City staff provided “overwhelmingly outdated, inaccurate and inconsistent” information about Toronto’s shelter system amid extreme cold this winter and in at least three cases told members of the public that a given facility was full when dozens of beds were available, Ombudsman Susan Opler has found.

Opler launched an enquiry on Jan. 2 after several reported incidents in which members of the public were wrongly told that there was no space at the Better Living Centre respite site amid temperatures that plunged to – 30 C.

In a 44-page report released on Wednesday, Opler said that she looked into four reported incidents in which members of the public were given incorrect information and found three of them illustrated “serious shortcomings in the city's intake and referral system.”

She said that in one of the incidents a caller to 311 asked for the location of warming centres downtown and was told to either call the Better Living Centre directly or seek shelter at a mall or library. She said that staff failed to inform the caller about the full breadth of available shelter sites located downtown because an internal database “contained outdated information.”

In another call, a volunteer at a pop-up supervised injection facility in Moss Park reached out to the city’s central intake call centre to check on available spaces at the Better Living Centre. According to the report, the caller was told that there was no space at the facility and then contacted the Better Living Centre directly, where a worker also informed her that the facility was full. Opler, however, says that there was 29 available spaces at the 100-bed facility at the time. She said that while no workers at the facility admitted to turning anyone away on the night in question, one staff member did tell her office that she was wrongly told by a colleague that the facility was full earlier that night.

In the third call deemed to be problematic, Opler said that a member of the public called central intake to ask about available beds near Queen and Dufferin Streets. During the call, which the man recorded, staff told him that there were no space at the nearby Better Living Centre despite only 83 of 100 beds being full at the time. Opler said that the staff member later told her office that she called the Better Living Centre directly and was told there was no space; however she says “neither the recording nor the phone logs support her version of the events.”

“With any kind of public service it is the city s responsibility to ensure it is communicating clearly to the public – what is being offered and how they can access it – and that starts with good solid communication within the city itself. What we found was that neither of those were at a standards that the public would expect,” Opler told CP24 on Wednesday. “I think it is partly explained by the rapid pace at which the services were expanded. But what we found is that there were really inexcusable errors in some cases.”

The city’s winter respite program had 150 spaces in 2017 and was supposed to be doubled to include 300 spaces this winter. Instead, the program grew to a total of 750 spaces amid an ongoing overcrowding crisis before declining to about 600 spaces today.

Opler said that while there should be some hiccups expected when a program grows so rapidly, there is nonetheless no excuse for some of the communication failures outlined in her report.

“There is no question that city staff worked extremely hard this winter to get more spaces online and to staff them and provide the services. They should be commended for that and they are in our report. But on the communication front we found that there really needs to be some improvement,” she said.

Some staff relying on outdated information

The city uses a three-tiered system to refer members of the public to various shelter facilities, including its central intake call centre, 311 and the Street to Homes Referral Centre on Peter Street.

Opler said that in the case of 311, staff were relying on outdated online information that failed to list four of the six winter respite sites operating at the time.

Meanwhile, she said that staff at the central intake call centre reported having trouble contacting winter respite sites directly and often chose to “rely on old, second-hand information from colleagues” about the availability of beds.

She said that “unclear and inconsistent terminology” also lead to confusion about what services are available at particular facilities, aggravating matters further.

“We found at least 12 different terms the city has used this season to refer to winter respite sites,” the report notes.

18 recommendations

Opler made a total of 18 recommendations, including nine of an “urgent nature” that were made in the midst of her investigation.

Those immediate recommendations included a direction for the city’s Shelter Support and Housing Administration to share information about the availability of beds at winter respite sites with central intake. The department had been obtaining those occupancy numbers throughout the day but had previously not been sharing them with the call centre responsible for referring members of the public to shelter and respite site facilities.

“We recognize that the winter respite site system expanded significantly and quickly this winter season. Regardless, SSHA should have anticipated the need for coordinated intake and referral processes,” the report states. “It is incumbent on the city to ensure that SHARC (Streets to Homes Assessment and Referral Centre), Central Intake and 311 work in a coordinated way to ensure fair and effective service delivery.”

Conditions at respite sites also examined

Though Opler’s investigation was initially commenced amid several reported communication failures, it was also expanded to take a look at the conditions at respite sites.

Ombudsman Toronto staff visited all nine respite sites in operation and Opler said that there needs to be more consistency among the facilities, though she did commend staff for already beginning work on developing standards for all respite sites, most of which are operated by community partners.

“It was much too cold – only 11 to 14 degrees celsius - inside one of the Winter Respite sites. Some had no showers. Most had no ramps, elevators or accessible toilet facilities. None had beds or cots to accommodate people with mobility challenges,” Opler wrote. “I am pleased to see that Toronto’s Shelter Support and Housing Administration division (SSHA) has already begun developing standards for the Winter Respite sites, which are essential to providing fair service.”

Speaking with reporters at an unrelated news conference on Wednesday, Mayor John Tory said he shared Opler’s “overall conclusion that we did not meet the standards in terms of the communication aspect and also the existence of consistent standards in the respite sites.”

Tory, however, said that he is heartened by the pace which staff have begun work to implement Opler’s recommendations.

“I am very encouraged at the fact that the staff at the city have said unreservedly and without qualification that they accept every one of the recommendations made by the ombudsman,” he said. “This is the kind of response you want to see.”

Here are the nine recommendations made in Opler’s final report:

1. The City should decide on a clear, descriptive and user-friendly term for each of the different services it provides. It should define each term, and commit to only using these terms. The City should require all staff, as well as its community partners, to use the same language and should do so in all communications
2. The City should define the roles of 311, SHARC and Central Intake and how they should work together. It should clearly communicate the role of each one to staff, community agencies, stakeholders and the public. The City should develop procedures and staff training to align with these roles.
3. The City should develop a system to share up-to-date information with all City organizations that provide information about homelessness services to the public, including 311, SHARC and Central Intake.
4. The City should improve data collection on Winter Respite site capacity and usage, to make sure it is useful for both operational and future planning purposes. SSHA should assess and address any data gaps preventing staff from making accurate referrals for people experiencing homelessness. They should also assess and address what type of data can best inform future planning to meet the needs of people using
5. The City should review and reorganize all homelessness information on its website to meet the needs of all stakeholders requiring this information. It must be updated regularly. All information should either be located in a single, easy to find place, or clearly cross-referenced.
6. The City should prioritize its work establishing minimum standards for Winter Respite sites. Until those standards are established, it should continue to assess conditions at each site on an ongoing basis and take steps to work with community partners to improve them in order to best meet users' needs.
7. Once standards are in place, the City should support its community partners who operate Winter Respite sites to ensure they are able to meet them. It should also hold community partners accountable for meeting the standards and develop a mechanism for doing so.
8. In implementing Recommendations 4, 5, and 6, the City should consult with people using the services, frontline workers, and professionals who work with, and on behalf of, people experiencing homelessness.
9. For a period of one year from the date of this report, SSHA should update the Ombudsman on a quarterly basis regarding all steps taken by the City to improve communications about services for people