census 2016 topic paper - westir · census night in 2016 were born overseas. this equated to 64.3%...

CENSUS 2016 TOPIC PAPER

Homelessness among at-risk Groups in Greater Western

Sydney

By Amy Lawton, Social Research and Information Officer, WESTIR Limited September 2019

Photo by Eric Ward from www.unsplash.com

© WESTIR Limited A.B.N 65 003 487 965 A.C.N. 003 487 965

This work is Copyright. Apart from use permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part can be reproduced by any process

without the written permission from the Executive Officer of WESTIR Ltd.

All possible care has been taken in the preparation of the information contained in this publication. However, WESTIR Ltd

expressly disclaims any liability for the accuracy and sufficiency of the information and under no circumstances shall be liable in

negligence or otherwise in or arising out of the preparation or supply of any of the information WESTIR Ltd is partly funded by the NSW Department of Family and Community Services.

WESTIR LTD

Suite 7, Level 2 154 Marsden Street Parramatta, NSW 2150 PO Box 136 Parramatta 2124

[email protected] (02) 9635 7764

ABN: 65 003 487 965 ACN: 003 487 965 |

2

Table of contents (Click on the heading below to be taken straight to the relevant section)

Acronyms ............................................................................................................................ 3

Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 4

Summary of key findings.................................................................................................... 5

Regions and terms used in this paper ............................................................................... 7

Homelessness among at-risk groups in Greater Western Sydney ................................ 11

General characteristics of homeless population ............................................................... 11

Youth homelessness ....................................................................................................... 14

Older person’s homelessness ......................................................................................... 17

Women’s homelessness .................................................................................................. 19

Homelessness among TEI priority groups ....................................................................... 19

Indigenous homelessness ............................................................................................ 19

Homelessness among 0-3 year olds ............................................................................ 23

Homelessness among young parents .......................................................................... 25

CALD homelessness ....................................................................................................... 25

Homeless with a disability................................................................................................ 30

Student and worker homelessness .................................................................................. 33

Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 35

3

Acronyms ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics ACH Assistance with Care and Housing AHURI Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute ATSI Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander CALD Culturally and Linguistically Diverse CHSP Commonwealth Home Support Program CNOS Canadian National Occupancy Standard DFV Domestic and Family Violence FACS Department of Family and Community Services (NSW) GWS Greater Western Sydney LGA Local Government Area NDIS National Disability Insurance Scheme NSW New South Wales SA Statistical Area SBS Special Broadcasting Service TEI Targeted Earlier Intervention WESTIR Limited Western Sydney Regional Information and Research Service

4

Introduction Since 1996, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) has undertaken a special methodology

to estimate the number of homeless people in Australia on Census night. The methodology

has been revised over time, notably in 2011 where the cultural definition1 of homelessness

was endorsed, and the ABS subsequently changed the rules of who was identified as

homeless2.

In the 2016 Census, a number of additional features were added to the ABS homelessness

estimates to provide greater insights into the homeless population in a given area. The first

addition was the release of homelessness estimates on a Local Government Area (LGA)

level (rather than just the Statistical Areas (SAs) created by the ABS), making it easier for

findings to be presented, interpreted and acted upon at a local level. The second addition,

was that for the first time in 2016, the homelessness estimates were able to be cross-

tabulated with demographic variables (such as age, sex, Indigenous status and country of

birth) on a range of geographical levels. This data release through ABS TableBuilder Pro is

the premise of this Census topic paper.

WESTIR Limited has already released the 2016 Census Topic Paper called ‘Estimating

Homelessness in Greater Western Sydney’ showing an increase in homelessness in the

Greater Western Sydney (GWS) region over time3. Recent analysis by the Australian

Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI) has also noted increasing homelessness

rates westward of inner Sydney, with possible drivers including the rise of inner city

gentrification, housing unaffordability and precarious labour market conditions4.

The aim of this paper is to explore homelessness estimates for at-risk groups in GWS in

2016. Demographic variables will be used to explore the following types of homelessness:

• Youth homelessness;

• Older person’s homelessness;

• Women’s homelessness;

• Homelessness among the priority groups of the New South Wales (NSW)

Government’s Targeted Earlier Intervention (TEI) reform (including Indigenous

homelessness);

• Homelessness among culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) people;

• Homeless with a disability; and

• Student and worker homelessness.

1The cultural definition of homelessness by Chamberlain and MacKenzie (1992) is divided into the following categories:

primary, secondary and tertiary homelessness. This definition is not explicitly used by the ABS to define homelessness,

however it is used by the ABS to test the validity of its existing definition. Broadly, the ABS statistical definition of homelessness

is: “when a person does not have suitable accommodation alternatives, they are considered homeless if their current living

arrangement: (a) is in a dwelling that is inadequate, (b) has no tenure, or if their initial tenure is short and not extendable, or (c)

does not allow them to have control of, and access to space for social relations”. 2Chamberlain, C. & MacKenzie, D. 2014, ‘Definition and Counting: Where to now?’ in Chamberlain, C., Johnson, G. &

Robinson, C (eds), Homelessness in Australia: an introduction, New South Publishing, Sydney. 3In 2016, it was estimated that there were 14,147 homeless persons across the thirteen LGAs in GWS. The number of

homeless persons in GWS increased by 5,183 persons or 57.8% since 2011. The GWS homeless population grew at a faster

rate than the homeless population of Greater Sydney (+47.5%), NSW (+37.1%) and Australia (+13.7%). 4Parkinson, S., Batterham, D., Reynolds, M. & Wood, G. 2019, The changing geography of homelessness: a spatial analysis

from 2001 to 2016, AHURI, Melbourne.

https://www.westir.org.au/new/images/EHGWS2016.pdf

https://www.westir.org.au/new/images/EHGWS2016.pdf

https://www.facs.nsw.gov.au/providers/children-families/early-intervention/reform

5

Summary of key findings The main findings of this topic paper are:

• General characteristics: In 2016, it was estimated that 13,958 persons in GWS

were homeless on Census night. As a rate, approximately 60.9 persons per 10,000

were homeless in the region. Most homeless persons in GWS were male (58%),

aged 20-24 years old (14.3%) and living in ‘severely’ crowded dwellings (66.4%). The

highest number of total homeless persons were in Fairfield (2,002 persons), Auburn

(1,727 persons), Merrylands – Guildford (1,520 persons) and Canterbury (1,291

persons).

• Youth homelessness: An estimated 3,710 persons aged 12-24 years were

homeless in GWS on Census night in 2016. This equated to 26.6% of the region’s

homeless population and as a rate, 92.9 per 10,000 young people were homeless in

the region. Approximately 55% of homeless youth in GWS were male, 4.3% identified

as Indigenous and 58.5% were born overseas. Most young people in GWS

experiencing homelessness were living in ‘severely’ crowded dwellings (73.6%) or in

supported accommodation for the homeless (16.1%).

• Older person’s homelessness: An estimated 712 persons aged 65 years and over

were homeless in GWS on Census night in 2016. This equated to 5.1% of the

region’s homeless population and as a rate, 25.2 per 10,000 older people were

homeless in the region. Approximately 54% of homeless older people in GWS were

male, 1.0% identified as Indigenous and 76.7% were born overseas. Most older

people in GWS experiencing homelessness were living in ‘severely’ crowded

dwellings (41.6%) or living in supported accommodation for the homeless (33.4%),

• Women’s homelessness: In 2016, it was estimated that there were 4,477 working

age females who were homeless in GWS. This equated to 39.8% of the region’s

homeless population. In general, working age females were less likely to be

homeless than their male counterparts.

• Indigenous homelessness: An estimated 460 Indigenous persons were homeless

in GWS on Census night in 2016. This equated to 3.3% of the region’s homeless

population. As a rate, 110.0 per 10,000 Indigenous people were homeless in GWS,

much higher than the overall homeless rate (60.9 per 10,000). Most Indigenous

homeless persons were living in supported accommodation for the homeless (49.2%)

or in ‘severely’ crowded dwellings’ (30.3%).

• Homelessness among 0-3 year olds: An estimated 819 persons aged 0-3 years old

were homeless in GWS on Census night in 2016. This equated to 5.9% of the

region’s homeless population and as a rate, 62.1 per 10,000 people aged 0-3 years

old were homeless in the region. Approximately 52.0% of homeless 0-3 year olds

were male, 8.1% identified as Indigenous and most were living in ‘severely’ crowded

dwellings (66.9%).

6

• Homelessness among young parents: The ABS does not provide the variables

required to estimate homeless among young parents aged under 20 years in GWS.

However, it is assumed that a very small proportion of the 1,249 homeless persons

aged 15-19 years old on Census night in 2016 may have had child/ren.

• CALD homelessness: An estimated 8,975 persons who were homeless in GWS on

Census night in 2016 were born overseas. This equated to 64.3% of the region’s

homeless population and as a rate, 88.7 per 10,000 people born overseas were

homeless in the region. Most homeless persons who were born overseas in GWS

were male (61%), aged between 20-29 years old (31.0%) and living in ‘severely’

crowded dwellings (72.6%). Most had arrived in Australia between 2006 and 2015

(50.5%) and did not have Australian citizenship (54.5%). Of the homeless people

born overseas in GWS, most were born in South East Asia or the Middle East.

• Homeless with a disability: An estimated 794 homeless persons needed

assistance with core activities in GWS on Census night in 2016. This equated to

5.7% of the region’s homeless population and as a rate, 61.5 per 10,000 people

needing assistance were homeless in the region. Most homeless persons needing

assistance in GWS were living in ‘severely’ crowded dwellings (50.1%) or in

supported accommodation for the homeless (33.5%).

• Student and worker homelessness: In 2016, over a third of homeless persons in

GWS (37.7%) had an educational attainment of Year 12 or equivalent, 7.2% had a

bachelor degree qualification and 2.4% had a postgraduate degree qualification. Just

under a third of the homeless population in GWS were estimated to be employed

(either full time, part time or away from work) (31.8%) or were fully engaged in

employment, education and training (31.9%). The most common industries of

employment for homeless persons in GWS were construction, accommodation and

food services, and manufacturing. Approximately 7.7% of homeless persons in GWS

were attending a university or other tertiary institution. Most homeless university

students in the region were full time students aged 15-24 years old (58.3%) or 25

years and over (30.3%).

7

Regions and terms used in this paper The GWS region in this paper is constructed from geographical structures called Statistical

Area 3 (SA3s) in ABS TableBuilder Pro. These SA3s fall under seven larger regions called

SA4s which broadly cover GWS, but the SA3s allow the region to be defined in greater

detail. Overall, GWS is calculated from all SA3s in Table 1, except for Hurstville and

Kogarah-Rockdale SA3s as they fall outside the region. SA3 estimates are slightly different

from LGA estimates due to minor boundary differences, however, they are the best option in

TableBuilder Pro at this point in time (see Map 1).

Please note that this paper does not explore Lithgow and Wingecarribee areas which fall

under current NSW Department of Family and Community Services (FACS) districts but sit

outside GWS. For homelessness estimates among at-risk groups in Lithgow and

Wingecarribee, please contact WESTIR Limited.

Table 1: ABS Statistical Areas of GWS, 2016

Statistical Area (SA) 4 SA3

Sydney – Baulkham Hills • Baulkham Hills

• Dural – Wisemans Ferry

• Hawkesbury

• Rouse Hill – McGraths Hill

Sydney – Blacktown • Blacktown

• Blacktown – North

• Mount Druitt

Sydney – Inner South West • Bankstown

• Canterbury

• Hurstville

• Kogarah – Rockdale

Sydney – Outer South West • Camden

• Campbelltown

• Wollondilly

Sydney – Outer West and Blue Mountains

• Blue Mountains

• Blue Mountains – South

• Penrith

• Richmond – Windsor

• St Marys

Sydney – Parramatta • Auburn

• Carlingford

• Merrylands – Guildford

• Parramatta

Sydney – South West • Bringelly – Green Valley

• Fairfield

• Liverpool Source: ABS TableBuilder Pro

The total number of homeless persons for each at-risk group is calculated from the six

homelessness operational groups used by the ABS:

1. Persons living in improvised dwellings, tents, or sleeping out

2. Persons in supported accommodation for the homeless

3. Persons staying temporarily with other households

8

4. Persons living in boarding houses

5. Persons in other temporary lodgings

6. Persons living in 'severely' crowded dwellings

The data for at-risk groups experiencing homelessness in this paper shows that many are

living in ‘severely’ crowded dwellings. While those in crowded dwellings may sit on a

continuum within marginalised housing, people in ‘severely’ crowded dwellings are

considered to be homeless because they do not have control of, or access to space for

social or personal relations. Severe and sustained overcrowding can also put the health and

safety of the occupants. Severely crowded conditions are operationalised in the ABS Census

as living in a dwelling which requires 4 or more extra bedrooms to accommodate the people

who usually live there, as defined by the Canadian National Occupancy Standard (CNOS).

The concept of crowding is based upon a comparison of the number of bedrooms in a

dwelling with a series of household demographics such as the number of usual residents,

their relationship to one another, their age and their sex. Operationalisation using ABS

Census data for overcrowding as homelessness at this severe level of 4 or more extra

bedrooms is designed to prevent the misclassification of people as homeless who may

choose to live together under some crowding to save money, to be close to family or for

other reasons5.

Under the operationalisation of the ABS definition, those in marginalised housing are not

classified as homeless but may be at risk of homelessness. Where required, the total

number of persons living in marginalised housing (that is, people in housing situations close

to the minimum standard) will also be presented in the paper. Those in marginalised housing

cover the following categories:

1. Persons living in other crowded dwellings (that is, those living in dwellings reported in

the Census requiring 3 extra bedrooms to accommodate them according to the

CNOS).

2. Persons in other improvised dwellings

3. Persons who are marginally housed in caravan parks

The following definitions are also used to define the at-risk groups used in this paper:

• Youth: defined as persons aged 12 to 24 years old.

• Older person: defined as persons aged 65 years and over.

• Women: defined as persons aged 15 years and over that are female.

• Indigenous: defined as those who identify as Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander and

both Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (ATSI) origin. Those who are non-

Indigenous do not identify with any of the origins above. Overall, these terms have

been chosen for ease when comparing Census data between Indigenous and non-

Indigenous households and populations.

• Young parent: defined as persons aged under 20 years old who are raising children.

5For more information on overcrowding, please see the ABS website: https://bit.ly/33tbhPv

https://bit.ly/33tbhPv

9

• Born overseas: defined as persons who were born anywhere except mainland

Australia. It includes Australian External Territories and Norfolk Island.

There are always limitations to ABS homelessness estimates, which are aggregated from

several Census responses rather than from direct questions asked to Census participants.

As with any estimate, there is the potential to under or over-estimate homelessness. This is

especially true for certain groups, such as ATSI people, for whom there is a known likely

undercount in the Census. The ABS has developed specific enumeration strategies for

whom a known undercount is likely to occur to reduce the rate of error. Strategies include

working with homeless service providers and using supplementary data sources to further

inform the estimates. In the case of this paper where a specific region is focused on,

homelessness estimates may be small and, therefore, must be used purely as an estimate.

Where estimates are small, particularly on a SA3 level, data has been left as raw numbers

rather than percentages or rates. They must, however, be read with the acknowledgement

that areas with higher homeless numbers often have higher total populations. Nevertheless,

the data presented provides a new insight into the demographic characteristics of homeless

people in GWS, with the hope that it will better inform service planning and policy in the

region.

10

Map 1: Statistical Area 4 (SA4) and Statistical Area 3 (SA3) Boundaries, Greater Sydney, 2016

11

Homelessness among at-risk groups in Greater Western Sydney

General characteristics of homeless population Based on an aggregation of SA3s, it was estimated that 13,958 persons in GWS were

homeless on Census night in 2016. This equated to less than one percent of the total

population (0.6%), but as a rate, approximately 60.9 persons per 10,000 were homeless in

the region. In addition, an estimated 18,187 persons in GWS were living in marginalised

housing in 2016, also placing them at risk of homelessness (see Table 2).

Table 2: Homelessness estimates, GWS, 2016

Homelessness estimates, GWS, 2016

Total number Total

population % total

population

Rate per 10,000 people

Homeless persons (total) 13,958 2,290,785 0.6 60.9

Persons in marginalised housing (total) 18,187 2,290,785 0.8 79.4

Total 32,143 2,290,785 1.4 140.3 Source: ABS Census of Population and Housing 2016, Tablebuilder Pro, Counting persons, Estimating Homelessness.

Most homeless persons in GWS were male (58%) and aged 20-24 years old (14.3%).

Similar trends for sex and age also occurred for persons living in marginalised housing (see

Figure 1).

Figure 1: Age distribution, persons who were homeless or in marginalised housing, GWS, 2016

Source: ABS Census of Population and Housing 2016, Tablebuilder Pro, Counting persons, Estimating Homelessness.

When looking at homeless operational groups, most homeless persons in GWS were living

in ‘severely’ crowded dwellings (66.4%). Approximately 17.2% lived in supported

accommodation for the homeless, 9.1% were staying temporarily with other households,

7.2

6.5

5.7

8.9

14.3

12.8

9.3

7.3

5.9

5.5

4.9

4.0

2.7

5.1

7.9 8.1

7.2

10.3

15.8

13.0

7.9

5.5

5.2 5.4

4.5

3.5

2.0

3.8

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

0-4years

5-9years

10-14years

15-19years

20-24years

25-29years

30-34years

35-39years

40-44years

45-49years

50-54years

55-59years

60-64years

65yearsandover

Perc

en

t (%

)

Age

Age distribution, persons who were homeless or in marginalised housing, GWS, 2016

Homeless persons (%) Persons in marginalised housing (%)

12

5.1% were living in boarding houses, 2.1% were living in improvised dwellings, tents or

sleeping out, and 0.2% were in other temporary lodgings (see Figure 2).

Figure 2: Types of by homelessness by homeless operational groups, GWS, 2016


Most persons living in marginalised housing in GWS in 2016 were living in ‘other’ crowded

dwellings (96.3%). Please contact WESTIR Limited for the full dataset.

Figure 3 shows the distribution of people who were homeless or in marginalised housing

across GWS SA3s in 2016. The highest number of total homeless persons were in Fairfield

(2,002 persons), Auburn (1,727 persons), Merrylands – Guildford (1,520 persons) and

Canterbury (1,291 persons).

The concentration of homelessness types varied across the GWS SA3s in 2016. Overall:

• Merrylands – Guildford had the highest number of persons living in improvised

dwellings, tents or sleeping out (41 persons);

• Campbelltown had the highest number in supported accommodation for the

homeless (358 persons) and those staying temporarily with other households (152

persons);

• Auburn had the highest number of persons living in boarding houses (142 persons);

• Numbers for other temporary lodgings were very small, however, the highest number

appeared to be in Bankstown (10 persons).

• Fairfield had the highest number of persons living in ‘severely’ crowded dwellings

(1,558 persons).

Persons living in improvised

dwellings, tents, or sleeping out, 2.1%

Persons in supported

accommodation for the homeless,

17.2%

Persons staying temporarily with

other households, 9.1%

Persons living in boarding houses,

5.1%

Persons in other temporary

lodgings, 0.2%

Persons living in 'severely' crowded dwellings, 66.4%

Types of homelessness by homeless operational groups, GWS, 2016

13

When looking at marginalised housing, the highest numbers of persons living in ‘other’

crowded dwellings and other improvised dwellings were in Fairfield (2,886 persons and 60

persons respectively). The highest number of persons marginally housed in caravan parks

were in Blacktown – North (67 persons). Please contact WESTIR Limited for the full dataset

of homeless operational groups by SA3 in GWS in 2016.

Figure 3: Distribution of persons who were homeless or in marginalised housing by Statistical Area 3 (SA3), GWS, 2016


The remainder of this paper will explore homelessness specifically for at-risk groups,

including youth, older people, women, TEI priority groups (including Indigenous), CALD

communities, those with a disability, and student and worker populations.

212

65 81

24

789

154

613

1055 1291

51

931

64 166

3

604

188

261

1727

167

1520

929

466

2002

600

240

116

98 117

984

282

1167

1598

1813

77

815

136

105

0

281

133 299

2305

151

2020

1043

653

2977

778

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Nu

mb

er

of

pers

on

s

SA3

Distribution of persons who were homeless or in marginalised housing by Statistical Area 3 (SA3), GWS, 2016

Homeless persons (total) Persons in marginalised housing (total)

14

Youth homelessness In 2016, it was estimated that 3,710 persons aged 12-24 years were homeless in GWS on

Census night. This equated to 26.6% of the region’s homeless population and less than one

percent (0.9%) of the youth population. As a rate, approximately 92.9 per 10,000 young

people were homeless in GWS. It should be noted that an estimated 5,511 young people in

GWS were living in marginalised housing in 2016, also placing them at risk of homelessness

(see Table 3).

Table 3: Homelessness estimates, persons aged 12-24 years old, GWS, 2016

Homelessness estimates, persons aged 12-24 years old, GWS, 2016

Number Total

homeless persons

Total population

(12-24 years old)

% homeless

% youth population

(12-24 years old)

Rate per

10,000 young people

Homeless persons (total) 3,710 13,958 399,415 26.6 0.9 92.9

Persons in marginalised housing (total) 5,511 18,187 399,415 30.3 1.4 138.0

Total 9,222 32,143 399,415 28.7 2.3 230.9 Source: ABS Census of Population and Housing 2016, Tablebuilder Pro, Counting persons, Estimating Homelessness.

Most young people in GWS experiencing homelessness were living in ‘severely’ crowded

dwellings (73.6%) or in supported accommodation for the homeless (16.1%). Less than one

per cent (0.9%) were living in improvised dwellings, tents or sleeping out (commonly referred

to as ‘sleeping rough’) (see Figure 4).

Figure 4: Types of homelessness by homeless operational groups, persons aged 12-24 years old, GWS, 2016

Source: ABS Census of Population and Housing 2016, Tablebuilder Pro, Counting persons, Estimating Homelessness. Most young people in marginalised housing in GWS were living in ‘other’ crowded dwellings

(98.0%). Please contact WESTIR Limited for further information on this dataset.


dwellings, tents, or sleeping out,

0.9%



16.1%




2.7%


lodgings, 0.1%


Types of homelessness by homeless operational groups, persons aged 12-24 years old, GWS, 2016

15

Table 4 shows some demographic characteristics of persons aged 12-24 years old who

were homeless in GWS in 2016. There were more young males in the region (55%) who

were homeless than young females (45%). Approximately 4.3% of the homeless youth in

GWS identified as Indigenous, higher than the Indigenous rate for the region’s youth

population (2.8%).

Most homeless youth in GWS were born overseas (58.5%), with the largest numbers from

Afghanistan (287 persons), India (223 persons), New Zealand (202 persons), Pakistan (173

persons), Vietnam (148 persons) and Iraq (132 persons). This may be linked with citizenship

status and the ability of migrant communities in accessing homeless services. This will be

discussed further in a later section.

Table 4: Demographic characteristics, persons aged 12-24 years old, homeless or in marginalised housing, GWS, 2016

Demographic characteristics, persons aged 12-24 years old, homeless or in marginalised housing, GWS, 2016

Homeless persons

Persons in marginalised housing

Total number (12-24 years old) 3,710 5,511

% male 55 56

% female 45 44

% Indigenous 4.3 1.6

% born in Australia 41.6 45.1

% born overseas 58.5 54.8 Source: ABS Census of Population and Housing 2016, Tablebuilder Pro, Counting persons, Estimating Homelessness.

Estimates also reveal that homeless numbers generally increase as young people in GWS

enter adulthood (that is, 18 years of age) and get older. Most young people in GWS who

were homeless were aged 21 years (416 persons), with similar trends seen for young people

living in marginalised housing (see Figure 5). This trend highlights the vulnerability of some

young people to homelessness when they are old enough to leave the family home, due to

factors such as limited and unaffordable housing options, lack of family support or stability,

and precarious employment conditions6.

Figure 6 shows the distribution of young people who were homeless or in marginalised

housing across GWS SA3s in 2016. The highest numbers of homeless youth in the region

were in Fairfield (521 persons), Auburn (454 persons), Merrylands – Guildford (442

persons), Canterbury (322 persons) and Bankstown (269 persons). These areas, which are

home to a large proportion of the region’s culturally and linguistically diverse communities,

further highlight the issue of homelessness among youth from non-Australian backgrounds.

6Johnson, G. & Chamberlain, C. 2014, ‘Young People’ in Chamberlain, C., Johnson, G. & Robinson, C (eds), Homelessness in Australia: an introduction, New South Publishing, Sydney.

16

Figure 5: Age distribution, persons aged 12-24 years old, homeless or in marginalised housing, GWS, 2016


Figure 6: Distribution of persons aged 12-24 years old who were homeless or in marginalised housing by Statistical Area 3 (SA3), GWS, 2016


15

3

15

1

16

5

17

7 21

1

20

6

29

7 35

3

37

1 41

6

38

1 41

3

41

7

25

4

27

2

24

3

31

5

31

7

27

8

46

3 50

2

56

4 60

6

59

6

57

7

52

9

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Nu

mb

er

of

pers

on

s

Age

Age distribution, persons aged 12-24 years old, homeless or in marginalised housing, GWS, 2016


79

20

21

0

204

29

182

269 3

22

13

264

6 23

0

166

55 9

3

454

43

442

231

123

521

154

126

22

18

19

282

105

383

538 583

24

252

24

23

0

102

47

111

652

29

698

284

197

753

236

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Nu

mb

er

of

pers

on

s

SA3

Distribution of persons aged 12-24 years old who were homeless or in marginal housing by Statistical Area 3 (SA3), GWS, 2016


17

Older person’s homelessness In 2016, it was estimated that 712 persons aged 65 years and over were homeless in GWS

on Census night. This equated to 5.1% of the region’s homeless population and a very small

percentage of the overall population of older people (0.3%). As a rate, approximately 25.2

per 10,000 older people were homeless in GWS. It should be noted that around 693 older

people in GWS were living in marginalised housing in 2016, also placing them at risk of

homelessness (see Table 5).

Table 5: Homelessness estimates, persons aged 65 years and over, GWS, 2016

Homelessness estimates, persons aged 65 years and over, GWS, 2016

Number Total

homeless persons

Total population (65 years and over)

% homeless

% older population (65 years and over)

Rate per

10,000 older

people

Homeless persons (total) 712 13,958 282,913 5.1 0.3 25.2

Persons in marginalised housing (total) 693 18,187 282,913 3.8 0.2 24.5

Total 1,407 32,143 282,913 4.4 0.5 49.7 Source: ABS Census of Population and Housing 2016, Tablebuilder Pro, Counting persons, Estimating Homelessness. Most older people in GWS experiencing homelessness were living in ‘severely’ crowded

dwellings (41.6%). In saying that, just over a third were also living in supported

accommodation for the homeless7 (33.4%). Approximately 10.7% were living in boarding

houses and 10.1% were staying temporarily with other households (often commonly referred

to as ‘couch surfing’) (see Figure 7).

Figure 7: Types of homelessness by homeless operational groups, persons aged 65 years and over, GWS, 2016


7The notable proportion of older people in supported accommodation is most likely linked to government services specifically

established to address homelessness among older people. This is called the Assistance with Care and Housing (ACH) sub-

program under the Commonwealth Home Support Program (CHSP). For more information, please visit: https://bit.ly/2XkoFF5



2.5%



33.4%


other households,

10.1%

Persons living in boarding

houses, 10.7%


lodgings, 0.4%

Persons living in 'severely' crowded

dwellings, 41.6%

Types of homelessness by homeless operational groups, persons aged 65 years and over, GWS, 2016

https://bit.ly/2XkoFF5

18

Most older people in marginalised housing in GWS were living in ‘other’ crowded dwellings

(80.8%). Please contact WESTIR Limited for further information on this dataset.

Table 6 shows some demographic characteristics of persons aged 65 years and over who

were homeless in GWS in 2016. There were more older males in the region (54%) who were

homeless than older females (46%). Approximately, 1.0% of the homeless older people in

GWS identified as Indigenous, slightly higher than the Indigenous rate for the region’s older

population (0.7%). Most homeless older people in GWS were born overseas (76.7%), with

the largest numbers from Vietnam (75 persons), China (53 persons) and Iraq (36 persons).

Table 6: Demographic characteristics, persons aged 65 years and over, homeless or in marginalised housing, GWS, 2016

Demographic characteristics, persons aged 65 years and over, homeless or in marginalised housing, GWS, 2016

Homeless persons Persons in marginalised housing

Total number (65 years and over) 712 693

% male 54 46

% female 46 54



% born overseas 76.7 81.5 Source: ABS Census of Population and Housing 2016, Tablebuilder Pro, Counting persons, Estimating Homelessness. Figure 8 shows the distribution of older people who were homeless or in marginalised

housing across GWS SA3s in 2016. The highest numbers of homeless older people in the

region were in Fairfield (174 persons), Canterbury (63 persons), Liverpool (57 persons) and

Penrith (56 persons).

Figure 8: Distribution of persons aged 65 years and over who were homeless or in marginal housing by Statistical Area 3 (SA3), GWS, 2016


11

4

13

3

28

11 1

7

52

63

5

38

5

10

0

56

23

14

34

8

48

26

18

174

57

13 16 18 20 24

40

34 38

50

7

25

17

4 0

25

8 7

37

14

53

18 2

6

166

38

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Nu

mb

er

of

pers

on

s

SA3

Distribution of persons aged 65 years and over who were homeless or in marginal housing by Statistical Area 3 (SA3), GWS, 2016


19

The pathways into ‘later-life homelessness’ are varied but rates have been increasing over

time8. Studies have shown major differences between those who become homelessness

earlier in life and those who become homeless later in life. Those who experience

homelessness earlier in life were more likely to be men, been homeless for three years or

more, never married nor worked regularly, and have reported drug and alcohol and mental

health problems. By contrast, the lives of first-time homeless at a later age often had long

periods of stable employment and housing. These individuals experienced circumstances in

later life such as significant health problems, relationship breakdown and loss of

accommodation that left them with insufficient resources to maintain independent housing.

Overall, there have been five themes identified which characterise the pathways into older

age homelessness: structural and systemic disadvantage during life course, vulnerabilities

associated with older age, critical incidents or triggers, role of public policy and housing

system, and older homelessness among specific social groups9.

Women’s homelessness In 2016, it was estimated that there were 4,477 working age females who were homeless in

GWS. This equated to 39.8% of the region’s homeless population, but only 0.5% of total

working age females in GWS. In general, working age females were less likely to be

homeless than their male counterparts. In addition, approximately 6,228 working age

females in GWS in 2016 that were marginally housed, placing them at high risk of

homelessness. For a more in-depth analysis of women’s homelessness, please see

WESTIR Limited’s 2016 Census Topic Paper ‘Women in Greater Western Sydney’.

Homelessness among TEI priority groups The NSW Department of Family and Community Services (FACS) is undertaking a reform

process to redesign the earlier intervention service system in NSW. Collectively known as

the Targeted Earlier Intervention (TEI) reform10, the reform has three priority groups:

• Aboriginal children, young people, families and communities in NSW

• 0-3 year olds, and,

• Younger parents (at least one parent is under 20 years).

Where possible, this section explores the homelessness estimates for these priority groups.

Indigenous homelessness It is widely acknowledged that Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander (ATSI) people are

overrepresented in the homeless population as a result of the ongoing impact of

colonisation, dispossession and intergenerational trauma. Despite this acknowledgement,

the ABS has continually struggled to estimate Indigenous people and recognises that ‘there

8On a national level, the rate of older persons experiencing homelessness had increased from 26 persons per 10,000 of the

population in 2011 to 29 per 10,000 in 2016. For more information on national trends, please visit the ABS website:

https://bit.ly/2INyxBf 9Jones, A. & Petersen, M. 2014, ‘Older People’ in Chamberlain, C., Johnson, G. & Robinson, C (eds), Homelessness in

Australia: an introduction, New South Publishing, Sydney. 10For more information about the NSW TEI Reform, please visit the FACS website: https://bit.ly/2x5QUsv

https://www.westir.org.au/new/images/WGWS2.pdf

https://bit.ly/2INyxBf

https://bit.ly/2x5QUsv

20

are additional aspects to homelessness from an Indigenous perspective that the [ABS]

definition does not currently adequately capture’ (p. 160)11.

Indigenous homelessness is likely to be underestimated by the ABS and there are two main

reasons why. Firstly, the homeless operational groups do not adequately cover those staying

temporarily in other households. This is particularly important in ATSI culture where cultural

obligations to kin often see ATSI persons visiting relatives for extended periods of time. The

distinction between ‘visitor’ and ‘usual resident’ is also not appropriate for ATSI households

where people are staying with family members. Secondly, a ‘usual address’ may be reported

that is associated with a ‘place’ rather than with a home or a dwelling. The ABS need to

continue working on definitions of Indigenous homelessness, acknowledging that ‘home’ for

the ATSI population is more than shelter and has an important spiritual connection to family,

community and Country10. Nevertheless, the current ABS homelessness estimates can

provide an insight into Indigenous homelessness but must be interpreted with caution due to

this underestimation.

In 2016, it was estimated that 460 Indigenous persons were homeless in GWS on Census

night. This equated to 3.3% of the region’s homeless population and a very small percentage

of the overall Indigenous population (0.3%). Most Indigenous homeless persons in GWS

were male (52%). As a rate, approximately 110.0 per 10,000 Indigenous people were

homeless in GWS, much higher than the overall homeless rate (60.9 per 10,000). It should

be noted that around 248 Indigenous people in GWS were living in marginalised housing in

2016, also placing them at risk of homelessness (see Table 7).

Table 7: Homelessness estimates by Indigenous status, GWS, 2016

Homelessness estimates by Indigenous status, GWS, 2016

Number of Indigenous

persons

% male

% female

Total homeless persons

Total Indigenous population

% homeless

% Indigenous population

Rate per 10,000

Indigenous people

Homeless persons (total)

460 52 48 13,958 41,804 3.3 1.1 110.0

Persons in marginalised housing (total)

248 44 56 18,187 41,804 1.4 0.6 59.3

Total 708 49.4 51.1 32,143 41,804 2.2 1.7 169.4 Source: ABS Census of Population and Housing 2016, Tablebuilder Pro, Counting persons, Estimating Homelessness.

Figure 9 shows the age distribution of Indigenous persons who were homeless or in

marginalised housing in GWS in 2016. Most Indigenous homeless persons in the region

were aged 0-9 years (133 persons) followed by 20-29 years (107 persons). This suggests

that most Indigenous persons who were homeless were parents with their children. These

families may be experiencing homelessness due to family breakdown and/or escaping

circumstances such as domestic and family violence (DFV).

11Memmott, P. & Nash, D. 2014, ‘Indigenous homelessness’ in Chamberlain, C., Johnson, G. & Robinson, C (eds), Homelessness in Australia: an introduction, New South Publishing, Sydney.

21

Figure 9: Age distribution, Indigenous persons, homeless or in marginalised housing, GWS, 2016

Source: ABS Census of Population and Housing 2016, Tablebuilder Pro, Counting persons, Estimating Homelessness. In 2016, most Indigenous homeless persons were living in supported accommodation for the

homeless (49.2%) or in ‘severely’ crowded dwellings’ (30.3%). Approximately 12.0% were

living temporarily with other households (See Figure 10). For those living in marginalised

housing, most were in ‘other’ crowded dwellings (90.1% of Indigenous persons in

marginalised housing). Please contact WESTIR Limited for further information on this

dataset.

Figure 10: Types of homelessness by homeless operational groups, Indigenous persons, GWS, 2016


133

99107

4149

32

7163

49

2314

22

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

0-9 years 10-19 years 20-29 years 30-39 years 40-49 years 50+ age group

Nu

mb

er

of

pers

on

s

Age

Age distribution, Indigenous persons, homeless or in marginalised housing, GWS, 2016

Homeless persons (total) - Indigenous Persons in marginalised housing (total) - Indigenous



5.6%



49.2%Persons staying temporarily with



2.9%


lodgings, 0.0%

Persons living in 'severely' crowded

dwellings, 30.3%

Types of homelessness by homeless operational groups, Indigenous persons, GWS, 2016

22

Figure 11 shows the distribution of Indigenous persons who were homeless or in

marginalised housing across GWS SA3s in 2016. The highest numbers of Indigenous

homeless people in the region were in Penrith (74 persons), Campbelltown (71 persons),

Mount Druitt (59 persons) and Blacktown (40 persons). This is consistent with the areas in

GWS with the largest Indigenous populations12.

Figure 11: Distribution of Indigenous persons who were homeless or in marginalised housing by Statistical Area 3 (SA3), GWS, 2016


12For more information about the Indigenous population of GWS, please see WESTIR Limited’s 2016 Census Topic Paper

‘Indigenous Population of Greater Western Sydney’.

7

0

10

0

40

6

59

13

0 0

71

5

22

0

74

31

7

12

0

22

15 16

26 27

0

3

0 0

22

3

39

5

11

16

44

9

15

0

30

16

4

0

4

0

4

12 14

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Nu

mb

er

of

pers

on

s

SA3

Distribution of Indigenous persons who were homeless or in marginalised housing by Statistical Area 3 (SA3), GWS, 2016

Homeless persons (total) - Indigenous Persons in marginalised housing (total) - Indigenous

https://www.westir.org.au/new/images/IPGWS.pdf

23

Homelessness among 0-3 year olds In 2016, it was estimated that 819 persons aged 0-3 years old were homeless in GWS on

Census night. This equated to 5.9% of the region’s homeless population and less than one

percent (0.6%) of the 0-3 year old population. As a rate, approximately 62.1 per 10,000

people aged 0-3 years old were homeless in GWS. It should be noted that an estimated

1,140 persons aged 0-3 years old in GWS were living in marginalised housing in 2016, also

placing them at risk of homelessness (see Table 8).

Table 8: Homelessness estimates, persons aged 0-3 years old, GWS, 2016

Homelessness estimates, persons aged 0-3 years old, GWS, 2016

Number Total

homeless persons

Total population (0-3 years

old)

% homeless

% population (0-3 years

old)


aged 0-3 years old


819 13,958 131,860 5.9 0.6 62.1


1,140 18,187 131,860 6.3 0.9 86.5

Total 1,955 32,143 131,860 6.1 1.5 148.3 Source: ABS Census of Population and Housing 2016, Tablebuilder Pro, Counting persons, Estimating Homelessness. Most 0-3 year olds in GWS experiencing homelessness were living in ‘severely’ crowded

dwellings (66.9%). Just over a quarter (25.6%) were living in supported accommodation for

the homeless (See Figure 12). For those living in marginalised housing, most were in ‘other’

crowded dwellings (97.5%). Please contact WESTIR Limited for further information on this

dataset.

Figure 12: Types of homelessness by homeless operational groups, persons aged 0-3 years old, GWS, 2016






25.6%




0.0%Persons in other temporary

lodgings, 0.0%


Types of homelessness by homeless operational groups, persons aged 0-3 years old, GWS, 2016

24

Table 9 shows some demographic characteristics of persons aged 0-3 years old who were

homeless in GWS in 2016. There were more males aged 0-3 years old in the region (52%)

who were homeless than females of the same age (48%). Approximately 8.1% of the

homeless persons aged 0-3 years old in GWS identified as Indigenous, higher than the

Indigenous rate for the region’s 0-3 year old population (3.0%).

Table 9: Demographic characteristics, persons aged 0-3 years old, homeless or in marginalised housing, GWS, 2016

Demographic characteristics, persons aged 0-3 years old, homeless or in marginalised housing, GWS, 2016

Homeless persons Persons in marginalised housing

Total number (0-3 years old) 819 1,140

% male 52 51

% female 48 49



% born overseas 15.0 89.2 Source: ABS Census of Population and Housing 2016, Tablebuilder Pro, Counting persons, Estimating Homelessness. Figure 13 shows the distribution of persons aged 0-3 years old who were homeless or in

marginalised housing across GWS SA3s in 2016. The highest numbers of homeless persons

aged 0-3 years old in the region were in Fairfield (142 persons), Merrylands – Guildford (105

persons), Canterbury (69 persons), Blacktown (67 persons) and Mount Druitt (55 persons).

Figure 13: Distribution of persons aged 0-3 years old who were homeless or in marginalised housing by Statistical Area 3 (SA3), GWS, 2016


5 8 3 0

67

11

55

48

69

10

67

3

10

0

36

15

15

50

4

105

38

33

142

41

5

11

0

6

83

5

108

103 113

4

59

9 11

0

13

5

22

110

7

127

44

35

206

59

0

50

100

150

200

250

Nu

mb

er

of

pers

on

s

SA3

Distribution of persons aged 0-3 years old who were homeless or in marginalised housing by Statistical Area 3 (SA3), GWS, 2016


25

Homelessness among young parents The ABS does not provide the variables required to estimate homeless among young

parents aged under 20 years in GWS. There are, however, general characteristics about

15-19 year olds who were homeless in 2016 that can be ascertained, with the assumption

that a very small proportion of these persons may have child/ren.

In 2016, it was estimated that 1,249 persons aged 15-19 years were homeless in GWS on

Census night. This equated to 8.9% of the region’s homeless population and a very small

percentage of the overall 15-19 year old population (0.8%). Most homeless persons aged

15-19 years old were female (50.7%) and lived in ‘severely’ crowded dwellings (71.8%).

An additional 1,871 persons aged 15-19 years old were living in marginalised housing, with

most being male (51.4%) and living in ‘other’ crowded dwellings (97.3%). For more

information on this dataset, please contact WESTIR Limited.

CALD homelessness In 2016, it was estimated that 8,975 persons who were homeless in GWS on Census night

were born overseas. This equated to 64.3% of the region’s homeless population and less

than one percent (0.9%) of the overseas born population. As a rate, approximately 88.7 per

10,000 people born overseas were homeless in GWS. It should be noted that an estimated

11,423 persons born overseas in GWS were living in marginalised housing in 2016, also

placing them at risk of homelessness (see Table 10).

Table 10: Homelessness estimates by country of birth, GWS, 2016

Homelessness estimates by country of birth, GWS, 2016

Number

born overseas


Total overseas

born population

% homeless

% overseas

born population

Rate per 10,000

people born in overseas

Homeless persons (total) 8,975 13,958 1,012,153 64.3 0.9 88.7

Persons in marginalised housing (total) 11,423 18,187 1,278,631 62.8 0.9 89.3

Total 20,398 32,143 2,290,785 63.5 0.9 89.0 Source: ABS Census of Population and Housing 2016, Tablebuilder Pro, Counting persons, Estimating Homelessness. Most homeless persons who were born overseas in GWS were male (61%) and aged

between 20-29 years old (31.0%) (See Figure 14 over the page). When looking at

homelessness types, most overseas born homeless persons in the region were living in

‘severely’ crowded dwellings (72.6%). Approximately 14.3% were in supported

accommodation for the homeless and in total, over ten percent were living in boarding

houses (5.9%) or staying temporarily with other households (5.7%) (see Figure 15 over the

page).

26

Figure 14: Age distribution, persons born overseas, homeless or in marginalised housing, GWS, 2016

Source: ABS Census of Population and Housing 2016, Tablebuilder Pro, Counting persons, Estimating Homelessness. Figure 15: Types of homelessness by homeless operational groups, persons born overseas, GWS, 2016


172 276

311

602

1380

1402

1065

782

622

589

514

421

288

546

170 3

04 401

857

1911

1954

1232

851

782

818

712

553

317

565

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

0-4years

5-9years

10-14years

15-19years

20-24years

25-29years

30-34years

35-39years

40-44years

45-49years

50-54years

55-59years

60-64years

65+age

group

Nu

mb

er

of

pe

rso

ns

Age

Age distribution, persons born overseas, homeless or in marginalised housing, GWS, 2016

Homeless persons (total) - Born overseas Persons in marginalised housing (total) - Born overseas





14.3%




5.9%


lodgings, 0.1%Persons living in

'severely' crowded dwellings, 72.6

Types of homelessness by homeless operational groups, persons born overseas, GWS, 2016

27

Of the homeless people born overseas in GWS, most were born in Vietnam (889 persons),

Afghanistan (878 persons), India (677 persons), Pakistan (543 persons) and New Zealand

(538 persons). Most of the top 20 countries of birth (after Australia) for homeless persons in

GWS in 2016 were in South-East Asia or the Middle East (see Table 11).

Table 11: Homelessness estimates, top 20 countries of birth, GWS, 2016

Homelessness estimates, top 20 countries of birth, GWS, 2016

Homeless persons

(total) Rank

Persons in marginalised

housing (total)

Rank

Australia 4,985 1 6,764 1

Vietnam 889 2 1,247 2

Afghanistan 878 3 888 4

India 677 4 1,223 3

Pakistan 543 5 777 6

New Zealand 538 6 650 7

Iraq 523 7 840 5

China (excludes SARs and Taiwan) 469 8 566 8

Sri Lanka 268 9 293 12

Philippines 216 10 414 11

Samoa 203 11 250 13

Lebanon 202 12 480 9

Myanmar 188 13 194 15

Iran 186 14 100 22

Cambodia 151 15 235 14

Thailand 117 16 179 16

Syria 111 17 144 17

Fiji 107 18 110 20

Taiwan 104 19 90 23

Bangladesh 89 20 80 24

Other countries (total) 1,379 2,294

Not stated 1,095 346

Inadequately described 16 19

Total 13,958 18,187 Source: ABS Census of Population and Housing 2016, Tablebuilder Pro, Counting persons, Estimating Homelessness. When looking at the year of arrival in Australia, most homeless persons born overseas in

GWS arrived in Australia in the ten years prior to the Census, that is between 2006 and 2015

(50.5%) (see Figure 16 over the page). Over half of the region’s homeless population born

overseas did not have Australian citizenship (54.5%) (see Figure 17 over the page) and over

a quarter could not speak English well (20.0%) or not at all (6.5%) (see Figure 18 over the

page). The citizenship status and language barriers of homeless persons is a significant

issue as it may affect their ability to access emergency accommodation, long term housing

and other social supports required to break the cycle of homelessness13.

In 2016, most homeless persons born overseas in GWS were living in areas where there are

high concentrations of CALD communities. Figure 19 (over the page) shows that the highest

numbers of overseas born homeless persons were living in Auburn (1,504 persons), Fairfield

(1,426 persons) and Merrylands – Guildford (1,080 persons).

13Homelessness NSW 2019, Cultural Diversity and Homelessness, https://bit.ly/2VMcO1N

https://bit.ly/2VMcO1N

28

Figure 16: Persons born overseas who were homeless or in marginalised housing, year of arrival in Australia, GWS, 2016

Source: ABS Census of Population and Housing 2016, Tablebuilder Pro, Counting persons, Estimating Homelessness. Figure 17: Persons born overseas who were homeless or in marginalised housing, Australian citizenship status, GWS, 2016


0 12

38 135

386 741 1126

4533

509

405

1095

0 24

44 198 498

1165 1

926

5993

808

427

346

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Nu

mb

er

of

pers

on

s

Year of Arrival in Australia

Persons born overseas who were homeless or in marginalised housing, year of arrival in Australia, GWS, 2016


3083

4892

1003

4594

6531

293

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Australian Not Australian Not stated

Nu

mb

er

of

pers

on

s

Australian Citizenship

Persons born overseas who were homeless or in marginalised housing, Australian citizenship status, GWS, 2016


29

Figure 18: Persons born overseas who were homeless or living in marginalised housing, Proficiency in Spoken English/Language (%), GWS, 2016

Source: ABS Census of Population and Housing 2016, Tablebuilder Pro, Counting persons, Estimating Homelessness. Figure 19: Distribution of persons born overseas who were homeless or in marginalised housing by Statistical Area 3 (SA3), GWS, 2016


10

.8

24

.1

27

.8

20

.0

6.5

9.9

0.8

9.5

31

.1

31

.0

20

.5

6.2

1.0

0.7

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

Speaks Englishonly

Speaks otherlanguage and

speaks English:Very well


speaks English:Well


speaks English:Not well


speaks English:Not at all

Not stated -both languageand proficiency

not stated

Not stated -languagestated,

proficiency notstated

Perc

en

t (%

)

Proficiency in Spoken English/Language

Persons born overseas who were homeless or living in marginalised housing, Proficiency in Spoken English/Language (%), GWS, 2016

Homeless persons (total) - Born overseas (%) Persons in marginalised housing (total) - Born overseas (%)

120

14

9 7

523

80

299

623

949

23

477

8

67

3

206

39 1

48

1504

72

1080

688

231

1426

383

136

35

12 46

636

172

590

892

1235

21

367

21 33

0

101

22 1

35

1880

82

1335

878

374

1933

483

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Nu

mb

er

of

pers

on

s

SA3

Distribution of persons born overseas who were homeless or in marginalised housing by Statistical Area 3 (SA3), GWS, 2016


30

Overall, the homelessness experience of those from CALD backgrounds is probably best

described in an educational resource by the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) and St

Vincent de Paul Society14:

“People from CALD backgrounds who are experiencing homelessness face additional

obstacles to accessing emergency accommodation, securing housing and accessing support

and assistance. They often contend with language barriers, discrimination, and social

isolation. They may have limited knowledge of Australian legal and social systems; and must

figure out how to access culturally appropriate support such as translation services and

bilingual staff. Many recent migrants, asylum seekers and refugees are particularly

vulnerable to homelessness depending on which category of visa they hold. Their right to

work, right to social security, access to education and training, and access to Medicare may

be restricted in some instances. As a result, this group is often dependent on the support

available to them through local community services, including migrant and refugee support

services offered by [non-government] organisations… Those experiencing homelessness

from a CALD background are, however, less likely to use homelessness services due to the

additional barriers they face. This in turn results in this group facing increased hardship as

their circumstances become more complicated over time” (p. 2)

Homeless with a disability The Census ‘Core Activity Need for Assistance’ indicator is used to estimate the disability

status of people within the population. The population is defined as people who need

assistance with their day-to-day lives with any or all of the following core activities –

self-care, body movements or communication. The Census question regarding need for

assistance is self-reported and should be treated with caution, however, it is currently the

best indicator available in estimating the prevalence of disability within a geographical

area15.

People with disability are at a higher risk of homelessness than the general population

because they may have lower incomes and are, therefore, more likely to have limited

housing options. People with physical, mental and/or intellectual disabilities can also face

barriers in accessing homelessness services as they may not be aware that services exist or

may be mistakenly barred from services for ‘not conforming to the rules’. There is a need for

more research into the housing pathways of people with disability, particularly with the

introduction of government initiatives such as the National Disability Insurance Scheme

(NDIS)16.

In 2016, it was estimated that 794 homeless persons needed assistance with core activities

in GWS on Census night. This equated to 5.7% of the region’s homeless population and less

than one per cent (0.6%) of the population needing assistance. As a rate, approximately

61.5 per 10,000 people needing assistance were homeless in GWS (see Table 12 over the

page). Most homeless persons who needed assistance were male (55%).

14SBS & St Vincent de Paul Society 2018, Fact Sheet: Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Peoples’ Experiences of

Homelessness, https://bit.ly/2ILcY2f 15For more information about the ABS Core Activity Need for Assistance indicator, please see: https://bit.ly/2Rs9R1O 16Homelessness Australia 2016, Homelessness and Disability, https://bit.ly/2DyDzhA

https://bit.ly/2ILcY2f

https://bit.ly/2Rs9R1O

https://bit.ly/2DyDzhA

31

Table 12: Homelessness estimates by Core Activity Need for Assistance, GWS, 2016

Homelessness estimates by Core Activity Need for Assistance, GWS, 2016

Number

(Has Need for

Assistance)


Total population (Has Need

for Assistance)

% homeless

% population (Has Need

for Assistance)


needing assistance

Homeless persons (total) 794 13,958 129,047 5.7 0.6 61.5


819 18,187 129,047 4.5 0.6 63.5

Total 1,613 32,143 129,047 5.0 1.2 125.0 Source: ABS Census of Population and Housing 2016, Tablebuilder Pro, Counting persons, Estimating Homelessness. The need for assistance with core activities increased as the age of homeless persons

increased in GWS. Most homeless persons needing assistance were aged 65 years and

over (29.5%), with similar trends for those living in marginalised housing (see Figure 20).

Most homeless persons needing assistance in GWS were living in ‘severely’ crowded

dwellings (50.1%) or in supported accommodation for the homeless (33.5%) (see Figure 21

over the page). On a SA3 level, most homeless persons needing assistance were in Fairfield

(201 persons), Merrylands – Guildford (98 persons) and Bankstown (78 persons). Please

contact WESTIR Limited for the full dataset.

Figure 20: Age distribution, Persons who have need for assistance, homeless or in marginalised housing, GWS, 2016


10

34

24 26

26 28 3

7

33 37

60

88

80

75

234

18

44

37

33 35

25

21 24

42

66 72 8

5

85

244

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0-4years

5-9years

10-14years

15-19years

20-24years

25-29years

30-34years

35-39years

40-44years

45-49years

50-54years

55-59years

60-64years

65+age

group

Nu

mb

er

of

pers

on

s

Age

Age distribution, Persons who have need for assistance, homeless or in marginalised housing, GWS, 2016

Homeless persons (total) - Has Need for Assistance

Persons in marginalised housing (total) - Has Need for Assistance

32

Figure 21: Types of homelessness by homeless operational groups, persons who have need for assistance, GWS, 2016






33.5%




8.3%


lodgings, 0.4%


Types of homelessness by homeless operational groups, persons who have need for assistance, GWS, 2016

33

Student and worker homelessness This section explores a range of education and employment indicators of the homeless

population in GWS in 2016, with the aim of uncovering potential groups within the homeless

population that may need targeted support. Please see Table 13 for the full list of indicators.

Table 13: Homelessness estimates, various education and employment indicators, GWS, 2016

Homelessness estimates, various education and employment indicators, GWS, 2016



Total number 13,958 18,187

% Year 12 or equivalent attainment 37.7 43.6

% Attending University or other Tertiary Institution 7.7 9.7

% Employed (full time or part time) 31.8 36.3

% Bachelor degree qualification 7.2 7.8

% Postgraduate degree qualification 2.4 2.7

% Fully engaged in employment, education and training 31.9 38.6

% Nil income per week 13.3 15.1

Most common industry of employment* • Construction (646 persons)

• Accommodation and Food Services (465 persons)

• Manufacturing (404 persons)

• Accommodation and Food Services (782 persons)

• Construction (779 persons)

• Retail Trade (756 persons)

Most common occupation* • Labourers (933 persons)

• Technicians and Trade Workers (856 persons)

• Machinery Operators and Drivers (618 persons)

• Labourers (1,426 persons)

• Technicians and Trade Workers (1,063 persons)

• Machinery Operators and Drivers (914 persons)

Source: ABS Census of Population and Housing 2016, Tablebuilder Pro, Counting persons, Estimating Homelessness. *Excludes not stated and not applicable categories. There are several observations that can be made from the indicators above. Firstly, there

was a small but noticeable proportion of the region’s homeless population that were well

educated in 2016, with over a third (37.7%) having an educational attainment of Year 12 or

equivalent, 7.2% having a bachelor degree qualification and 2.4% having a postgraduate

degree qualification. Interestingly, just under a third of the homeless population in GWS were

estimated to be employed (either full time or part time) (31.8%) or were fully engaged in

employment, education and training (31.9%). The data seems to confirm the increasing

number of ‘working poor’ who are experiencing homelessness, exacerbated by a range of

labour force factors such as the cost of living, casualisation of the workforce and

underemployment17.

The data also shows that for the homeless in GWS who were employed in 2016, the most

common industries of employment were construction (646 persons), accommodation and

food services (465 persons) and manufacturing (404 persons). The most common

occupations were labourers (933 persons), technicians and trade workers (856 persons) and

machine operators and drivers (618 persons). This suggests that policy and service

responses may need to consider those in low wage, manual labour industries that are

homeless or at risk of experiencing homelessness.

17ACOSS, 2018, ‘Homelessness up as housing costs rise and incomes decline’, media release (14 March),

https://bit.ly/2X2YT43

https://bit.ly/2X2YT43

34

Table 13 also shows that approximately 7.7% of homeless persons in GWS in 2016 were

attending a university or other tertiary institution. Most homeless university students in the

region were full time students aged 15-24 years old (58.3%) or 25 years and over (30.3%)

(see Figure 22). While the overall proportion of homeless undertaking further education is

small, it does highlight that student homelessness is an issue within GWS and across

Australia. Research suggests that student homelessness continues to rise due to a

combination of cost of living pressures, low incomes and a lack of affordable accommodation

close to university campuses18,19.

Figure 22: Homeless students, University other tertiary institution, Attendee status (%), GWS, 2016


18Victoria University 2012, Homeless uni students ‘invisible’, https://bit.ly/2XFZ7Tn 19Koziol, M. 2018, ‘Couchsurfing and living in cars: 11,000 tertiary students are homeless, 14 April, The Sydney Morning

Herald, https://bit.ly/2vggpt3

Full-time student: Aged 15-24 years,

58.3%

Full-time student: Aged 25 years and over,

30.3%

Part-time student: Aged 15-24 years,

6.0%

Part-time student: Aged 25 years and over,

4.9%

Full-time/Part-time student

status not stated, 0.6%

Homeless students, University other tertiary institution, Attendee status (%), GWS, 2016

https://bit.ly/2XFZ7Tn

https://bit.ly/2vggpt3

35

Conclusion

This paper confirms that homelessness is an issue for at-risk groups in the GWS region. The

homelessness estimates highlight that the general homeless population in GWS are most

likely to be young, male and concentrated in the south-west of the region. Most at-risk

groups do not live in the streets, but rather in housing that is unstable and severely crowded.

Youth homelessness is an issue for GWS, with young people accounting for over a quarter

of the region’s homeless population. The homeless youth are culturally diverse and are more

likely to become homeless as they reach adulthood. These factors should be considered

when undertaking policy and planning responses for youth homelessness services.

Homelessness is also experienced by other at-risk groups in GWS, such as older people

and women, and is expected to increase over time. While men in the region are more likely

to be homeless than women, the data highlights that certain groups such as older women

are more likely to be living in marginalised housing and, therefore, are also at risk of falling

into homelessness.

The ATSI community in GWS continues to be over-represented in the homeless population,

however the prevalence of Indigenous homelessness is still likely to be underestimated. The

ABS needs to consider developing their homelessness definition to better account for the

cultural dimensions of homelessness. This will allow for more accurate counting and

encourage the resourcing of better targeted policy, programs and services20.

The paper also highlights that homelessness most likely impacts the priority groups identified

in the NSW Government’s TEI reform and more research should be undertaken to better

understand this issue.

The estimates strongly show that homelessness is a major issue for overseas born persons

in GWS. Almost two thirds of the region’s homeless persons were born outside Australia,

mostly in South East Asia and the Middle East. Most overseas born homeless persons in the

region had recently arrived in Australia and did not have Australian citizenship. Many also

had limited to no English proficiency. Homelessness service providers in the region need to

provide culturally appropriate support to ensure that they are accessible to those from CALD

backgrounds.

The paper also illustrated the characteristics of the region’s homeless population that

deserve ongoing attention. A small but notable proportion of homeless persons in GWS

need assistance with core activities, with needs increasing as they age. Homelessness also

affects those that are employed, with estimates suggesting that those in low wage, manual

industries are more likely to be homeless than those in other industries of employment. Well

educated groups in GWS, such as full time university students, are also experiencing

homelessness and these issues require resourcing to ensure they are adequately

addressed.

20Memmott, P. & Nash, D. 2014, ‘Indigenous homelessness’ in Chamberlain, C., Johnson, G. & Robinson, C (eds), Homelessness in Australia: an introduction, New South Publishing, Sydney.

36

Overall, the homelessness estimates provide an important insight into the characteristics of

at-risk groups experiencing homelessness in GWS. While the data has its limitations, it has

been suggested that ‘the data tells us that we need to consider customised solutions for

population groups as well as for different regions… We need to be attentive to the data when

we are considering our policy and practice response to ensure that we are addressing our

regional issues and not just responding to state-wide trends that may have little or no impact

for the people experiencing homelessness in different regions’ (p. 46)21. It is hoped that this

paper achieves this goal and can be used in conjunction with the lived experience of at-risk

groups to better understand and address homelessness in the GWS region.

21Leebeek, M. 2019, ‘Youth Homelessness Across Queensland: What Does the Data Say?’, Parity, vol.32, issue 2, pp. 44-46.

census 2016 topic paper - westir · census night in 2016 were born overseas. this equated to 64.3%...

Documents