Is Supportive Housing Providing Enough Support?

There are different models of supportive housing. “Housing First” and “Treatment First” are two distinctly different approaches.

Housing First provides permanent housing as the starting point. Residents don’t have to seek treatment or stay clean as a condition of keeping their housing. The idea is that people will be in a better position to make those decisions once they have a safe and stable roof over their heads. Treatment and other services may be offered, but taking part is generally voluntary.

Treatment First takes a different approach and often happens in stages. First comes emergency shelter. Then treatment or stabilization. After that comes transitional or recovery housing, and finally permanent housing. Treatment, behaviour and sobriety requirements may apply as someone moves through those stages.

Lift uses the “Housing First” model at the Blackberry Creek facility on Joyce Avenue. While treatment or sobriety under that model is not required, Lift publicly states that they provide access and connections to detox and substance-use treatment. Recently, statements have been made by staff of the facility that advertising for AA/NA is not allowed, AA/NA meetings are not allowed on the premises and encouraging treatment and/or sobriety is not allowed. Clients and family members of clients have also made similar statements.

The Driftwood Shelter falls under a similar model with few differences. It is a temporary, low-barrier emergency shelter operating with Housing First and harm-reduction principles.  As with the Housing First model, treatment and sobriety are not requirements. Similar to the the Blackberry Creek model, access and connections to treatment are available, but more for informational purposes. I haven’t heard whether or not that has been promoted within from staff at the facility.

I was at a council meeting recently when representatives from Lift were presenting their successes to council. There is no question that some successes have been made, and those should be celebrated. However, I found their presentation to be heavy on the positive and light on the negatives. As a matter of fact, I didn’t hear a single negative mentioned.

A friend of mine told me a story about an experience someone close to him had. This person had a rough go in life and went down a dark path with substance abuse. They left town for treatment, found themselves on the recovery path back, and came back home to Powell River. Rental costs being what they are, and housing options being what they are, left this person with little other option but to find housing at Lift’s Blackberry Creek facility. As the story goes, they were doing their best to stay on track with their newfound sobriety but found little encouragement from staff. The person in the next room was an active user, the temptation became too great, and they soon fell back into old habits.

Unfortunately this is not the only story like that I’ve heard. Stories like that should be the exception, not the norm.

I firmly believe in helping people who need it, but I also believe in helping people in a way that actually helps them. When current strategies are not producing the intended results, changes need to be made. 

People with substance abuse issues need help battling those issues. People with mental health issues need appropriate mental health support. People who became homeless due to financial hardship or other life complications need help getting back on their feet.

Supportive housing is required; there is no argument there. But the type of housing that is, and where they are located, are both vitally important parts of conversation and to determining whether they benefit the city, or cause harm to the city.

“Housing First” isn’t a model that has demonstrated it can work near residential neighbourhoods, businesses and schools without unacceptable effects on the surrounding community, but housing for people in the later stages of the “Treatment First” model may. Supportive housing intended for active drug users should be at arms length from the community in order to keep our residents safe and secure.

People struggling with substance abuse need more than a roof. They need a realistic path forward. People living around these facilities deserve safety and accountability. Powell River deserves a system that actually helps people instead of simply moving the consequences from inside a building into the streets and woods around it.