Homeless Count Tables - City of Prince George

Prince George Homeless Count Report 2010 

May 16 and 17, 2010 

Prepared for: 

Prepared By: 

UNBC Computer-Assisted Survey Research Laboratory 

Diana Kutzner & Stephanie Ameyaw 

Prince George: August, 2010 

1

Table of Contents 


Acknowledgement .............................................................................................. 5 

Executive Summary ............................................................................................ 6 

Section 1: Introduction ....................................................................................... 8 

1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 8 

1.2 Background ......................................................................................................................................... 8 

1.3 Purpose ............................................................................................................................................. 10 

Section 2: Methodology .................................................................................... 11 

2.1 Planning Process ............................................................................................................................... 11 

2.2 Timeframe and Timing of the Count ................................................................................................ 11 

2.3 Volunteer Recruitment and Coordination ........................................................................................ 12 

2.4 Count and Survey Scope ................................................................................................................... 13 

2.5 Data Collection and Analysis............................................................................................................. 13 

2.6 Organization of this Report .............................................................................................................. 13 

2.7 Limitations ........................................................................................................................................ 14 

Section 3: Count Results.................................................................................... 16 

3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 16 

3.2 A Profile of Homelessness in Prince George ..................................................................................... 17 

3.2.1 Location of Data Collection ....................................................................................................... 17 

3.2.2 Previous Count Participation ..................................................................................................... 17 

3.2.3 Where Homeless People Stayed Overnight .............................................................................. 18 

3.2.4 Demographic Profile .................................................................................................................. 19 

3.3 Places Homeless People Stayed ....................................................................................................... 22 

3.3.1 Places Stayed In Over the Last Year .......................................................................................... 22 

2


3.3.2 How Long Since Accommodated In Stable Housing .................................................................. 23 

3.4 Income and Homelessness ............................................................................................................... 25 

3.4.1 Source of Income....................................................................................................................... 25 

3.5 Community Called Home .................................................................................................................. 26 

3.6 Health and Homelessness ................................................................................................................. 27 

3.6.1 Health Conditions ...................................................................................................................... 27 

3.6.2 Physical and Mental Health ....................................................................................................... 28 

3.7 Defining Homelessness ..................................................................................................................... 30 

3.8 Reasons for Homelessness ............................................................................................................... 32 

3.9 Services Offered in Prince George .................................................................................................... 33 

Section 4: Discussion and Conclusions............................................................... 35 

4.1 Working Toward Solutions ............................................................................................................... 35 

APPENDICES ...................................................................................................... 37 

Appendix A: Open-Ended Responses ..................................................................................................... 38 

List of Tables Reporting Open-Ended Responses ............................................................................... 39 

Appendix B: Figures ................................................................................................................................ 60 

List of Figures ..................................................................................................................................... 61 

Appendix C: Survey Instrument and Script ............................................................................................. 69 

Appendix D: Guide to Coordinating and Conducting a Homeless Count ............................................... 72 

3

List of Tables 


Table 1 Locations of Data Collection in Prince George ............................................................................... 17 

Table 2 Did You Participate in the PG Homeless Count in a Previous Year? .............................................. 18 

Table 3 In the Past Day, Have You Answered Any Questions About Where You Live? .............................. 18 

Table 4 Locations Stayed In Overnight ....................................................................................................... 19 

Table 5 Respondent Demographics ............................................................................................................ 20 

Table 6 Respondent Age by Gender ........................................................................................................... 20 

Table 7 Respondent Age by Self-declared Aboriginal Status ...................................................................... 21 

Table 8 Places Stayed In Over the Last Year ............................................................................................... 22 

Table 9 Places Stayed In the Most .............................................................................................................. 23 

Table 10 Source of Income ......................................................................................................................... 25 

Table 11 Prince George is Home ................................................................................................................. 26 

Table 12 Reported Health Conditions ......................................................................................................... 27 

Table 13 Physical Health ............................................................................................................................. 28 

Table 14 Mental Health .............................................................................................................................. 28 

Table 15 Definition of Homelessness .......................................................................................................... 30 

Table 16 Other Definitions of Homelessness .............................................................................................. 31 

Table 17 Reasons for Homelessness ........................................................................................................... 32 

4

Acknowledgement 


The Prince George Community Partners for Addressing Homelessness (CPAH) would like to express their 

gratitude to the many individuals, community organizations, groups, sponsors and service agencies who 

invested their time and energy towards the 2010 Homeless Count and helped make it a success. In 

addition, CPAH would also like to acknowledge the following members, who continue to work to address 

homelessness in Prince George: 

Active Support Against Poverty 

Christian Life Centre 

Association Advocating for Women and Children 

BC Housing 

Canadian Mental Health Association 

Carrier Sekani Family Services 

Central Interior Native Health Society 

City of Prince George 

Community Living BC 

Prince George Elizabeth Fry Society 

Ministry for Housing and Social Development 

Northern Family Health Society 

Northern John Howard Society 

Northern Health 

Northern Women's Wellness Information Centre 

Positive Living North 

Prince George Aboriginal Business Development Centre 

Prince George Brain Injured Group 

Prince George Free Press 

Prince George Metis Housing 

Prince George Native Friendship Centre 

Prince George Nechako Aboriginal Employment and Training Association 

Red Cross Society 

St. Patrick's Transition House Society 

St. Vincent dePaul Society 

Salvation Army 

Service Canada 

Spirit Lodge of Prince George 

University of Northern British Columbia 

Kerry Pateman, Coordinator 

Lynn Florey, Assistant Coordinator 

5

Executive Summary 


On May 16 th and 17 th of 2010, the Community Partners Addressing Homelessness (CPAH) conducted a 24 

hour Homeless Count in the City of Prince George, British Columbia. This was the second ever Homeless 

Count taking place in Prince George. Funding for the count was provided by the Homeless Partnership 

Initiative (HPI), a national initiative by the Government of Canada designed to prevent and reduce 

homelessness in Canada. Key goals of the initiative are to enable designated communities to address key 

issues related to homelessness through a community-based process and to empower communities to 

monitor the effectiveness and success of their homeless services and programs 1 . 

The 2010 Homeless Count was conducted with the help of over 50 volunteers, as well as various service 

agencies and organizations. This report provides a brief background on the Prince George Homeless 

Count, the Count methodology and a summary of the results. Some key findings of the 2010 Homeless 

Count include: 

o 361 homeless individuals participated in the survey, compared to 375 in 2008. 

o Out of 361 participating individuals, 65% were male and 34% were female. 

o 19% of the participants had participated in a previous Prince George Homeless Count. 

o 85% of participants considered Prince George to be their home community. 

o 3% (11 participants) had slept outdoors the night prior to the count. 

o 66% of the participants self-identified as being of Aboriginal descent. 

o Male participants were significantly more likely to be older than female participants; the median 

was 44 years. 

o Aboriginal participants were significantly more likely to be younger than non-Aboriginal 

participants. 

o The majority of participants (60%) had stayed most frequently at a safe house/emergency 

shelter or transitional housing over the last year. 

o The majority (55%) of homeless participants identified income assistance as their source of 

income, followed by disability benefits (30%) and collecting bottles (19%). 

o 30% of respondents suffered from three or more health conditions. 

1 Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (2008) Homelessness Partnership Initiative. Accessed Aug 3, 

2010 from http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/eng/homelessness/partnership_initiative/index.shtml. 

6


o The most common reason for homelessness, indicated by 40% of participants, was the inability 

to afford the cost of housing (rent or mortgage). 

o 27% of participants felt that they fit the definition of “absolute homelessness,” where an 

individual or family has no housing at all or is staying in a temporary form of shelter or in 

locations not fit for people to live in. 

o A significant difference to the 2008 Count was noted in regards to the number of surveys 

completed by people found on the street. In 2008, approximately 43 individuals were 

interviewed outdoors/on the street. Even with an earlier start to the count on day 2 than last 

year, only 21 individuals were found on the street. While this may have several reasons, of 

major concern are the recent cleanup efforts conducted by the city which may have displaced 

homeless individuals to less safe areas of the downtown where services are inaccessible. 

The results of the 2010 Prince George Homeless Count reflect that homelessness continues to be a key 

issue in the City and additional social housing developments, as well as more targeted programs and 

services, are needed in Prince George. 

7

Section 1: Introduction 


1.1 Introduction 

Homeless Counts have become increasingly widespread as the value of counting, assessing and tracking 

homeless residents has become apparent. Census data is limited in capturing this vulnerable and 

transient population, due to its primary focus on households. As a result, the need to gather detailed 

information and statistics that can assist communities, governments and policy makers in their decision 

making is critical. The information that is gathered through homeless counts is vital to many sectors in 

developing programming, planning for both long and short term solutions, and gaining a detailed 

understanding of the circumstances that can cause homelessness. The better we understand how 

individuals come to be homeless and the barriers they face, the better prepared a community will be to 

respond with a holistic approach to aid homeless individuals, and the more effective and permanent a 

reduction in homelessness can become. 

This report presents the data of the second of two Homeless Counts that have taken place in the Prince 

George community. Conducting a Homeless Count is both time consuming and complex; it requires 

careful and effective planning and a regimented implementation. For smaller rural communities this in 

itself can be problematic as volunteers are often less plentiful and the geographic area to be covered is 

extensive. In Prince George, the Community Partners Addressing Homelessness (CPAH) has taken on the 

task of conducting the Homeless Count over the last several years. CPAH is a long established 

community group of more than 45 volunteer agencies and government representatives that has been 

active for over a decade and has developed an intimate understanding of the homeless sector in Prince 

George and the problems associated with it. 

It is CPAH’s hope that this report will not only shed light on the issue of homelessness in Prince George 

but also that it will help increase awareness of the issue and validate further action to reduce 

homelessness in this community. 

1.2 Background 

The first Homeless Count in Prince George was held May 25 - 26, 2008, followed by this year’s count, 

held May 16 - 17, 2010. Both counts were conducted by CPAH over a 24 hour period. CPAH was first 

established in response to the Federal Government’s `Supporting Community Partners Initiative` (SCPI), 

now known as the Homelessness Partnership Initiative (HPI). Initially, conducting homeless counts was 

not a key focus of the Federal agenda; however, over time, both the subsequent Federal Governments 

and the designated communities began to recognize the value of conducting homeless counts. As the 

initiative evolved, CPAH expressed a desire to take on the responsibility for conducting a homeless count 

in Prince George and to be recognized as a valid contributor to the development of standardized data 

gathering, methodology and results. 

8


It was with these goals in mind that the first Prince George Homeless Count was developed. In 2008, 

CPAH designated a small portion of its overall HPI budget to the Homeless Count and a sub-contractor 

was hired to conduct the count. The tasks assigned to the contractor included working with CPAH to 

establish how the count would be conducted in terms of geographic needs, restrictions and time frames. 

Of particular focus was the development of an effective survey instrument. 

At the time the funds directed to this activity were minimal, resulting in some areas of the count being 

less extensive than first anticipated. For instance, the ability to physically conduct the count was 

deemed paramount, whereas the ability to effectively analyse the information collected was slightly less 

critical. During the first count, CPAH was fortunate to have at its helm Dr. Alex Michalos, a Chairperson 

of some influence as well as member of the Order of Canada, who is committed to social issues and a 

world renowned contributor to Quality of Life Research. His position as the Director of the Institute for 

Social Research and Evaluation at the University of Northern British Columbia (UNBC) was pivotal in 

allowing CPAH to conduct a basic analysis of the data following the first Prince George Homeless Count. 

The analysis provided CPAH with insights and tools to improve the data collection approach to the 

second Homeless Count and also provided a vehicle to begin engaging the community at large in 

investing in solutions to homelessness in Prince George. The 2008 data was analyzed by staff within the 

Institute for Social Research and Evaluation and an overview of the results was compiled and released in 

the form of a media press release by Dr. Michalos, for general distribution within the community of 

Prince George. 

In the case of the 2008 Prince George Homeless Count, CPAH recognized that there was a need to first 

establish baseline data and thus a standardized yet customized survey instrument. In the past, Prince 

George agencies and services have relied upon other data sources, such as Census data or agencyspecific 

data within the scope of their funding applications and reporting processes. However, due to 

the geographical and intrinsic nature of rural communities, reporting processes can be significantly 

different from those of more central and urban centres, such as Vancouver or Victoria. As a result, the 

development of a survey instrument customized to rural standards, yet providing data that would allow 

for comparisons across the board, was a key concern to CPAH. 

Another key concern of CPAH has been the need to provide an accurate and truthful picture of the 

current state of homelessness in Prince George. For the 2010 Homeless Count, CPAH was fortunate to 

access some additional HPI slippage funds that allowed the committee to address this concern by 

providing a credible third party review and analysis of the data collected. In June of 2010, CPAH decided 

to hire the Computer-Assisted Survey Research Laboratory of the University of Northern British 

Columbia to analyze the 2010 data set. Funds were also secured to further review the validity, 

usefulness and applicability of the Count results through community focus groups and agency 

discussions as a next step. This collective review will also provide an additional opportunity to refine and 

further develop future homeless counts. 

9


1.3 Purpose 

The overarching purpose of all homeless counts is to gather information on how many individuals are 

homeless and, where possible, the causes of their homelessness. The actual number of homeless 

individuals counted in the survey tends to be the primary focus of certain sectors of a community. No 

less important are the factors contributing to homelessness and the tools and resources necessary to 

assist homeless individuals to move from being homeless to being independently, safely and securely 

housed. 

10

Section 2: Methodology 


2.1 Planning Process 

The coordinator hired for the 2010 Homeless Count was tasked with compiling the information from the 

2008 Count, along with the 2010 Count activities, into a user friendly format that would act as a guide to 

any future counts 2 (see Appendix C). The purpose of this guide book is to provide an avenue for a 

consistent methodology and approach to the count process, thereby providing a comparable and 

accountable process. The guide book provides a complete collection of the materials developed and 

used during the 2010 Homeless Count. This guide will be used to assist with future homeless counts and 

provides detailed information supplementing this report. 

Several components of the 2008 Count methodology had proven successful and were built upon during 

the 2010 Homeless Count. For instance, the previous identification and mapping of areas to be surveyed 

were extremely valuable and were used as the base for this year’s count, along with the identification of 

agencies that were a critical part of the process. In addition, several recommendations resulting from 

the first Count were incorporated, including an earlier start of the Count (4:30 am versus 6:00 am) as 

well as more time allocated to training to ensure all volunteers were made aware of ethical and safety 

issues related to the conduct of the Count. 

The Coordinator for the 2010 Homeless Count expressed a personal interest in continuing further with 

activities related to the Count and so was also pivotal in aspects of the training of volunteers, organizing 

these volunteers and soliciting donations from various sources. 

2.2 Timeframe and Timing of the Count 

The organization of any community event involves extensive planning which, in turn, relies upon 

accurate and reliable timeframes. CPAH is a voluntary group of agencies and individuals and it needs to 

be recognized that the group’s members volunteer outside of their existing day-to-day jobs and 

responsibilities, which limit their ability to actively contribute. In addition, the group has very limited 

funds available to work with and also completes other significant activities throughout the year, which 

demand time and resources and which are no less important than the Homeless Count. 

To date, each count has presented its own unique challenges, which CPAH continues to work on 

improving. Such challenges include the attraction of the necessary resources to implement the homeless 

count, which requires CPAH to go through a lengthy process in order to obtain funding through Service 

Canada, as well as recruiting committed volunteers to conduct the Count, which often is particularly 

2 Community Partners Addressing Homelessness, 2010. Guide to Coordinating and Conducting a Homeless Count: 

Putting the Pieces of the Puzzle Together. Prince George: CPAH. 

11


challenging in smaller communities. Challenges such as these can cause a delay in the planning process 

which, in turn, can result in a ‘rush’ to finalize and complete the Count within the set time frame. 

It is important to stress that the time set for the count is crucial in a northern community. While CPAH 

committee members first considered a fall count, the committee is busy with Homelessness Action 

Week during that time. Winter was also considered; however, many agencies report that a significant 

number of homeless individuals ‘couch surf’ or return to their home communities over the winter 

months due to the cold. In the end, CPAH decided it would be most sensible for comparative purposes 

to conduct the second homeless count during the same month as the 2008 Count. In addition, the 

month of May is a time that ensures the count includes individuals who are still using available shelter 

and have not yet moved on to other communities, as is common during the summer months. Prince 

George is the central service centre for the entire northern region and a significant number of the city’s 

homeless population does not necessarily call this community home, but rather come to the city in 

order to access services not available in their home communities. Consequently, CPAH does not have 

the luxury of delaying the Count should the need arise; rather, it places additional pressure on the group 

to ensure that the Count takes place on time. 

In the case of the 2010 Count, this meant that additional ‘on the spot’ ethics training had to occur with 

last-minute volunteers, some volunteers completed several geographical areas, and additional CPAH 

members were called upon at the last minute to participate in the count. While a successful count was 

conducted, these are areas of concern that CPAH will continue to work on in future counts to ensure 

that every count can result in consistent and comparative activities and data. 

2.3 Volunteer Recruitment and Coordination 

Volunteers were recruited from various agencies and community organizations in Prince George during 

the months of March through May 2010. Over 50 volunteers participated in the 24 hour homeless 

count. In order to train the homeless count volunteers, CPAH hosted a volunteer information session 

that provided all volunteers with an information package about the purpose and logistics of the 

Homeless Count. This two-hour volunteer information and training session was held at the Fire Pit in 

Prince George, May 6 th 2010. All volunteers were provided with a detailed street count information 

sheet, including respectful communication practices and information about rescue packs for distribution 

to people being approached to complete a survey. A second information and training session was held 

at the AWAC Activity Centre on May 16 th , 2010 (AWAC is an Association Advocating for Women and 

Children in Prince George). 

Prior to the start of the Count, volunteers were divided into groups of street counters and agency 

counters and several volunteers were tasked with the delivery and organization of supplies throughout 

the community. At the conclusion of the count, volunteers were asked to complete a volunteer 

information form to gather feedback about their participation and experiences during the count, as well 

as for record keeping purposes. 

12


Common challenges that the volunteers reported were related to the restricted timeframe of the 

Homeless Count. Increasing the time allocated to the Count or increasing the days spent conducting the 

count were some of the suggestions that volunteers offered. 

2.4 Count and Survey Scope 

The 2010 Homeless Count data collection was conducted for a 24 hour period from 6:00 pm on May 16 

to 6:00 pm on May 17, 2010. The count was conducted through agencies that homeless individuals 

might access for shelter or food, as well as on the street and in other select areas. There were 12 

agencies that formally participated by taking surveys and utilizing trained staff or volunteers. In a few 

instances, ‘street’ counters accessed an agency to conduct surveys. For a list of all the agencies, please 

see Table 1. 

The outdoor portion of the count was conducted throughout the downtown streets, portions of the 

Prince George Gateway, Fort George Park, Connaught Hill Park, Freeman Park, Cottonwood Island Park, 

First Avenue, and some areas west of the Bypass near the Salvation Army, First Avenue and Tabor Blvd. 

2.5 Data Collection and Analysis 

Surveys were made available at participating shelters, service agencies and community centres that 

homeless individuals access throughout Prince George. For a period early in the morning (beginning at 

4:30 am), surveyors were on the streets of downtown and several other areas where homeless people 

who are either unable to, or choose not to, access Prince George’s shelters, sleep outdoors. A total of 

361 surveys were collected and used for analysis. 

Once collected, the questionnaires were numbered and all data entered into an Excel spread sheet. 

Closed-ended responses were coded into responses suitable for statistical analysis and analyzed using 

SPSS version 18.0 3 . The open-ended data was exported into an Excel database for qualitative thematic 

analysis. To ensure anonymity of all respondents, any identifying information was removed from the 

data set. 

2.6 Organization of this Report 

This report is organized into four main sections. Section 1 provides an introduction to and some 

background information about the Prince George Homeless Count as well as the purpose and the 

objectives of the Count. Section 2 provides detailed information on the methodology applied, the timing 

and organization of the count as well as the data analysis process. Section 3 of the report provides the 

3 SPSS Inc., 2009. 

13


results of the data analysis. Due to the number of open-ended data collected as part of the homeless 

count, Section 3 is focused on the quantitative and key results of the count. Throughout Section 3, you 

will find various references to Appendices A and B, which present the complete open-ended responses 

provided by participants and figures of the key results respectively. Section 4 provides a brief discussion 

and conclusions of the results. Lastly, Appendices C and D provide the survey instrument and CPAH’s 

guide to the Homeless Count respectively. 

2.7 Limitations 

Although a standardized methodological approach that has proven to be successful in other 

communities was followed during the 2010 Prince George Homeless Count, some limitations apply. To 

begin with, the data analyzed in this study were collected from a sample of Prince George homeless 

people at several key locations and at various street locations in the city within a 24 hour period. 

Consequently, the results do not include the number of ‘hidden’ homeless people in the city and is likely 

to underestimate the true scale of homelessness in Prince George. In addition, the results are limited in 

the extent that they can be generalized to those homeless people in Prince George who may have been 

elsewhere within the 24 hour survey period. This is especially true as Prince George is a key service 

centre in the North and is home to a very transient population of homeless individuals who move in and 

out of the city depending on the season. Furthermore, it should be noted that the City of Prince George 

recently underwent several ‘cleanup’ efforts, which have triggered serious concerns among agencies 

and services providers in the downtown area who feel that such efforts may have displaced parts of the 

homeless population to less safe areas within the city. Due to these special circumstances, this year’s 

count may be particularly prone to underestimating the true extent of homelessness in the city. Lastly, a 

homeless count provides a snap-shot of homelessness rather than a year-round assessment; therefore, 

the results also do not capture the variation in the number of homeless people staying outdoors over 

the course of the summer. 

Several limitations may apply to the screening of homeless participants. A screening question was 

included in the survey to avoid duplication of surveys. In particular, question 1a, “In the past day have 

you answered questions about where you live?” was used to identify those who have already completed 

the survey. Surveyors were instructed to probe for further information and stop the survey if the 

individual reported having already answered similar questions as the ones of the 2010 Homeless Count 

survey (see Appendix C for the survey script detailing the instructions). There were a relatively high 

number of respondents who responded with “yes” to this question (13.6%) yet the surveyors continued 

and had the respondent complete the survey. Inferring from the instructions, this should indicate that 

respondents answered questions about where they lived within the last 24 hours for some other reason 

and not due to filling out a survey questionnaire; however, the relatively high percentage has raised 

questions about how rigorously the instructions were followed. 

As an additional measure to ensure response duplication was kept to a minimum, each questionnaire 

asked respondents to indicate the first 3 letters of their last name as well as their year and month of 

14


birth. The resulting data analysis showed that 5% of the surveys indicated the same letters and year of 

birth twice yet individual responses differed, including several open-ended questions. As a result, the 

decision was made to not exclude any surveys from the data set for the benefit of the additional 

information provided. 

15

Section 3: Count Results 


3.1 Introduction 

This section provides the key findings of the 2010 Prince George Homeless Count, subdivided into the 

following sections: 

A Profile of Homelessness in Prince George 

Demographic Profile 

Places Stayed 

Income and Homelessness 

Community Called Home 

Physical and Mental Health 

Defining Homelessness 

Reasons for Homelessness 

Services Offered in Prince George 

As a result of the amount of data collected, as well as open-ended responses, this section is 

supplemented with Appendices A and B, which provide the complete set of open-ended responses and 

figures of key results respectively. 

16


3.2 A Profile of Homelessness in Prince George 

3.2.1 Location of Data Collection 

A number of service facilities and agencies provided the locations for the administration of the homeless 

count survey. The majority of surveys were completed at Bridget Moran Place (20.2%). Table 1 provides 

a complete overview of how many respondents completed the survey at which location. 

Table 1 Locations of Data Collection in Prince George 

Street Location or Agency 

# of respondents 

(n=361) % 

Bridget Moran Place (ASAP) 73 20.2 

Fire Pit 49 13.6 

Ketso Yoh 47 13.0 

PGNFC 44 12.2 

Salvation Army 37 10.2 

Various street locations 29 8.0 

St. Vincent de Paul 17 4.7 

AWAC 15 4.2 

PG New Hope Society 14 3.9 

Future Cents 13 3.6 

Elizabeth Fry 11 3.0 

Tse Koo Hub Yoh 7 1.9 

Christian Life Centre 3 0.8 

Phoenix Transition 1 0.3 

Positive Living North 1 0.3 

Total 361 100.0 

3.2.2 Previous Count Participation 

The majority of respondents to the 2010 Prince George Homeless Count (78.8%, 281 respondents) 

indicated that they did not participate in a previous count. A total of 67 participants, or 18.6%, 

responded that they did participate in a previous Prince George Homeless Count. The first Prince George 

Homeless Count was conducted in 2008. Table 2 provides an overview of the responses to this question. 

17


Table 2 Did You Participate in the PG Homeless Count in a Previous Year? 

Response # of respondents (n=361) % 

No 281 77.8 

Yes 67 18.6 

Don’t Know 7 1.9 

Missing Responses 4 1.1 

Invalid Response 2 0.6 

Total 361 100.0 

Of the 361 homeless people who participated in the 2010 Prince George Homeless Count, 49 people 

(13.6%) responded that they had answered questions about where they live during the past day, while 

the majority indicated that they had not done so (84.5%, 305 respondents). Table 3 provides a 

summarized breakdown of the responses. 

Table 3 In the Past Day, Have You Answered Any Questions About Where You Live? 

Response # of respondents (n=361) % 

No 305 84.5 

Yes 49 13.6 


Missing Information 2 0.6 

Invalid Response 0 0.0 

Total 361 100.0 

3.2.3 Where Homeless People Stayed Overnight 

A total of 359 participants responded to the question, “Where did you sleep last night?” The majority of 

the homeless people in Prince George who participated in this study slept indoors the night prior to the 

count, while 11 people (3.1%) reported having slept outside (Table 4). The most commonly indicated 

overnight sleeping locations include: 

Safe house/emergency shelter/ or transitional housing (110 respondents or 30.7%) 

Rented house or an apartment (80 respondents or 22.3%) 

Someone else's place (family, friend, etc.; 62 respondents or 17.3%) 

18

Table 4 Locations Stayed In Overnight 


Places Stayed In 


(n=359) % 

Safe house/Emergency shelter/transitional housing 108 30.1 

Rented house, apartment 80 22.3 

Someone else's place (family, friend, etc.) 62 17.3 

Other* 52 14.5 

Motel/hotel 15 4.2 

Rooming house 12 3.3 

Outside/streets/parks 11 3.1 

Hospital/Emergency Room 4 1.1 

Jail 3 0.8 

Treatment facility/recovery house 2 0.6 

Abandoned building/car/truck 1 0.3 

Campground 0 0 

No answer 0 0 

Imperfect Answers 9 2.5 

Total 359 100.0 

*Please find the open-ended responses to “other” listed in Appendix A, Table A 1. 

3.2.4 Demographic Profile 

The average age of respondents to the Prince George Homeless Count was 42 years (with a median of 

44 years). Some of the key findings in regard to respondent age include (Table 5): 

The age range of the homeless population surveyed was from 14 to 69 years of age. 

The majority of respondents fell within the age bracket of 45-54 years (107 respondents; 29.6%). 

The second largest group was within the range of 35-54 years (89 respondents; 24.7%). 

There were 355 people who responded when they were asked to specify their gender. There were 233 

males (64.5%) and 122 females (33.8%). The majority of the respondents, 238 individuals (66.1%), 

identified themselves as being of Aboriginal descent. Aboriginal homeless count respondents identified 

themselves as being from six major locations: Prince George (13 respondents), Lake Babine Nation (12 

respondents), Burns Lake (11 respondents), Fort St. James and Stoney Creek (10 respondents each) and 

Nakazdli (8 respondents). Please find the complete list of areas in Appendix A, Table A 2. 

19

Table 5 Respondent Demographics 


Variable 

# of respondents % 

Ageª b (n = 361) 

17 years and under 7 1.9 

18-24 34 9.4 

25-34 58 16.1 

35-44 89 24.7 

45-54 107 29.6 

55-64 45 12.5 

65 years and older 16 4.4 

Missing 5 1.4 

Gender (n = 361) 

Male 233 64.5 

Female 122 33.8 

Missing 6 1.7 

Aboriginal status (n = 360) 

Self-declared Aboriginal 238 66.1 

Non-Aboriginal 107 29.7 

Unknown 11 4.1 

ª Pearson Chi-Square indicated significant differences between males and females, p


55-64 16.8 3.3 

65 years and older 6.9 0.0 

* Pearson Chi-Square indicated significant differences between males and females, p

3.3 Places Homeless People Stayed 


3.3.1 Places Stayed In Over the Last Year 

Participants of the homeless count reported a variety of locations that they stayed in over the course of 

the last year. The three most frequently reported locations were: 

o Safe house, emergency shelter or transitional housing (217 participants, 60.1%) 

o Rented house or an apartment (173 people, 47.6%) 

o Someone else's place (family, friend, etc.; 179 participants, 49.6%) 

This result coincided with the most frequently indicated locations respondents reported when asked 

about the location they had stayed in the night prior to the homeless count (Table 4). Table 8 provides a 

list of the locations participants reported having stayed in over the past year. 

Table 8 Places Stayed In Over the Last Year* 

Places stayed in # of respondents (n=361) 

Safe house/Emergency shelter/transitional housing 217 60.1 






Jail 71 19.7 




Other*** 28 7.7 

Campground 26 7.2 

No answer 2 0.0 

*Respondents were able to check more than one option. **For a complete list of answers provided for 

‘other’, please see Appendix A, Table A 3. 

Homeless individuals were also asked which places they have stayed in the most. The most frequently 

stayed in locations coincided with those reported for overnight stays prior to the count, as well as those 

22 

%


used over the last year. Table 9 provides a breakdown of the responses provided. The three most 

frequently reported and most used locations were: 

o Safe house/emergency shelter/transitional housing (126 people; 37.3%) 

o Rented house/apartment (67 people; 19.8%) 

o Other (46 people; 19.6%) 

Table 9 Places Stayed In the Most 

Places stayed in 


(n=338) 

% 

Safe house/Emergency shelter/transitional 

37.3 

housing 126 


Other* 46 13.6 




Jail 12 3.6 




Campground 2 0.6 


Invalid response 5 1.5 

Total 338 100.0 

*Please find the open-ended responses to “other” listed in Appendix A, Table A 4. 

3.3.2 How Long Since Accommodated In Stable Housing 

Participants were asked how long it has been since they have stayed in the same location for six months 

or longer. For the 258 people who answered this question, the mean number of years since staying in 

the same place for more than six months was 2.6 years (the median was 1.0). 279 respondents 

answered the follow-up question inquiring about the type of place they stayed in for more than six 

months. This question was posed in an open-ended format, which resulted in a great variety of 

responses. Of those responses that were similar enough to be grouped together, the three most 

frequently reported locations were: 

o Apartment (50 responses) 

o House (38 responses) 

23

o Rooming house (15 responses) 


For a complete list of all locations indicated by respondents, please see Appendix A, Table A 5. 

24

3.4 Income and Homelessness 


3.4.1 Source of Income 

Homeless count respondents were asked to indicate the sources of income that they receive. Each 

participant was able to indicate more than one source of income, which resulted in 672 responses. Table 

10 reflects the responses to this question. The three most common sources of income were: 

o Income assistance (200 respondents, 55.4%) 

o Disability benefits (108 respondents, 29.9%) 

o Collecting bottles (69 respondents, 19.1%) 

Table 10 Source of Income* 

Source of Income 


(n = 361) % 

Income assistance 200 55.4 

Disability benefits 108 29.9 

Canada Pension/other pension 32 8.9 

Employment insurance 13 3.6 

Child tax credit 21 5.8 

Child support 6 1.7 

Panhandling 44 12.2 

Collecting bottles 69 19.1 

Survival sex 19 5.3 

Theft 28 7.8 

Family/friends 62 17.2 

Paid employment 37 10.2 

Other** 17 4.7 

No income 13 3.6 


*Respondents were able to check more than one option.**For a list of ‘other’ reasons provided by respondents, 

please see Appendix A, Section 4. 

25


3.5 Community Called Home 

Participants were asked to indicate whether they considered Prince George to be their home 

community. Eighty-five percent (85.5%; 307) of the respondents considered Prince George to be their 

home community. Table 11 provides a breakdown of the responses. Respondents who did not consider 

Prince George their home community were asked to indicate their home community. Thirty-eight (38) 

respondents (10.6%) indicated a different community as their home community. The majority (307 or 

85.0%) of these communities were located in British Columbia, ranging from as far north as Fort Ware to 

Vancouver. Other locations mentioned include Ontario, Alberta, Saskatoon, North Dakota and Montana. 

For a complete list of other locations considered a home community by respondents, please see 

Appendix A, Table A 7). 

Table 11 Prince George is Home 

Response 


(n=361) % 

Yes 307 85.0 

No 38 10.6 


Imperfect Response 6 1.7 

Missing 2 0.5 

Total 361 100.0 

26

3.6 Health and Homelessness 


3.6.1 Health Conditions 

To gain a better understanding of the health conditions of homeless individuals in Prince George, the 

survey questionnaire asked participants if they were currently experiencing any addiction issues, health 

conditions, physical or mental disability, etc. Respondents were able to check multiple responses for 

this question. When asked if they were experiencing any of a list of health conditions, the three most 

frequently reported conditions were: 

Drug/alcohol issues (185 respondents or 51.2%); 

A health condition/physical illness (140 respondents or 38.8%); and 

A physical disability (116 respondents or 32.1%). 

Table 12 provides a detailed overview of the different types of health issues reported by respondents to 

the Prince George Homeless Count. 

Table 12 Reported Health Conditions* 

Health Conditions 


(n = 361) % 

Drug/alcohol Issues 185 51.2 

Health condition/physical illness 140 38.8 

Physical disability 116 32.1 

Mental illness 88 24.4 

Brain injury 48 13.3 


Developmental disability/handicap 25 6.9 

Other** 24 6.6 

*Respondents were able to check more than one option.**For a complete list of other health conditions 

provided by respondents please see Appendix A, Table A 8. 

When reviewing the number of health conditions reported per person, it is apparent that just less than 

one-third (29.7%) of the homeless individuals in Prince George suffer from three or more health 

conditions. In particular, the results show that the following number of respondents suffers from: 

One health condition (166 respondents; 49.8%) 

Two health conditions (68 respondents; 20.4%) 

Three health conditions (54 respondents; 16.2%) 

27


Three or more health conditions (99 respondents; 29.7%) 

3.6.2 Physical and Mental Health 

Respondents were asked if to rate their physical and mental health on a three point scale. There were 

359 responses to the question, “How is your physical health?” Out of those responses, 181 respondents 

(50.1%) rated their health as good, 135 (37.4%) rated their health as fair and 40 respondents (11.1%) 

rated it as poor. Table 13 provides the complete set of responses for this question. 

Table 13 Physical Health 

Condition of Physical Health 


(n = 361) % 

Good 181 50.1 

Fair 135 37.4 

Poor 40 11.1 


Missing 2 0.6 

Total 361 100.0 

There were 356 responses to the question, “How is your mental health?” Out of those responses, 201 

respondents (55.7%) rated their mental health as good, 128 (35.5%) rated their mental health as fair and 

24 respondents (6.6%) rated it as poor (Table 14). 

Table 14 Mental Health 

Condition of Mental Health 

# of responses 

(n = 361) % 

Good 201 55.7 

Fair 128 35.5 

Poor 24 6.6 


Missing 5 1.4 

Total 361 100.0 

A number of cross-references were conducted to investigate trends within the data in regard to the 

health conditions of Prince George’s homeless population. Several trends emerged through correlation 

tabulations with responses from the questions on health conditions, physical health and mental health. 

28


Respondents who reported one or more health conditions were significantly more likely than 

others to rank their health as fair or poor 4 . 

Respondents who reported one or more health conditions were significantly more likely than 

others to rank their mental health as fair or poor 5 . 

Respondents who reported their physical health as fair or poor were significantly more likely to 

also rank their mental health as fair or poor 6 . 

No significant differences were found based on gender or self-identified Aboriginal status in 

regard to physical and mental health conditions. 

The results suggest that people who identified themselves as Aboriginal have a similar reporting of 

mental and physical issues as people who identified themselves as Non-Aboriginal. 

4 p


3.7 Defining Homelessness 

Homeless Count respondents were asked to self-identify with either of two definitions of homelessness, 

or, if they felt both definitions to be unsuitable, to provide their own definition of homelessness. 

Definition A: 

Absolute Homelessness – is a situation where an individual or family has no housing at all or is staying in 

a temporary form of shelter or in locations not fit for people to live in. 

Definition B: 

Relative Homelessness – is a situation where people have a home but are at risk of becoming homeless: 

this includes those that are living in places that are unsafe, inadequate or too expensive; and people 

who for different reasons are not able to, or don’t feel comfortable, living on their own in typical 

housing. 

In response to this question, 88 respondents (26.8%) felt that they fit the definition of homelessness 

represented by Definition A; 28 respondents (39.0) felt that they fit the definition of homelessness 

represented by Definition B; and 50 respondents (15.2%) answered with “No”. 55 respondents (16.8%) 

answered with “Don’t know” and 7 responses (1.9%) were coded as invalid. Table 15 provides a 

summarized overview of the responses. 

Table 15 Definition of Homelessness 

Definition of Homelessness 


(n = 328) % 

Definition A 88 26.8 

Definition B 128 39.0 

No (don’t fit either definition) 50 15.2 


Invalid response 7 2.2 

Total 328 100.0 

The survey questionnaire provided an opportunity for those respondents who felt that neither definition 

of homelessness (Definition A or B) applied to them to provide their own definition of homelessness. 

The purpose of this question was to gain insights to the meaning of homelessness to homeless 

individuals in Prince George. Sixty-two (62) respondents provided an individual definition of 

homelessness in response to this question. A qualitative thematic analysis resulted in six major themes 

describing homelessness (Table 16). The three major themes identified were: 

Not having a place to live or no home (i.e., affordable housing, living in shelters) – 27 responses 

(44.3%); 

Living a hard life/a hopeless life/being lost – 15 responses (24.6%); and 

Living life on the street/ street lifestyle – 8 responses (13.1%). 

30

Table 16 Other Definitions of Homelessness 


Definition of Homelessness 


(n = 62) 

% 

Not having a place to live or no home (i.e., affordable 

housing, living in shelters) 

27 45.0 

Hard life/Hopelessness/ Lost 15 25.0 

Street Life/Lifestyle 8 13.3 

Being at risk 7 11.7 

No income 4 6.7 

Survival 3 5.0 

Other definitions* 2 3.3 

No Answer 1 1.7 

*For a complete list of the definitions provided by respondents please see Appendix A, Table A 9. 

31


3.8 Reasons for Homelessness 

Respondents were asked to identify the main reasons they feel they do not have their own place. Table 

17 provides a summary of the reasons chosen by respondents. The three most commonly reported 

responses were: 

o Cost of housing/can’t afford rent/mortgage (146 people or 40.4%); 

o Pay or welfare not enough or not available (126 people; 34.9%); and 

o Issues with alcohol/substance misuse (114 people; 31.6%). 

Table 17 Reasons for Homelessness* 

Reasons for Homelessness 


(n = 361) % 

Cost of housing/can’t afford rent/mortgage 146 40.4 

Pay or welfare not enough / not available 126 34.9 

Alcohol/substance misuse 114 31.6 

Unemployment 90 24.9 

Other** 54 14.9 

Divorce/family rejection 44 12.2 

Lack of education 42 11.6 

Abuse/conflict/personal safety 39 10.8 

My health/family member illness 35 9.7 

Government policy/new rules 34 9.4 

My choice not to have a place 26 7.2 

Moved to find work 26 7.2 

Eviction/foreclosure 24 6.6 


*Respondents were able to choose up to three reasons. **For a complete list of ‘other’ reasons 

provided by respondents please see Appendix A, Table A 10. 

32


3.9 Services Offered in Prince George 

There were 110 respondents (30.5%) who commented on the services offered in Prince George. Major 

themes resulting from the data included: 

The need for more shelters and beds that are available for the homeless 

More activities and agencies that can be frequented by homeless people 

Low income housing support 

Help with unemployment 

Need more low income housing; 

More options for single people who are having trouble making an income; 

There were also multiple comments that praised the services that are available for homeless people in 

Prince George. The following list of quotations provides an impression of the range of comments 

provided. For a complete list of the responses please see Appendix A, Table A 11. 

More of "Fire Pit" services available on weekends. With things to do besides drinking; 

More places, like friendship lodge. BC housing, Métis housing. 

Not enough standardized housing for people. Lots of red tape; people have to meet certain 

criteria to access housing - creates long waiting lists and discourages people from pursuing these 

spots. Openness is key; affordability; 

Cut bus passes for the homeless and poor; 

We have wicked resources here; 

Welfare does not give us enough. You can have shelter or you can have food, not both. It would 

be nice to have places that are better priced and not run down. It's hard to have roommates 

(trust); 

More drop-ins. More places to do laundry, later hours, safe storage for overnight holdings 

(clothes, personal stuff); and 

Men need more services, places where they serve protein with meals for men. Harm reduction 

shelter for men. 

More welfare 

Training opportunities without getting cut off of EI [IA]. Opportunities to volunteer where meals 

are given out + people could get skills and knowledge they may not need Food Banks. 

33


Need more places to eat, more good breakfasts for homeless people. 

Excellent services in PG but could use more places to stay like ASAP 

More shelter beds. Something to do on Sundays. 

Everything needed, not enough shelter for men, need more places like AWAC esp. for those with 

mental health issues and in winter, elders need to have somewhere too. CINHS is a joke, people 

shouldn't be using in there, also the way they are running it. 7-10 days to get an appt. There's so 

much to say, but that's enough for now. 

34

Section 4: Discussion and Conclusions 


4.1 Solutions and Next Steps 

The 2010 Prince George Homeless Count is the second ever homeless count that has been conducted in 

the City of Prince George. Based on the results, close to 30% of the homeless people in Prince George 

face ‘absolute homelessness’, where an individual or family has no housing at all, is staying in a 

temporary form of shelter, or in locations not fit for people to live in. The primary reasons for their 

homelessness named by the majority of respondents are a lack of affordable housing (40%) followed by 

too little or no pay or welfare (35%) and issues with alcohol and substance abuse (32%). Most indicated 

a combination of these and other reasons for their homelessness. Notably, while issues with alcohol and 

substance abuse were indicated as reasons for their homelessness by one-third of the surveyed 

population, just over half of all respondents (51%) indicated having drug and alcohol issues when 

reporting their health conditions. Related to health issues, and especially troublesome, is the finding 

that one-third (30%) of respondents suffered from three or more health conditions. The combination of 

a lack of affordable housing and the many health issues homeless people in Prince George struggle with 

is a clear indication of a lack of shelter and services available to the population which could facilitate and 

encourage their attempts to escape this vicious circle. This is a long-standing issue that has and 

continues to raise primary concern with the homeless service agencies and organizations in Prince 

George. A possible avenue to address this issue may be through a collaborative effort between CPAH, 

the City of Prince George, Northern Health and the various service providers and agencies in Prince 

George. 

Concerns are also raised by the large number of self-declared Aboriginal respondents. According to the 

demographic results of the Homeless Count, more than two-thirds of the homeless population in Prince 

George is of Aboriginal descent. Additionally, Aboriginal respondents tend to be younger than the non- 

Aboriginal homeless population. Likewise, female respondents tended to be younger than male 

respondents. Although some specialized services and programs are already being provided and are 

targeted at Aboriginal homeless individuals in particular, these findings may indicate that there is a need 

for the development of further, possibly more diversified and age-specific services and/or the 

improvement of current services and programs provided to Aboriginal and female homeless people in 

Prince George. 

The results of the 2010 Prince George Homeless Count demonstrate that homelessness continues to 

remain a significant problem in the City of Prince George. The count provides essential information to 

government, organizations, and agencies providing services and support to homeless individuals. It is 

CPAH’s hope that, as with the 2008 data, the results of the 2010 Count will inform future development 

strategies and action plans, and allow for further collaborative work with the City of Prince George, the 

Ministry of Housing and Social Development and all other levels of government, toward the reduction of 

homelessness. 

35


36


APPENDICES 

37

Appendix A: Open-Ended Responses 

38


List of Tables Reporting Open-Ended Responses 

Table A 1 Where Homeless People Stayed Overnight .............................................................................. 40 

Table A 2 If Aboriginal, where do you come from? .................................................................................. 41 

Table A 3 Places Stayed At Over The Last Year ......................................................................................... 44 

Table A 4 In The Last Year, Which Of These Places Have You Stayed In The Most? (Other Places)........ 45 

Table A 5 What Type Of Place Was It? (Other Places) .............................................................................. 47 

Table A 6 Other Sources Of Income ........................................................................................................... 49 

Table A 7 Communities Called Home Other Than Prince George ............................................................. 50 

Table A 8 Other Reported Health Conditions ............................................................................................ 51 

Table A 9 Definitions of Homelessness (Other Definitions) ..................................................................... 52 

Table A 10 Reasons For Homelessness (Other Reasons) .......................................................................... 54 

Table A 11 Comments On Services Offered In Prince George .................................................................. 56 

39


Table A.1 Where Homeless People Stayed Overnight 

Response # of respondents 

(n=52) 

ASAP 10 

Home 7 

Own home/place 5 

Didn't sleep 4 

2nd stage housing 3 

Basement Suite 2 

At home 2 

Didn't sleep, walked around. 2 

No place - No sleep 2 

Here 2 

Tent in yard 2 

3rd Ave 1 

Spruce Street 1 

Haven't slept 1 

Own apartment, at risk of eviction 1 

Didn’t 1 

Sister's 1 

Tent 1 

Tent in bushes 1 

Friendship Lodge 1 

Top of old Laundromat 1 

Truck trailer 1 

Total 52 

40

Table A 2 If Aboriginal, where do you come from? 


Response 


(n=217) 

Lake Babine Nation 12 

Burns Lake 11 

Fort St. James 10 

Stoney Creek 10 

Kitwanga 8 

Nakazdli 8 

Tache/ Tachie/ Tl'azt’en 7 

Hazelton 5 

Sucker Creek 5 

Takla Landing/Lake 5 

Tsay Keh Dene 5 

Alberta 4 

Fort St John 4 

Fort Ware (Weir) 4 

Gitxsan (Hazelton) 3 

Kluskus Nation 3 

McLeod Lake 3 

Morristown 3 

Saikuz 3 

Anaheim lake - Uikatcho First Nation Band 2 

Carrier 2 

Chetwynd 2 

Dawson Creek 2 

Fort Nelson 2 

Fountain 2 

Métis 2 

Old fort / Nedo'ats 2 

PG 2 

Quesnel 2 

Red Bluff 2 

Saskatchewan 2 

Smithers 2 

Vanderhoof 2 

Winnipeg, Manitoba 2 

Alexandria 1 

Blackwater 1 

Canada 1 

Carrier - Quesnel/Burns Lake 1 

Carrier Nation, Stellaquo 1 

Cheam 1 

Cheslatta Carrier Nation 1 

Cree 1 

41


Duncan band, Alberta 1 

Edson 1 

Fort Babine 1 

Fort St. James, Tl’azt’en 1 

Gitsan 1 

Glenvowell 1 

Grand Prairie 1 

Hagelgit 1 

Haggersville, ONT 1 

Hart 1 

Hudson Hope 1 

Huston 1 

Kamloops 1 

Kamloops reserve 1 

Kitieucla 1 

Kunlundun 1 

Kwadacha 1 

Lax Ku Alaams 1 

Lhoosk'uz Nation 1 

Mam 1 

Manitoba 1 

Manitoba Island/Georgian Bay ON 1 

Manson Creek 1 

Métis, PG 1 

Métis - Trois Rivieres 1 

Métis housing 1 

Moberly Lake 1 

Montana 1 

Montana (Blackwood) 1 

N. Dakota 1 

Nadleh 1 

Nat-leh 1 

Nazko 1 

Nefi 1 

Negroadomis 1 

Nuayiansh 1 

NWT Goochin 1 

Ojibwa 1 

Peace River, AB 1 

Pinehouse lake. Sask. 1 

Poppasschase Banc 1 

Prince Albert, SASK 1 

Prince Rupert 1 

Region of St. Lawrence Ontario 1 

Saikuz/ Nakazdli 1 

Saikyz 1 

Salich 1 

42


Sekani 1 

Shelley 1 

Shelly Res 1 

Spuzzaan First Nation 1 

Stellaquo 1 

Stone Creek 1 

Stoner - Williams Lake 1 

Takla Lake Band 1 

Telegram Creek 1 

Telegraph Creek, BC 1 

Thaltan 1 

Ulkacho 1 

Ulkacho Reserve 1 

Valdor Que. 1 

Vanderhoof - Saiku'uz 1 

Whitehorse 1 

Williams Lake 1 

Wyoming 1 

Yekooche 1 

Total 217 

43

Table A 3 Places Stayed At Over The Last Year 


# of respondents (n=28) 

Response 

ASAP 6 

AWAC 2 

Group Home 2 

Home 2 

Re-Connect group home. 2 

2nd Stage housing 1 

APT 1 


Camper 1 

DNA 1 

E-Fry 1 

Friends van 1 

Hostel 1 

Ketso Yoh 1 

Low Income Apartment 1 

Own a mobile home 1 

Reserve 1 

Trailer, Drunk tank 1 

Truck Trailer 1 

Total 28 

44


Table A 4 In The Last Year, Which Of These Places Have You Stayed In The Most? (Other Places) 

Response 


ASAP 6 

Camper 2 

Group Home 2 

Home 2 

1/2 friends and 1/2 shelter 1 

1/2 shelter and 1/2 rental 1 

50:50 D+E 1 

At apartment and Hospital 1 

Back & forth AWAC + friends 1 


Basement suite for 1 1/2 years 1 

Boarding House 1 

Current (3 years) - longest time in 16 years 1 

Did have own place 1 

Duplex 1 

Edmonton, own home. 1 

Green Place 1 

Half H, half K 1 

Here 1 

House 1 

Ketso Yoh 1 

Kiso 1 

Mobile Home 1 

My apartment/safe house 1 

My house 1 

My place 1 

None 1 

2nd Ave 1 

Outside & shelter 1 

Reconnect 1 

Rented Room 1 

Shack not fit for animals let alone people 1 

Shelter and Recovery house 1 

Someone else's place, motel/hotel, rented 

house/apartment 

1 

Someone else’s' and hospital 1 

Street/my place - mom's (rented house), 

equal between streets/home/moms 

1 

45


Trailer 1 

Truck trailer 1 

Total 46 

46


Table A 5 What Type Of Place Was It? (Other Places) 

Response 


Apartment 50 

House 38 

Duplex 16 

Rooming house 15 

Shelter 13 

Trailer 12 


Rented house 8 

Motel 6 

Rental 5 

Safe House 5 

ASAP 4 

Friends place 4 

Home 4 

Hotel 4 

Rented apartment 4 

Reserve 4 

Boarding House 3 

Group Home 3 

Mom's house 3 

Rental apartment 3 

Townhouse 3 

BC housing 2 

Camper 2 

Condo 2 

Hotel/Motel 2 

Ketso Yoh 2 

Mobile Home 2 

One bedroom 2 

Own house on reserve 2 

Rented 2 

Rented room 2 

1 Bedroom lodge 1 

2 Bedroom 1 

4plex 1 

Alpine Village Complex 1 

AWAC 1 

Basement 1 

47


Bunk house 1 

Cabin 1 

Campground 1 

Emergency Shelter 1 

Family’s house 1 

Green Place 1 

Home condo house 1 

Hostel 1 

Hotel Suite 1 

House - Parents 1 

Jail 1 

Low Income apartment 1 

Low Income Housing 1 

Métis Housing 1 

Mom's Basement 1 

My own place 1 

N/A 1 

Parents 1 

PG Hotel 1 

R=B with brother 1 

Reconnect 1 

Rental house 1 

Rental housing 1 

Rented Duplex 1 

Rented Home 1 

Rented room in someone’s house 1 

Room and board 1 

Safe House/Shelter 1 

Shack not fit for animals let alone people 1 

Shared accommodation 1 

Sister's house 1 

Sixplex 1 

Someone else's place. 1 

Transitional housing 1 

Treatment 1 

Total 279 

48

Table A 6 Other Sources Of Income 


Response 


(n=17) 

Part Time Work 2 

Odd jobs 2 

Group Home 1 

SA 1 

Self Employed 1 

Labour 1 

Scrap Metal 1 

Self Employment 1 

Casual Labour 1 

Renting place out 1 

People from church 1 

GST 1 

Dumpster Diving 1 

Waiting on RIS 1 

Unemployed 1 

Total 17 

49


Table A 7 Communities Called Home Other Than Prince George 

Response 


Fort St. James 4 

Vancouver 3 

Alberta 2 

BC/Alberta 2 

Chilliwack 2 

Tsay-Keh-Dene 2 

Victoria - 2 2 

Ontario 1 

Alexandria 1 

Burns Lake 1 

Corner Brook 1 

Cranbrook 1 

Dawson Creek 1 

Elliot Lake, ON 1 

Fort Babine 1 

Fort St John 1 

Ft. Ware 1 

Grand Prairie 1 

Hart 1 

Hazelton 1 

Home Sweet Home 1 

Kamloops 1 

Lillooet 1 

Mackenzie 1 

Melford, SASK. 1 

Montana 1 

N. Dakota 1 

Nefi 1 

Ontario 1 

Osoyoos 1 

Out of province 1 

Port Edward 1 

Quesnel 1 

Red Bluff 1 

Smithers 1 

Stoner - Williams Lake 1 

Terrace 1 

Toronto 1 

Vernon 1 

Yekooche 1 

Total 40 

50

Table A 8 Other Reported Health Conditions 


Response 


(n=24) 

Depression 2 

Seizures 2 

Asthma 1 

Back problems 1 

Brain Trauma 1 

Cataracts 1 

Coma for 2 months from fall - hit head. 

Short term memory loss. 

1 

Confusion, lost about where to live. 1 

Deaf in one ear, partial blindness in one 

1 

eye. 

Arthritis 1 

Diabetes/asthma/arthritis 1 

Epilepsy and Bipolar 1 

Flu 1 

Good 1 

Heart problem, diabetes, arthritis 1 

Lack of Money 1 

Learning Disabilities 1 

Lungs, Black spot 1 

Major seizures 1 

None 1 

PTSD 1 

Arthritis in neck and spine 1 

Total 24 

51


Table A 9 Definitions of Homelessness (Other Definitions – 62 Unique Responses) 

Living on the streets, no place at all to go. 

Someone who is living on the streets. 

Pretty hard, if you don't know people you get taken for a ride. Everything I own comes from 

dumpsters. I've stayed outside till 10 below - I'm a survivor! 

Being able to afford. Can't afford housing. 

Not having a place of independence. 

People who have nowhere to go. No income. 

No Home. 

A lot of people are not interested in having their own place. Rate seems to be increasing. 

No. 

Crappy. 

Poor. 

Person without a home. Even if you are in a shelter it is not yours. You get told what to do - they 

can be full, then I walk the streets. 

Is moving to Vancouver and will be on the streets. Moving to Vancouver to make a living as an 

artist but will have to start out without supports. 

Street Life. 

There are many sources or different homelessness. 

Horrible life, can't trust anyone. 

Homelessness is homelessness. It is sad. 

Each person might have their own definition. 

Forgotten out in the environment. 

Not having one's own place. 

Nowhere to live. 

My basement suite. It's trashed, it's a crack shack. Unsafe area in the hood, hear gun shots. 

Constant fear of going back into the cycle. Feels like a fear, being evicted, then absolute 

homelessness. 

Everyone should have a home. A key to their own door. 

I feel safe with my family because I can trust them. I was raised with them. No reason not to 

trust them. I have a home with them. 

Complete homelessness is living in a shelter. 

Lifestyle, it's how you live your life. 

Lost. 

Not having a home. 

Living on streets. 

Can happen to anyone. 

Hopelessness. 

A home is your own place where you have control. 

Person stuck on streets with nothing and can't afford nothing. 

Just the feeling of helplessness. 

Live on the streets. No home. 

You're stuck in one place and that’s it. 

Quit doing drugs. 

52


We can’t be safe on the streets. Most of us feel safe at Ketso Yoh. 

Keep on walking all day, every day. Until I found a home. 

Without a fixed address. 

Not just people on the streets. Couch surfing, people sharing, giving what they can. It's all about 

the community you are in. The closer to home the more couches to sleep on. 

Unable to provide for yourself, foodwise, having no place to go to call home. At the end of the 

month if I don't have a place to live I'll breach my probation and go back to jail. 

Street living person. 

No Where to go. 

Need more shelters. 

Just trying to survive. 

Homelessness - Panhandling, street work, sleeping in unfit places (trying to find a place to live 

and sleep) Trying to find food, and hang out. Drug and alcohol use, staying out of jail. 

Living on streets/used to live on streets. 

Homelessness is when you do not have a home and rely on other places, like Fire Pit, for food 

and other services. 

Walking the streets. 

Sleeping on sidewalks. 

Sleep outside. 

It means loss of security. Loss of family, loneliness, depression, hungry, and lost. 

Nowhere to go. 

I used to sleep outside for 3 years, don't feel bad about it. 

Pay day to pay day economy. A payment away from losing everything. Lose your car to pay your 

rent. 

When you have kids your at risk level is so high - previously could sleep in a tent, hitch hike, do 

without a meal, now with 3 kids I worry a lot. We have to use our support money for rent so 

very little left for food. 

A place where you can't put your stuff. 

If they don't have a home. 

Not having affordable housing so you can afford food for the month. 

Shelter, Tent, sleep in parks over passes, benches. 

53


Table A 10 Reasons For Homelessness (Other Reasons) 

Reason 


(n=54) 

Has own place 3 

Jail 2 

No income 2 

Addiction 1 

Being in jail I lost my place 1 

Budgeting money 1 

Can't find place 1 

Can't live with Mother 1 

Chose to be homeless at one time, but then got 

stuck there. 

1 

Depression 1 

Does 1 

Dog 1 

Don't want to bring alcoholism back onto the 

reserve. 

1 

Family 1 

Foster care since two, one the streets on and off 

since 10-12. 

1 

Gave home to ex and children 1 

Government wants me land + home in Blackwater 

- own home in Anaheim lake. 

1 

Hard to get references 1 

Harassment 1 

Has own place but doesn't stay there, doesn't 

want to. 

1 

Has place 1 

Have my own place 1 

Have own place 1 

Have own place - just need to eat. 1 

Have place 1 

Have Place 1 

Husband passed away. 1 

I have a place 1 

I have own place 1 

In jail too many times 1 

54


It's easier, less responsibility 1 

Kicked out of parents place 1 

Lazy 1 

Mom thought I was too bad. Off and on in care 

1 

since 3. First time lived on streets 10. 

My pet. 1 

NA Shelter 1 

No place I can afford 1 

Now that I can't work anymore, I'm just used to 

1 

being on the streets. 

Pension deficiency 1 

Pension not enough 1 

Poor, poverty 1 

RCMP 1 

Relied on other people. 1 

Rents an Apartment 1 

Retired due to disability. 1 

SA only plays $200 a month 1 

Seizure condition 1 

Stay safe at ASAP. They keep an eye on me. 1 

Survivor of residential schools 1 

Widow 1 

55


Table A 11 Comments On Services Offered In Prince George (107 Unique Responses) 

Yes, somewhere to go and relax; drop-in. 

More Shelter. 

More Work. 

More services for men. 

More shelters. 

Cambel. 

Need more low income housing. 

PG needs a campground for the homeless - Priority #1. I don't harm anybody, what I don't need I 

pass on to others who need them. 

Cheaper rent. 

For men who have not stayed in a shelter, need places to eat/ More options. 

More for men in PG. 

Ketso is the only place to get a decent meal in PG. 

Would like no rules in shelter. 

Ketso Yoh is great, ASAP is not. 

Low income housing should be low income housing. 

More places, like friendship lodge. BC housing, Métis housing. 

P.G needs shelters for couples so they can sleep together somewhere safe and now have to 

sleep outside. 

Definitely need more housing or shelter. Are there any recovery houses?? 

Flexible Hours. 

Should have low income housing for couples. 

Make recovery places for people and cheaper housing. 

Street nurses. 

Need more places like this (Fire Pit) and places open weekends, because there is none. 

See more people having a place to sleep. Some of them are passing out at church; I see them at 

church and everywhere else. Parks, four season’s pool. Ect. It's not good. 

More stable long term resources; less transition. The fire pit is great for food. 

More subsidized housing is needed in PG. Lack of confidentiality/privacy in welfare office and 

pharmacy. 

Hurry up with RIS, It'll allow me to go home. 

More homeless drop ins. More social houses for low income families. Welfare not to question 

about finances, etc. When they already know the answer. 

[X] is a wonderful person. Fire Pit has a comfortable, friendly, family feel to it. 

More funding, cheaper rent. 

I just want a home. 

More money for welfare. 

Something like BC housing, not so much structure. City Bus houses, pet friendly, pick 

something you can be responsible for. 

Better housing, low income housing. In Kamloops they have the ASK society, where people can 

do drugs or whatever they want. But the shelter here is better, you can come in and sit down. 

"You can't even get a coffee there" that says it all. They boot you out at 7AM. Everyone's 

entitled to a certain amount of rent, why not build something that is affordable. 

56


More shelter beds. Something to do on Sundays. 

Need more. More shelters and stuff. 

Jobwave has been useless, slow - "I could have been working 3 months ago if they got 

the tickets sorted out." "I want to work, I've been working my whole life why stop now." 

Would like to have medicine delivered. 

All services in PG are adequate. 

Support is good right now. 

Feels comfortable here at ASAP, workers understand where people are coming from - give you 

space, treat you like family. You could say I've stayed with family. 

Got it better than anywhere else. A lot of people’s problems is low income. 

Good services, better than anywhere else so you can go to different places to eat. 

Low Income Housing. 

More money for SS. Lower rent. 

Low cost housing for single people and one with kids. Don't make it hard to find a place 

when being released from jail. 

More welfare. 

120-150 people served every Sunday night at St. Michaels. Some people choose to sleep on 

streets even if family or agencies offer a place, because of addiction. 

Excellent services in PG but could use more places to stay like ASAP. 

More low income housing. 

More childcare for under 3 yrs would be able to go find a job if I had child care. 

Just give a lot of people help with their needs and lots of help with food. 

Yes, more available. 

More help to find housing/services, lengthy time, finding a reasonable priced home. More 

advertizing to ensure awareness. 


More affordable housing. 

More places, like friendship lodge. BC housing, Metis housing. 

More education for inmates. 

Dealing with the ministry. 

More of "Fire Pit" services available on weekends. With things to do besides drinking. 

We have everything here. P.G. is one of the best communities. Where else can you eat like this 

for free and get clothes for free? 

There are a lot of food and clothes services in PG, the big issue is employment. 

More options for single people who are having trouble making an income. 

Not enough standardized housing for people. Lots of red tape; people have to meet certain 

criteria to access housing - creates long waiting lists and discourages people from pursuing these 

spots. Openness is key. Affordability. 

We have wicked resources here. 

Cut bus passes for the homeless and poor. 

Structure 2) Expectations and deadlines 3) Extensions (justified) 4) Alternative structure for 

men/women. 

I need some furniture. House for broken into they took all the beds, table, chairs, and I have a 

gran. 

57


Shouldn't have group home right downtown. Being down here is not a good place for young 

people to be down town on the street. There are a lot of crazy old men who ask younger girls for 

dates. 

I think if we had more places to live, more people would be more responsible, settle down, get 

jobs. Secure places where no one can come break in and steal your stuff. 

More drop-ins. More places to do laundry, later hours, safe storage for overnight holdings 

(clothes, personal stuff). 

Low income, welfare does not give enough. Can't get a job because addicted to alcohol. 

Welfare does not give us enough. You can have shelter or you can have food, not both. It would 

be nice to have places that are better priced and not run down. It's hard to have roommates 

(trust). 

More housing that is cheaper. 

Great to have resources available. Just love it. Have been out of town and no resources 

available. Resources are given free, without cost - just repay through appreciation. 

We need places for low income people that have no children living with them. 

My apartment building has a bug infestation. In my unit there is ants under my tub and the back 

where the wall is around my tub has water damage and there is a fire alarm that is to be wired 

in the ceiling and it is not. It is uncovered with wires showing and the stove is not good, its 

burners are not in good shape the burners are falling apart and the laundry room dryers are not 

working properly. It is not healthy for someone with asthma and health problems. 

I have a place and I get medication - delivery service for prescription would be nice because it’s 

hard to get bus fare/bus pass to get to prescription. NOT the only one suffering - even if they 

have their own home, it's hard. Bus fare $4.00 just to pick up and I don't always have that 

money. 

Everything needed, not enough shelter for men, need more places like AWAC esp. for those with 

mental health issues and in winter, elders need to have somewhere to. CINHS is a joke, people 

shouldn't be using in there, also the way they are running it. 7-10 days to get an appt. There's so 

much to say, but that's enough for now. 

Everything is too expensive. 

The Fire Pit is great! 

ASAP helps me out. 

Need more subsidized housing where you can afford to live independently. 

[X] is a wonderful person. Fire Pit has a comfortable, friendly, family feel to it. 

More places open on weekends. 

We have lots of shelters, food is one of my prime concerns, and a place for me to go. Don't like 

staying at home. Laundry facilities should be more accessible to the homeless. 

All I want is help to find a place. 

I'm unable to find a suitable place. 

Somewhere for the homeless to go on Sundays, and something to do. 

City tearing down and rebuilding housing for downtown people. More community parks and 

gardens, buildings with apartments in them owned by the city. Roof top gardening, city growing 

enter, even paid programs. Housing and social development. 

People are good here, pretty friendly. 

All pretty good, if you don't have a place, there's somewhere to stay. 

Kind of expensive. That's why most people don't have a home here, it's hard to afford $500 

when you only get $610. 

58


Paid into services my whole life, should be able to get back enough to get a place. 

Should turn PG hotel into low income housing. Rents should be frozen like in Vancouver. By-law 

in Vancouver for rooming house rent to be frozen - can't change. 

There's lots here. 

I wish people would talk to people. That's why everyone comes here. I don't like going to AA, 

what we’re doing means more to me. 

Pretty good services, especially for food, you can never starve in PG. 

Income assistance all in one office and call center is really difficult! Line -ups, can't get on phone. 

When floundering In addiction, they get crisis grant as long as they will go detox for a week, I 

worked hard to get myself clean and can't get a $40 crisis grant for diapers and milk! Should be 

more services for families with kids. 

More lodges, like the friendship lodge. 


More welfare. 

Social Services doesn't give enough money. 

Training opportunities without getting cut off of IA. Opportunities to volunteer where meals are 

given out + people could get skills and knowledge they may not need Food Banks. 

More food banks. 

More programs for single people to get help. 

Rent being too high, social assistance does not give enough. Sometimes hard to get work when 

single with children, hard when you don't have enough support. 

Yes all kinds for street people. 

Men need more services, places where they serve protein with meals for men. Harm reduction 

shelter for men. 

More low income housing. 

Lower rent, more low income housing. 

Need more places to eat, more good breakfasts for homeless people. 

59

Appendix B: Figures 

60

List of Figures 


Figure 1 Locations of Data Collection in Prince George .............................................................................. 62 

Figure 2 Did You Participate in the Prince George Homeless Count in a Previous Year? ........................... 62 

Figure 3 Where Did You Sleep Last Night? ................................................................................................. 63 

Figure 4 Respondent Age ............................................................................................................................ 64 

Figure 5 Respondent Gender ...................................................................................................................... 64 

Figure 6 Aboriginal Status ........................................................................................................................... 65 

Figure 7 Places Stayed In Over The Last Year ............................................................................................. 65 

Figure 8 Source of Income .......................................................................................................................... 66 

Figure 9 Do You Consider Prince George to be Your Home Community? .................................................. 66 

Figure 10 Reported Health Conditions ....................................................................................................... 67 

Figure 11 Definition of Homelessness ........................................................................................................ 67 

Figure 12 Reasons for Homelessness .......................................................................................................... 68 

61


Figure 1 Locations of Data Collection in Prince George 

Figure 2 Did You Participate in the Prince George Homeless Count in a Previous Year? 

62

Figure 3 Where Did You Sleep Last Night? 


63

Figure 4 Respondent Age 

Figure 5 Respondent Gender 


64

Figure 6 Aboriginal Status 

Figure 7 Places Stayed In Over the Last Year 


65

Figure 8 Source of Income 


Figure 9 Do You Consider Prince George to be Your Home Community? 

66

Figure 10 Reported Health Conditions 

Figure 11 Definition of Homelessness 


67

Figure 12 Reasons for Homelessness 


68


Appendix C: Survey Instrument and Script 

69


70


71


Appendix D: Guide to Coordinating and Conducting a Homeless Count 

72

Homeless Count Tables - City of Prince George

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?