Key Renter Supports Are Falling Short, Says BC Housing

A BC Housing review of two rental assistance programs it runs found they are helpful but their value has eroded over time and recipients are at risk of becoming homeless.

Quietly released in June, the “Review of Shelter Aid for Elderly Renters Program and the Rental Assistance Program” concluded: “Recipients of both programs are in danger of entering into homelessness or seeking affordable options that may result in living in unsuitable or unsafe housing should rents continue to increase.”

SAFER and RAP leave a “significant affordability gap” for many recipients and create barriers for some already marginalized populations in particular, the review found.

BC Housing, which runs the programs and conducted the review, is a Crown corporation that the provincial government mandates to develop, manage and administer subsidized housing.

Launched in 1977, SAFER provides payments of a couple of hundred dollars a month on average to eligible low-income seniors who are at least 60 years old to help pay for rent in the private rental market. RAP has done the same for low-income families with children since 2006, providing an average of $400 a month.

The 64-page report found that while the programs help recipients afford housing, the government has failed to adjust income limits and rent ceilings to keep up with rising rents.

“Increasing rents and low vacancy rates are eroding the benefits of both programs for many recipients,” the review said. “Survey respondents and stakeholders report that the current rent ceilings are too low given the current rental market resulting in challenges of affordability.”

Subsidy amounts are calculated on a sliding scale so that recipients with the lowest incomes get the highest payments. The calculation takes into account location in the province and is intended to get recipients closer to paying no more than 30 per cent of their incomes on rent.

Both programs, however, have caps on the amount of rent they take into consideration in determining payments. For SAFER, the maximum for a couple in Metro Vancouver is $866 a month, even though the average rent in the city is significantly higher. For RAP, the maximum rent taken into consideration for a family of four or more is $1,250.

BC Housing’s review found that 71 per cent of SAFER recipients and 80 per cent of RAP recipients pay rents that are higher than those ceilings. The average SAFER recipient pays a rent $342 above the ceiling. For RAP, the gap is $500.

Neither program is adjusted to keep pace with inflation, even though the B.C. government allows rents for existing tenants to rise to match inflation each year. Actual market rents available to anyone looking for a home have gone up even faster than inflation, largely thanks to increases landowners can make when units become vacant between tenancies.

SAFER and RAP were therefore a more significant help to recipients in the past, the review said. “The impact of these programs... has declined over time as housing costs have increased dramatically across the province while rent ceilings and maximum eligible incomes have not been adjusted accordingly.”

The BC Housing report included quotes from program recipients.

“I feel like the amount I get per month is too low for the housing market where I live,” one said. “If I ever have to move from my current housing, I will not be able to afford it even with RAP. A two-bedroom suite is upwards of $1,800 per month and RAP only gives me $400. I work three part-time jobs to make ends meet.”

A SAFER recipient said that as other old age benefits they receive increase, the amount they get from SAFER is cut.

“I never really feel I'm safe,” they said. “Cost of living has gone up so much that I have little money left for food, electricity etc.... I am happy just getting at least some help. It just would be nice to not have to worry about being able to eat or not!”

Asked about the review and whether the government plans to make any changes to the two programs, Premier David Eby focused his comments on SAFER.

“One of the changes we made to SAFER already was to increase the number of seniors who are eligible by increasing the income levels where people can apply,” Eby said, acknowledging that many seniors struggle to afford housing.

In April the government increased the income threshold for the program to $37,240 from the previous $33,000. At the same time it said it was increasing payments by an average of $110 a month.

“The SAFER grant makes a difference for thousands of seniors,” Eby said, “and we saw that seniors were not picking it up in the numbers we thought, frankly, they should be able to given the parameters of who’s able to apply and given the pressure they’re facing around rent.”

BC Housing’s review found that about 45 per cent of households of seniors facing unaffordability receive SAFER payments. That leaves as many as 30,470 such households out of the program even though they would qualify.

For RAP, of the families with children who are facing unaffordability and making less than the income threshold of $40,000 a year, only 16 per cent are enrolled in the program. While 8,311 families received benefits, another 42,700 that would qualify for the program weren’t getting the support.

When asked specifically about RAP and the number of eligible families who fail to receive it, Eby said it can be a challenge to reach people to let them know they can apply for the program.

“We’ve worked closely with housing organizations that are advocacy groups for renters across the province to make sure they’re aware of the programs that may be available,” he said. “We’re always looking for ways to ensure that the requirements for the program are reasonable and [adjusting them] if people aren’t applying and not accessing the money that’s set aside.”

In recent years the Office of the Seniors Advocate has consistently criticized the shortcomings of SAFER, as has BC Green Party Leader Sonia Furstenau.

BC Housing’s review reached similar conclusions to theirs about SAFER’s inadequacies and went into detail about how both it and RAP could be improved.

For example, the report said calculating subsidies based on average rents is unfair since it doesn’t take into account that long-occupied units pull the average down. “The affordability gap is more likely to be greater for households which have recently moved, which are more likely to be households with growing families or newcomers to the province.”

It is also tougher to find units to accommodate someone who uses a wheelchair or has another disability, it said, and there is evidence that owners discriminate based on race and against survivors of domestic violence, making it harder for people who are already marginalized to find an affordable home to rent.

The most common way for people to find out about SAFER and RAP is through word of mouth, but marginalized groups such as newcomers are less likely to be aware the programs are available. There’s particular concern that people living on Indigenous reserves are less likely than others to know that they are eligible for the programs.

“This is not altogether surprising since historically people living on reserve often did not have access to provincially funded housing programs,” the report said. “It was considered the sole jurisdiction of the federal government. In 2018, B.C. became the first province to invest provincial housing funds into on reserve housing.”

The report included recommendations to consider raising the rent ceilings, indexing them to inflation, raising the income limits, expanding eligibility and simplifying the funding formula. It also recommended doing more to let potential recipients know the programs exist.

In a description of next steps, the report acknowledged that several of the recommendations have “significant cost implications” and acting on them will cost the government money it may not want to spend.

The provincial government, which has a total operating budget of $90 billion annually, currently spends $100 million a year on the two programs.