As with most projects of the Canadian Observatory on Homelessness/Homeless Hub the toolkit was developed through a very collaborative process.
- A brief review of literature related to youth employment and social enterprise initiatives was conducted (this toolkit is not a literature review and this research was conducted primarily for background material).
- Phone and in-person interviews (the latter were filmed) were completed with a variety of staff and participants of Choices for Youth (CFY), Train for Trades (T4T) and partner organizations.
- Transcriptions were made of each interview.
- CFY/T4T staff provided copies of their materials including policies, forms, guides etc.
- All of the materials were analyzed to determine what information needed to be included in the toolkit.
- The video interviews were edited to create approximately 10 short videos to help supplement understanding of the written content.
- Each participant in the videos had the ability to review their contribution and confirm their acceptance of the video.
- Key staff at CFY/T4T had an opportunity to review content of the written toolkit. Special thanks to Eddy St. Coeur and Rosalind Curran for their continual feedback.
This toolkit is organized into 21 sections.
We begin with an overview of youth homelessness and youth employment, as well as backgrounders on social enterprise and energy poverty. We then move into an overview of Choices for Youth. This is followed by a thorough discussion of the Train for Trades program including history, program and support elements, partners, funding and evaluation.
We end with some lessons learned and recommendations for programs adopting a similar program. Additionally, Train for Trade recently underwent some changes to the way it is organized so these are all discussed and outlined.
“It’s a wonderful program. If anybody can’t adopt it and do it again, it’ll be a great thing to do for sure.” — Ronnie O’Neill, Site Manager, Train for Trades
Thanks to the staff and service users (past and present) of Choices for Youth and the Train for Trades program in St. John’s, Newfoundland who assisted in the development of the toolkit through taking part in interviews, providing data and resources or reviewing information.
- Sheldon Pollett – Executive Director
- Eddy St. Coeur – Manager of Social Enterprise
- Rosalind Curran – Project Coordinator, Train for Trades
- Ronnie O’Neill– Site Manager, Train for Trades
- Corey Foley – Youth Supports Coordinator, Train for Trades
- Joni King – Youth Support Worker, Train for Trades
- Matthew, age 21, Tier 1 participant
- Brad, age 22, Tier 2 participant
- Dylan, age 22, Tier 3 participant
- Samantha, age 22, past participant
Thanks also to the community partners for their involvement in this toolkit and in the program overall.
- Dennis Kendell – Regional Operations Executive Director, Newfoundland Labrador Housing Corporation
- Kelly Power – Director, Carpenters Millwrights College
Thanks to the staff, students and volunteers at the Canadian Observatory on Homelessness/Homeless Hub for their efforts in collecting and analyzing the material, transcription, review of materials and creation of the toolkit.
Dr. Stephen Gaetz, Director
Allyson Marsolais, Project Manager
Tanya Gulliver, Research Coordinator (primary author)
Stephanie Vasko, Communications Manager
Sarah Hamdi, Communications Coordinator
Patricia Lacroix, Graphic Designer
Oxana Roudenko, Communications Officer
Sebastian Wan, Web Assistant
Tyler Pettes, Research Assistant
Julia Bahen, Graduate Assistant
Alicia Campney, Research at York student
Jayne Malenfant, Research Assistant
Emma Woolley, Research at York student
William Castaneda, Research Assistant
Vander Tavares, Research Assistant
Julie Rocha, volunteer
Many different terms are used to describe young people who are homeless, including street youth, street kids, runaways, homeless youth, etc. Youth homelessness refers to young people who are living independently of parents and/or caregivers, and importantly, lack many of the social supports deemed necessary for the transition from childhood to adulthood. In such circumstances, they do not have a stable or consistent residence or source of income, nor do they necessarily have adequate access to the support networks needed to foster a safe and nurturing transition into the responsibilities of adulthood. Few young people choose to be homeless, and the experience is generally negative, unpleasant, stressful and distressing.
There is no formally agreed upon age definition of a homeless youth (or in many cases, even a youth) in Canada. However, there is a Canadian Definition of Homelessness that has received wide support from community groups, government and researchers. A youth definition of homelessness is in the process of being created. While it will follow the Canadian Definition in terms of types of homelessness, it will distinguish the unique pathways that youth follow into homelessness.
Even within the proposed definition there is recognition that it is being created to help provide some definitional coherence despite not necessarily reflecting specific program, policy and jurisdictional definitions that already exist.
Depending on the jurisdiction, the state will define the ages for which child protection services are responsible for care, what kinds of mental health supports are accessible and the age when one can live independently, obtain welfare and other government benefits, or leave school, etc. (Coming of Age: Reimagining the Response to Youth Homelessness in Canada).
The category of youth therefore can range from 12 to 29. According to the census youth means those aged 12-19, while young adults includes individuals between 20 and 29. A young person under the Youth Criminal Justice Act is someone over the age of 12 and younger than 18. Federally, the age of majority is considered to be 18 (when youth are allowed to vote) but in many provinces youth cannot buy alcohol until 19 years of age.
The child welfare mandate is determined by the provinces and territories and the age of protection ranges from under 16 to under 19. This means, for example, that youth leaving home or being removed from their home under these ages fall under the responsibility of the child welfare system. However, above these ages children can be “aged out” of foster care and restrictions may be placed on new entries. This is particularly true in Ontario where new access to the child welfare system is extremely limited for 16 and 17 year olds. A bill before the Ontario Legislature to address this issue died on the order papers before it could be approved into law.
Most youth homeless services in Canada provide supports beginning at 16 or 18 and continuing up to the youth’s 25th birthday. Age is an important consideration because the developmental needs of youth vary from those of adults, but also vary within the youth category itself. The “needs, circumstances, and physical and emotional development of a 14 year old compared to an 18 year old or a 23 year old [are different] (though it must also be acknowledged that the factors that produce and sustain youth homelessness – including violence, trauma and abuse, may also contribute to developmental impairment for older youth)” (Coming of Age: Reimagining the Response to Youth Homelessness in Canada).
Over the course of the year the number of young people who become homeless in Canada is at least 40,000 and there may be as many as 7,000 homeless youth on any given night.
The Government of Canada estimates 1 in 5 shelter users in this country are youth between the ages of 16 and 24. Males outnumber females by a ratio of 2:1 in most shelters (very little specific data is collected about trans* youth). Segaert reports that 63% of youth in shelters are male, and 37% are female. Because of violence encountered by young women on the streets they may be more likely than young males to access alternatives to shelters.
While only 20% of shelter users across the country are youth, Choices for Youth reports that youth make up 30% of the homeless population in St. John’s, Newfoundland.
There is significant overrepresentation amongst homeless youth who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans*, queer or 2-spirited (LGBTQ2S). They are estimated to make up 25-40% of the youth homeless population, compared to only 5-10% of the general population.
Additionally, as with the homeless adult population, there is significant overrepresentation of Aboriginal youth. Furthermore, depending upon location there may be an increase in the number of homeless youth of colour (i.e. black youth in Toronto).
Pathways into and out of homelessness vary. We know that over 40% of homeless youth have been involved with the child welfare system and over half of homeless youth have previous involvement with the criminal justice system. Additionally, homeless youth experience greater mental health issues (40-70% compared to only 10-20% for housed youth).
The key causes of youth homelessness include a) individual / relational factors, b) structural factors and c) institutional and systems failures:
- Individual and Relational factors - A main cause of youth homelessness is a breakdown or conflict in key relationships within the home. The vast majority have chosen or been forced to leave an unsafe, abusive, neglectful or otherwise untenable situation. Many young people leave home because of mental health problems or addictions issues that either they or someone else in their household is experiencing.
- Structural factors - This includes ongoing problems that a young person cannot control, and which largely originate outside of the family and exist at a broader societal level. This includes social and economic conditions like poverty, inadequate education, underemployment and lack of housing stability, which may also frame the experience of young people and can underlie stressors within the family that can lead to conflict; meaning “home” is no longer a viable option. Discrimination in the form of homophobia, transphobia, racism and bullying can also be contributing factors.
- Institutional system failures - Sometimes young people become homeless after slipping through the cracks of our “social safety nets” (such as child protection, health and mental health care, juvenile justice). Many young people in government care (child protection) become homeless when their placement breaks down leaving them without a place to live, or choose to leave their placements; and/or have been discharged from a situation of care (e.g., for non-compliance) without a place of residence to which they can or will return. That we discharge young people from systems of care without adequate discharge planning and ongoing supports increases the risk of homelessness.
Homeless youth may be physically on the streets, staying in emergency shelters or youth hostels, “couch-surfing” with friends or family, renting cheap rooms in boarding houses or hotels, or staying in squats. All of these are risky housing situations, which may lead to imminent loss of shelter. Homeless youth, also tend to move between various housing situations over time as outlined in the typology below, which has been expanded from the National Alliance to End Homelessness. Gaetz argues that “it is the instability of their housing situation that characterizes their status as homeless youth”.
Youth homelessness is defined by inherent instability, profound limitations and poverty. At a time when these young people are experiencing loss and potentially trauma, they are simultaneously charged with managing a diverse and complex set of tasks, including obtaining shelter, income and food, making good decisions and developing healthy relationships (Coming of Age: Reimagining the Response to Youth Homelessness in Canada).
Youth homelessness then must be considered separately from adult homelessness. Just as the pathways into homelessness are different, so are the possible interventions and solutions. Homeless youth generally are leaving a situation – whether it is family, child welfare or correctional services – where they were dependent upon adult caregivers for their overall support.
Becoming homeless then does not just mean a loss of stable housing, but rather leaving a home in which they are embedded in relations of dependence, thus experiencing an interruption and potential rupture in social relations with parents and caregivers, family members, friends, neighbours and community (Coming of Age: Reimagining the Response to Youth Homelessness in Canada).
The diversity of homeless youth notwithstanding, the lack of experience with independent living is an important factor. This toolkit presents models of supported transitional housing that can help homeless youth make the adjustment and develop the skills necessary to live and thrive on their own.
The NAEH Typology of Youth Homelessness
As Kuhn and Culhane point out, the vast majority of people who become homeless do so for a very short time, typically find their way out of homelessness with little assistance and rarely return to homelessness. This is as true for adults as it is for youth. The NAEH suggests that between 81 and 86 percent of homeless youth fit into this category. This group is characterized as generally being younger, as having more stable or redeemable relations with family members, a less extensive history of homelessness and are more likely to remain in school. There is a strong need for prevention and early intervention to divert this population from the homelessness system.
This population of homeless youth has a more complicated housing history and is likely to have longer and repeated episodes of homelessness. They are more likely to be disengaged from school and will have challenges in obtaining and maintaining employment. Most will have retained some level of connection with family members and are less likely to experience serious mental health or addictions issues than chronically homeless youth. This is a group for which family reconnection interventions, as well as transitional housing programs are recommended, particularly for youth under 18.
 Refers to the process of a child becoming independent and leaving the child welfare system. Many homeless youth have become too old to remain under the jurisdiction of the child welfare system and yet lack the necessary skills to live independently.
 Trans* is an umbrella term that signifies the broad diversity of gender variance found within the transgender community including, but not limited to, transgender, transsexual, agender, bigender, genderqueer, genderfluid, non-binary etc.
Youth employment, or more specifically, youth unemployment is an important issue for Canadians. In 2012, the youth (ages 15-24) unemployment rate was 14.3%. On average, according to Statistics Canada, youth unemployment nationally tends to be double the unemployment rate of adults (in 2012, adult unemployment was at 6%). In 2014, immigrant youth had even higher rates of unemployment (17.2%) compared to Canadian-born youth, with those more recently landed having higher rates than those who have been here for an extended period of time (19.5% for immigrant youth here five years or less versus 15.8% for immigrant youth landed 10 years ago or more).
Youth unemployment is also linked to education levels. The lower one’s level of education the longer one tends to be unemployed and the higher the rate of unemployment is amongst that group (Marshall, 2012). There is a push in the market towards credentialism and a job that may have required a high school diploma 20 years ago now requires a university degree. In 2014, only 23.8% of youth with less than a Grade 9 education were employed compared to 63.7% of high school graduates and 71.8% of youth with a bachelor’s degree.
Youth tend to experience more frequent periods of unemployment (for example, lower seniority means they are laid off first) but on the more positive side, youth tend to be unemployed for shorter periods of time than adults. Additionally, more than a quarter of the unemployed youth in 2012 were youth who had never worked before and therefore lacked experience necessary to obtain a job.
With unemployment a significant issue amongst housed youth, it is no surprise that it is also a challenge for youth experiencing homelessness. While some of the issues are the same (lack of experience, lack of education), there are also unique challenges to maintaining employment presented by the lack of a permanent address. Research conducted by Raising the Roof with “nearly 700 youth experiencing homelessness in three Canadian cities found that 73% were not employed. Similarly, in a study with 360 homeless youth in Toronto, only 15% identified paid employment as their primary source of income”.
In her report for Raising the Roof, Amanda Noble shares a number of barriers to employment for homeless and at-risk youth including:
- not having basic needs met
- a lack of social support
- low education and skill levels (or social capital)
- mental health concerns
- criminal justice involvement
Noble also stated that “some employers are hesitant to employ youth once they find out they are homeless, perhaps due to the fear that their lives are not stable enough to maintain employment, or as a result of the stereotypes associated with homeless and at-risk youth”.
The best employment training programs are effective in that they meet their objective of improving the employability of marginalized youth by providing them with the supports necessary to transition into the world of work. (Why don’t you just get a job? Homeless youth, social exclusion and employment training)
There are numerous training and employment programs for unemployed youth, some of which specialize in at-risk or homeless youth. However, traditional employment programs and methods may not work for marginalized youth. Creating a program that supports and responds to the needs of at-risk or homeless youth means addressing some of the systemic issues that affect their participation in a program.
- Connect employment training with housing stability. Youth should be supported to find or maintain housing, either independently, with the same agency or through a community partner. However, there should be no risk of eviction if the youth fails to complete the training program.
- Provide start-up costs including transportation, work clothing and necessary supplies/equipment.
- Support the youth to obtain necessary identification.
- Provide life skills training to assist the youth with development of practical skills that will serve them after the program is complete. In particular, obtaining a bank account and developing a budget, creating a resume, interview skills etc. are key for a youth employment program.
- Offer intensive case management supports to assist the youth in dealing with issues that arise. This includes allowing time off (with pay) to attend to urgent matters such as court dates, counselling appointments etc.
- Figure out a plan to address issues of lateness and attendance. These present particular challenges for street-involved youth who may not have the same ability to adhere to a structured routine as housed youth.
- Build in access to education – especially a GED – if possible. This will help improve outcomes after the program for the young person. Support a young person’s goals for future educational attainment. This could include discussing educational programs, assisting with applications and applying for scholarships.
- Create opportunities for job shadowing/mentorship so that youth can see what a program looks like in a real world application.
- Consider a weekly or bi-weekly pay schedule rather than monthly. This serves two functions:
- Youth do not have to wait as long between pay cheques, especially for those items that are deemed essential for work.
- Money is spread out over the month rather than arriving in one large sum (this does make budgeting for rent important however).
The report on the “Activation of Youthworks Employment Toolkit” highlighted several promising practices that had emerged for community agencies in engaging with private sector partners. These promising practices are included here, but the full report should be read for a more complete understanding.
- Be upfront and honest with employers about the barriers homeless and at-risk youth face and the possible challenges they may encounter during the work placement. Encourage youth to be transparent with their employer as well.
- Try and make sure that youth have the practical tools needed to succeed at their job placement. For example, make sure they have access to a phone and arrange a work placement in close proximity to where they are living. One organization used a “buddy system”: youth were paired up with a buddy who lived near them, and if they needed to contact their employer but did not have access to a phone they would ask to use their buddy’s cell phone.
- Arrange weekly meetings with the youth in either a group or one-on-one setting once they have started their job placement. Go over any challenges they are having and brainstorm strategies and solutions, such as better time management. Emphasize the importance of being accountable to their employer and being on time.
- Meet face-to-face with employers to discuss the opportunity of becoming partners and providing employment opportunities to youth. Share with them challenges, best practices, and success stories.
- Meet with the employer during the youths’ work placement to see how it is going and provide support. Help to manage challenges the youth may be facing.
- Promote pre-employment programs broadly using various communication outlets. Many employers are very interested in giving back to their community but do not know that these types of programs exist.
- Community agencies should think creatively when developing jobs for youth. If a youth is particularly talented artist look into placements at art galleries or in marketing.
Some of the former Train for Trades youth on the job.
Historically, energy poverty has referred to the way in which an individual in the Global South’s overall well-being is negatively affected by the lack of access to fuel, including the use of high polluting fuels or the need to spend extensive amounts of time collecting fuel. Conversely, fuel poverty was used to describe people in the Global North who had the ability to access energy but the lack of resources to pay for it.
In Canada however, these terms tend to be used interchangeably to refer to individuals who are unable to afford the energy/fuel needed to maintain their life, particularly as related to heating/cooling. Specifically, energy poverty is “defined as households that spend more than 10 percent of their income on home energy” (Guelph & Wellington Task Force for Poverty Elimination). In 2011, it affected 1 million households in Canada, while those households in the lowest income bracket in Ontario averaged 12% spending on utilities.
In some communities, low-income households can apply for energy subsidies from their utility providers, municipality and/or province/territory. Newfoundland Labrador Housing Corporation (NLHC) provides energy subsidies to many of its tenants through the Heat Subsidy Program. This program tries to offset heating costs and the average subsidy is $1,450/year. “NLHC has increased its emphasis on improving energy efficiency in units when regular modernization and improvement is ongoing. When units are made more energy efficient, the heat subsidy can go a lot further in helping tenants keep their homes warm throughout the year and improve overall housing affordability” (NLHC Annual Report 2013-2014).
Energy retrofitting refers to the practice of improving a facility to make it more energy efficient. This can include a number of small fixes such as caulking windows, inserting covers on plugs, wrapping water pipes and weather-stripping doors. It can also include large-scale repairs such as improving the amount and type of insulation in walls and roofs.
The Train for Trades program conducts about 60 energy retrofits a year in social housing belonging to the Newfoundland Labrador Housing Corporation. This includes demolishing the existing drywall, mold remediation, improving insulation and rebuilding. Overall energy costs for the tenant decrease and the space becomes more useable as well.
“Back when I used to work in the basements as a support worker [a tenant] told me that her mom had hers done by us a year before I got hired and she was saving $800 a year. She was an elderly lady with not much income and that $800 went a long, long way. So now she got more food in the fridge and just a better sense of pride and love.” — Corey Foley, Youth Supports Coordinator
Pictured above are Train for Trades youth at a worksite.