and stabilization model, because homelessness is rarely sudden. In many cases, it is a cumulative result of missed intervention points across, again, housing, health care, child welfare, mental health systems, addictions systems, education, employment and income supports. Because systems remain fragmented, these warning signs are often treated as isolated issues rather than signals of escalating housing instability. As a result, intervention frequently happens only after the crisis has intensified and costs have multiplied across shelters, health care systems, policing and corrections.
We need to shift from managing homelessness to preventing it. That means investing concurrently, earlier and more intentionally across departmental domains in housing stabilization and eviction prevention, mental health and addictions care, discharge planning, youth intervention, employment pathways, income supports and community-based supports.
Prevention is not only good social policy; it is also sound fiscal policy. The evidence is clear that preventing homelessness is significantly less costly than responding after people have entered repeated cycles of crisis care and emergency system use. We also need to recognize that integrated systems produce better outcomes than fragmented systems. That includes stronger alignment between affordable housing development, supportive housing and workforce development that includes social enterprise, health care and long-term community inclusion.
Within that continuum, supportive housing is particularly important, but it is also significantly more complex to deliver than housing alone. It requires not only capital funding for units but also long-term operating funding for mental health supports, addictions services, case management, staffing and ongoing building operations. Too often, capital and operating systems remain disconnected across governments and departments. This makes supportive housing difficult to finance, scale and sustain over time, particularly for the most vulnerable populations. If we want supportive housing outcomes, we need funding and policy structures designed to support integrated service delivery alongside housing itself.
On affordable housing more broadly, we also need to recognize that new supply alone is not enough. Preserving existing affordable housing is equally critical, because every unit lost through disrepair, conversion or market displacement increases pressure on homelessness systems. Preservation is often faster, more cost-effective and more stabilizing than rebuilding alone. There is a clear opportunity for Reaching Home, as part of a broader system strategy, to work more intentionally alongside efforts to preserve and expand deeply affordable housing.
Finally, we must strengthen the data and evaluation systems that support coordination and prevention. Community organizations need accessible, real-time tools that help them identify housing instability early, coordinate care across systems, and measure long-term outcomes. Without strong data and evaluation systems, we are making some of our most important investments without the feedback loops needed to improve them.
Ultimately, homelessness reflects the systems we build and the policy choices we make. Reaching Home should continue to evolve not simply as a homelessness program but also as part of a broader national social infrastructure strategy that recognizes housing, mental health, addictions care, employment and community inclusion as inseparable.
Thank you.
