What the 2005 count did
On January 15, 2005, the Greater Victoria held its first coordinated Homeless Count over a single night. The aim was to obtain real figures, as well as real experiences, about homelessness. This took place during a spell of sub-zero weather, with over 150 volunteers canvassing 43 routes across the community between midnight and 6 a.m.
They discovered (168) individuals homeless and sleeping on the streets and about (500) others in shelters and motels, including a number of these in the form of families, a total of (700) individuals suffering from absolute homelessness. A total of (175) individuals completed at least a portion of the survey.
How the study worked (and its limits)
The study combined a street count with a paper survey regarding demographic data, access to shelter, health, mental health, substance use, time in Victoria, and reasons for homelessness. Researchers employed simple statistical methods such as chi-squared tests to assess for trends by gender, age groups, cultural identity-group, and duration of homelessness.
Since it’s not a random participation and only a small sample, you cannot consider it a “population snapshot” perfect result. Also, it’s a survey that uses large categories like “street drugs” instead of names, which cannot allow you to pinpoint results related to causes and effects.
Who people were and where they slept
It was predominantly men who took part in this survey, while the average age of those who responded was in mid-thirties, although they came from a pool of people aged from youth to senior persons. Most of the people who took part in this survey were of First Nations, especially among
Despite the winter, only (84%) reported they had no shelter for the night, meaning access to beds remained difficult during a major street count event. What’s surprising, however, is that being homeless for a longer period of time did not significantly contribute to being housed on survey nights.
Why people became homeless
Rarely did people identify one factor. The most common drivers included abuse, addiction, breakdown in family, eviction, not meeting the criteria for income assistance, and simply being unable to find a place.
Clear gender differences emerged with female respondents reporting abuse or shorter-term homelessness and male respondents reporting longer-term homelessness, addiction, and eviction. Such patterns suggest that prevention and support need to look different depending on people’s pathways into homelessness.
How long they’d been without stable housing
The average time that respondents said they had not had any fixed accommodation is approximately (1) year and (8) months. Some individuals had gone without housing ranging from a matter of days to several decades. A substantial number had been homeless longer than five years. This is a group that might need not merely a place to sleep but a home and social and health services.
Income, roots in Victoria, and age trends
Nearly half of the participants received no income support, and the benefits system failed to distinguish between short-term and long-term homelessness. Moreover, some had resided in the city of Victoria for long periods of time (over a decade)–this does not appear to be the ‘newcomer’ problem that some would argue.
Younger adults reported higher use of street drugs, while older adults reported longer periods of homelessness. Use of alcohol was common across all ages.
Health, mental health, and substance use
While over half reported health problems, many couldn’t get consistent follow-up care-so they relied on walk-in clinics, community services, or emergency departments. Up to 40% said they’d been diagnosed with a mental illness at some point, and often found that mental health concerns overlapped with physical illness.
Street-drug use correlated both with health problems and with reporting psychiatric diagnoses. Alcohol use was widespread and often linked to personal-life impacts, and street-drug use frequently co-occurred with alcohol use—pointing to the need for integrated care rather than siloed services.
Cultural identity
First Nations respondents were more likely to have shelter on the survey night, even though overall housing instability looked similar across groups. Self-reported rates of health problems and substance use didn’t vary particularly strongly according to cultural identity in this sample. However, as the report noted, broader, well-documented inequities create an imperative for culturally safe approaches.
Why nutrition and weight matter (the “hunger–obesity paradox”)
The health-equity lens update that needed to be made: homelessness does not automatically equate to being underweight. Food insecurity often coexists with overweight and obesity because cheap foods are often calorie-dense and nutrient-poor, meals are irregular, stress hormones disrupt metabolism, and sleep is disrupted.
Recent studies show that the rates of obesity among homeless adults can be as high as those of the general population. Small, realistic shelter-based programs, such as short walking goals, simple nutrition supports, and better access to fruits and vegetables, have improved activity and diet quality. In contrast, many Housing First programs without specific nutrition or activity components do not change weight outcomes on their own.
What the findings point to
What the count of 2005 revealed was a community in extreme levels of housing strain: prolonged periods of no housing, restricted access to shelter, high levels of healthcare and mental healthcare needs, and differing levels of gender-related challenges with violence, substance use, and evictions. But the application of the lessons of the count in the modern context is that housing and shelter services can be most effective when tied to access to primary healthcare with low barriers to entry, harm reduction services, trauma-informed mental healthcare services, and nutrition and movement activities that are not stigmatized by the constraints of the rest of one’s life.