In traditional PiT Counts, individuals who indicate they are staying temporarily with friends are often screened out of the PiT Count process. That is, they are not “counted” in the total number of individuals experiencing homelessness. This is for good reason. A PiT Count cannot accurately enumerate the full extent of couch-surfing or hidden homelessness in a community. Given the very nature of hidden homelessness, PiT Count methods – street counts and shelter counts – will inevitably undercount the number of people experiencing hidden homelessness.

This limitation presents a challenge for communities that are focusing on youth homelessness. There is a growing recognition that youth experience homelessness differently than adults. That is, youth are more likely to be disconnected from traditional homeless-serving agencies, notably shelters. Further, youth are more likely to stay temporarily with friends, acquaintances or distant relatives – often referred to as couch-surfing. One might believe that couch-surfing is an adequate form of housing. However, these arrangements often lack stability and the broad range of material and emotional supports that youth require. If youth are less likely to be found in shelters or in outdoor spaces, this means they are also less likely to be enumerated and surveyed through a PiT Count.

“The route into homelessness for many young people is not linear and rarely is experienced as a single event.  It is more often the end result of a process that involves multiple ruptures with family and community and numerous episodes of leaving, even for short periods to temporarily stay with friends or relatives (“couch surfing”) before actually staying in an emergency shelter or in a context not suitable for human habitation (sleeping outdoors, on rooftops, in abandoned buildings, etc.). As a result, many young people who are homeless are part of the “invisible” or “hidden” homeless population. “

- Excerpt from the Canadian Definition of Youth Homelessness (forthcoming)

Hint! Neither a PiT Count nor a Youth count can adequately enumerate those at risk of homelessness (Operational Category #4). Precarious housing is an important issue but it is best measured through alternative research methods.

To better capture the experiences of homeless youth, communities conducting a Youth Count should expand their definition of homelessness – for the purposes of the count – to include a broader range of experiences. This includes youth that are couch-surfing, staying in transitional housing (any fixed-length term) and those in juvenile detention. This Toolkit provides information about the methods required to capture each of the recommend circumstances. For a more detailed explanation of these living situations, refer to the Canadian Definition of Homelessness.  

TABLE 2. SUGGESTED CATEGORIES OF HOMELESSNESS

OPERATIONAL CATEGORY		LIVING SITUATION	YOUTH COUNT
1	Unsheltered	1.1    People living in public or private spaces without consent or contract	✓
		1.2    People living in places not intended for permanent human habitation	✓
2	Emergency Sheltered	2.1    Emergency overnight shelters for people who are homeless	✓
		2.2    Violence-Against-Women (VAW) shelters	✓
		2.3    Emergency shelter for people fleeing a natural disaster or destruction of accommodation due to fires, floods etc.
3	Provisionally Accommodated	3.1     Interim Housing for people who are homeless	✓
		3.2     People living temporarily with others, but without guarantee of continued residency or immediate prospects for accessing permanent housing.	✓
		3.3     People accessing short term, temporary rental accommodations without security of tenure	✓
		3.4     People in institutional care who lack permanent housing arrangements.	✓
		3.5     Accommodation / Reception centres for recently arrived immigrants and refugees
4	At-Risk of Homelessness	4.1     People at imminent risk of homelessness
		4.2     Individuals and families who are precariously housed.

The Caveat