New national survey finds strong support for housing and services as Thunder Bay opens its temporary shelter village and regional partners outline long-term housing needs
THUNDER BAY — Canadians remain convinced that homelessness can be reduced, but they increasingly want governments to demonstrate results, according to new research from Abacus Data.
The survey, commissioned by the Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness, finds widespread concern about safety, growing frustration and continued compassion for people without stable housing.
For Thunder Bay, the findings arrive at an important moment. The City has announced that its Temporary Shelter Village is operational, while the District of Thunder Bay Social Services Administration Board has unveiled a new housing and homelessness strategy.
The question now is how those initiatives translate into fewer people sleeping outside, more people securing permanent homes and fewer households falling into homelessness.
Frustration and compassion exist together
The Abacus research surveyed 3,064 Canadian adults between July 16 and 28, 2026.
Two-thirds of respondents said they encounter homelessness at least weekly, including 36 per cent who see it daily. Six in ten believe homelessness has worsened in their communities over the past few years, compared with 10 per cent who believe it has improved.
The emotional response is mixed:
| Response to homelessness | Share of respondents |
|---|---|
| Concern about safety | 78% |
| Compassion | 77% |
| Helplessness | 76% |
| Frustration | 75% |
Compared with a year earlier, 60 per cent said they felt more compassion, while 57 per cent reported greater frustration.
The findings suggest frustration should not automatically be interpreted as a loss of concern for people experiencing homelessness. Respondents can want safer neighbourhoods while also supporting help for people living without secure housing. Abacus Data
Canadians support housing, treatment and prevention
The survey found 80 per cent support expanding mental-health and addiction services, 77 per cent support affordable housing and 76 per cent support supportive housing.
Supportive housing combines a place to live with ongoing assistance that can help residents maintain stability.
When respondents selected the approaches they believed would be most effective, housing and support services ranked ahead of enforcement.
Prevention also attracted support. Initially, 65 per cent supported a targeted housing benefit for people at greatest risk of losing their homes. Support rose to 72 per cent after respondents received information about its potential benefits.
That increase reflects responses to information presented in the survey. It does not, by itself, demonstrate the effectiveness or savings of a particular benefit program.
The central tension is clear: 84 per cent believe meaningful reductions in homelessness are possible, but 63 per cent say they have become less optimistic that reductions will happen.
Thunder Bay’s homelessness count shows the scale of need
The Lakehead Social Planning Council’s updated infographic recorded 652 people experiencing homelessness in Thunder Bay on October 9, 2025.
That included 130 people staying in encampments and another 68 outdoors in locations other than encampments. The count also included people in shelters, transitional housing or treatment settings, and other locations.
The figures describe a specific night in 2025, not the number experiencing homelessness today. The council says the count used administrative information from the homelessness service system rather than a volunteer street survey.
That distinction matters when assessing progress: different dates, geographic boundaries and counting methods can produce numbers that should not be compared directly.
City’s temporary shelter village moves into operation
On October 1, the City announced that the Temporary Shelter Village at 879 Alloy Place was open and operational, with resident intake to follow.
The City also acknowledged a $2.8-million provincial capital contribution through TBDSSAB, which reduced the municipality’s original $5-million capital commitment. Those figures concern capital funding and should not be presented as the full operating cost of the initiative. City of Thunder Bay
The village is designed to provide 80 private, climate-controlled units, each with a bed and locking door, alongside food, hygiene and laundry facilities and round-the-clock staff support.
The City describes it as a temporary initiative with a five-year commitment, intended to provide immediate shelter while housing partners expand longer-term options. It has also established a neighbourhood liaison committee process to support communication with surrounding residents and businesses.
Opening the site is a concrete step in delivering shelter. Its longer-term impact will depend on resident outcomes, including access to services and movement into stable housing. The opening announcement does not establish that homelessness across Thunder Bay has already declined.
The City’s response extends beyond the village
Thunder Bay’s 10-Part Enhanced Encampment Response Plan includes coordinated outreach, improved sanitation and garbage collection, work on designated encampment locations, public-space bylaw review and support for long-term housing.
The plan also calls for participation by Indigenous partners and people with lived experience of homelessness, alongside health and social-service agencies.
The City identifies its ultimate goal as helping people move into permanent, stable homes. Some components remain described as work underway or proposals being explored; they should not all be treated as completed services.
Regional housing strategy identifies substantial gaps
The municipal response operates alongside the work of TBDSSAB, which manages the district’s community housing and homelessness prevention system.
Reporting by Your ThunderBay on October 8 describes the launch of Under One Roof — Chapter 2, the board’s 2026–2036 housing and homelessness plan.
Housing and Homelessness Programs Manager Aaron Park identified a need for approximately 300 additional rent-geared-to-income units and 250 long-term supportive housing units, along with more transitional and bridge housing.
These are identified needs, not an announcement that all those units are funded or under construction.
The report also describes work on a centralized application process for transitional housing and an emphasis on tracking people’s movement from homelessness into housing.
What would meaningful progress look like?
The national survey found that 85 per cent of respondents want governments to work together more effectively.
For Thunder Bay, a useful public assessment would track several outcomes consistently:
- How many people move from encampments or shelters into permanent housing.
- How many remain housed after six and 12 months.
- How many households avoid eviction or homelessness through prevention assistance.
- How long people wait for supportive housing and necessary services.
- Whether unsheltered homelessness declines using comparable counting methods.
- How safety concerns and service costs change over time.
These are suggested accountability measures, not results established by the survey or the City’s opening announcement.
Public safety deserves careful measurement as well. Survey respondents’ concerns are evidence of public sentiment; they do not establish that homelessness causes crime or that people experiencing homelessness are inherently dangerous.
Thunder Bay now has an operational shelter initiative and a renewed regional housing plan to assess. Regular reporting on housing placements, housing retention, unmet needs and costs would allow residents to judge whether those efforts are delivering lasting improvements.
About the survey
Abacus published the findings October 8. The research used online survey panels and was weighted by age, gender, education and region. It was funded by the Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness.
Abacus provides a comparison margin of error of approximately ±1.77 percentage points for an equivalent probability sample. Because this research used online panels, that figure should not be presented as the survey’s conventional sampling margin of error. The national findings also should not be treated as a Thunder Bay-specific opinion poll.
