In total, 25 key informants were interviewed in Toronto. See Table 2 for an overview of key informant categories. Due to recruitment challenges, interviews with frontline workers and community-based organization managers disproportionately represented initiatives targeted at COVID-19 (e.g., vaccination programs). However, interviews with city managers, policymakers, and funders covered a broader range of the selected initiatives, including both the direct impacts of COVID-19 and the larger consequences of the pandemic (e.g., food insecurity, income assistance, settlement services, etc.).
Table 2
Key Participant Categories
Participant Categories |
Frontline workers | 3 |
CBO Managers | 14 |
Policymakers/Funders | 8 |
Totals | 25 |
Our analysis covers four key themes in the trajectory of the initiatives studied: (1) vulnerable newcomers’ circumstances regarding accessing the social determinants of health and the ways in which COVID-19 exacerbated their challenges; (2) the process of designing specific interventions to target this populations’ needs and service access challenges in the context of COVID-19; (3) the implementation phase of the initiatives, including any associated challenges and lessons learned; and finally, (4) long-term potential sustainability of the initiatives. Each of these themes will be examined in more detail throughout this section.
COVID-19 and the exacerbated hardships for vulnerable newcomers
Participants across all categories emphasized that vulnerable newcomers in Toronto faced inequities in accessing the social determinants of health before the COVID-19 pandemic and, critically, that the pandemic conditions further entrenched these challenges. For example, when discussing social isolation experienced by newcomer populations during the pandemic, this CBO manager described how some “specific factors for that extreme social isolation were lower language levels, lack of access to language courses, which are the very first way that most newcomers are brought out of their homes and into community with other newcomers. And so, without those language classes, or other employment training classes, or opportunities for in-person learning, refugee newcomer households, were just extremely isolated.” (Participant #2, CBO Manager). As highlighted by this participant, language learning opportunities provide key entry points for newcomers intoCanadian society. In emphasizing the trickle-down impact of these lost opportunities, this participant further highlighted how the pandemic “kind of slowed down opportunities for integration, because, if you can't learn to speak English, you can't find work. You can't connect with your community, you can't volunteer, it's extremely difficult to integrate.” (Participant #2, CBO Manager). Indeed, inequity in accessing the social determinants of health during the pandemic ranged across language learning, access to jobs, and even access to healthcare services and COVID-19 vaccinations.
According to many participants, many individuals living in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic experienced challenges with job loss, housing and food affordability, and social isolation; however, these challenges were more acutely felt by the newcomer population due to pre-existing barriers. As one participant described the pandemic “put a lot of hardships on our families and having to get back out there and secure a job, secure income, whether or not they were coming from something that they were doing night shifts and now they have to do day shift, but now the children are home, so it’s become very difficult.” (Participant #16, CBO Manager). In addition, the stress and difficulty surrounding job loss, lack of childcare, and the generally high cost of living in a city like Toronto on often inadequate salaries led to “an increase in the domestic violence within our residents in general, a lot of these being newcomers and I think out of the pandemic with the loss of jobs, this obviously affected several residents in terms of income, children having to be home.” (Participant #16, CBO Manager). Indeed, some of the most reported challenges COVID-19 imposed or exacerbated for the newcomer population included an increased incidence of domestic violence, lack of childcare, higher rates of job loss, food and income insecurity, and challenges accessing culturally or linguistically sensitive healthcare services, especially COVID-19 services like vaccination.
Designing interventions for vulnerable newcomer populations
A growing understanding among key informants that the pandemic was exerting heightened pressures on vulnerable newcomer populations in Toronto led to a call to design initiatives to tackle the pandemic’s health and social impacts while keeping the specific needs of these communities in mind.
Understanding community need
One of the first challenges participants reported for newcomers was the global shift to virtual service delivery. While organizations were rapidly pivoting to online formats and virtual services, participants reported needing to consider challenges that may be experienced by the newcomer population. Such challenges included potentially lower digital literacy, lack of access to telecommunications technologies (e.g., computers, smartphones, and WI-FI), and lack of private spaces to receive services digitally at home. In accounting for these challenges, one participant highlighted the importance of meeting newcomers at their specific comfort level with technology, “so that could be like a video meeting over WhatsApp, it could be a Zoom meeting, it could just be a phone call… that really depended on the newcomers’ comfort level with technology.” (Participant #2, CBO Manager). While another participant pointed to the expense and privacy challenges virtual care delivery can impose, as “internet is expensive. And so, for many immigrants and refugees, utilizing virtual care meant that they would have to go to a library, or they would have to go to a friend's house. Now, there's nothing wrong with that, in and of itself, you're getting access to care. But it raises issues around privacy, comfort” (Participant #21, CBO Manager). These participants highlighted the importance of considering the unique social contexts experienced by newcomers when designing an initiative to holistically address the community’s needs.
In other cases, participants noted that being responsive to newcomer needs could be accomplished within existing programs. One participant involved in a vaccination initiative described howthe initiative was able to account for newcomers’ language needs by instructing staff at the clinic to utilize mobile interpretive services. Each day before the clinic opened, she would simply remind her staff, “here's the number for interpretive services, here's [organization]’s account number, here's what you say, steps 1-2-3-4.” (Participant #10, CBO Manager). The organization had set aside a portion of the budget for the clinic for interpretation services, and by being mindful of linguistic challenges that may impede the newcomer population from becoming vaccinated, the initiative succeeded in considering the needs of service users without a radical redesign or significant additional costs.
The need for a rapid and adaptive response through intersectoral collaboration
To adapt to the unprecedented and rapidly developing COVID-19 situation, participants discussed the need to quickly design initiatives with limited resources and limited information about COVID-19. However, many participants highlighted that this was largely facilitated by the unifying force of COVID-19. As explained by this policymaker, “COVID allowed us to have one common goal or one common enemy or whatever you want to call it.” (Participant #5, Policymaker). As the threat of COVID-19 brought together various organizations, a rapid and adaptive response was facilitated in designing the various initiatives.
Implementing interventionsfor vulnerable newcomers: facilitators and challenges
The implementation phase of the initiatives utilized and strengthened any prior existing relations and created new partnerships. The alliances among city-level and more prominent or well-funded organizations ensured enough resources, whereas collaboration with smaller community-based organizations ensured broader outreach and facilitated more equitable access to services by the under-served newcomer population.
Enhancing coordination through formal coordination and informal cooperative relationships
Participants shared examples of willingness to not only work within their own organization but also with external organizations to share knowledge and support the holistic needs of the population. As described by one policymaker, “it’s really important to us that this information doesn’t sit and stay exclusively within the public health agency. So, beyond our external collaboration, we work with other departments. So, we have engaged with [Federal Department 1], we’ve also engaged with them on their migration and health team to share best practices and talk about key learnings and overlap between our projects.” (Participant #18, Policymaker). Moreover, while explaining the partnership across organizations to implement joint programmes, the manager from one community-based organization explained that any commitment that they will continue to provide services during the pandemic was facilitated through working together, as “The basic building block is we’re partners, you’ve got vulnerable clients who need access we had to make joint decisions about what would we offer, how would it be offered? When would it be offered? Where would it be offered? We had to have clarity around why we were offering it. We had to make sure that everybody had that basic commitment too; we’re going to remain open, and we’re going to remain accessible as a part of their service, as well city wide” (Participant 23, CBO Manager). As this participant made clear, while partnerships are essential, a clear delineation regarding roles and responsibilities was also essential to the success of the initiative.
Building partnerships both between organizations and with the newcomer community was a critical factor in the pandemic to address equity concerns. Participants emphasized that community engagement and establishing trust with the newcomer community was necessary, and hence, many city-level and health-based organizations partnered with community-based organizations working with equity-denied groups. Sharing the example of a vaccine program, a policymaker shared the importance of engaging communities as “there was testing hesitancy, primarily amongst racialized populations and vulnerable populations and the homeless. We were doing testing with our partners in shelters, in group homes, to reach the most vulnerable members of our community. So, we had built those relationships. And when the vaccine came, then things really expanded in terms of really needing to do that community outreach to vulnerable populations to help them get vaccinated, but we have the relationships already” (Participant #17, Policymaker). Our participants emphasized that this trust-building was largely developed through informal actions with the community and leveraging any pre-existing relationships the community-based partners may have already had with the newcomer community.
While stressing the importance of developing formal relationships, one of the managers from the community organizations also mentioned the role of developing personal and informal relationships. At the height of the pandemic, when the response had to be rapid, it was quicker and more efficient to use their informal relationships. The participant further explained that even in cases of a formal agreement, they often use their informal relationship to enable the work as “those personal relationships are so important. And even when there are institutions and formalized arrangements, and expectations that are documented, it’s often through those individual relationships that that information is more readily shared and, and things get done.” (Participant #15, CBO Manager).
While informal relationships are key, the importance of formal city-wide coordination mechanisms cannot be ignored. Policymakers shared the example of a task force set up during COVID-19 that enabled coordination, data pooling and review, knowledge sharing, and rapid response.
Leadership by key actors
Several participants reported that city-level and local organizations played a key role in leading the response. One of the policymakers expressed that leadership by community organizations in tailoring and building the program and services appropriate for their community was helpful due to their understanding of the needs of these often hard-to-reach populations. This also led to a change in approach to delivering services during COVID-19, as traditionally, the user comes for services, but given the vulnerability and access issues, services were designed to be delivered door-to-door, which led to an increase in rates of testing and vaccination. As explained by this policymaker, “I think we saw the value in going to sort of where people were, so whether that's apartment buildings and doing door knocking and in offering vaccines or going to churches, going to different places, basketball courts the streets, TTC stations, you know, the Community Ambassadors really informed where we might think about going in terms of offering vaccine in a way that was convenient for the people that needed them.” (Participant #5, Policymaker). The study participants also highlighted the role of individual leadership within organizations, who spearheaded and forged formal and informal relationships across different organizations.
Funding mobilization and human resource challenges
During the pandemic, many CBOs received additional funding to design programs for marginalized people, which enabled the hiring of required staff and their training. As this policymaker described, “there was also a lot of, I would say, resources that were, that was developed by [municipal health governance agency] and other sort of health service providers in the materials that were needed to promote vaccines.” (Participant #5, Policymaker).
Although funding support enabled the creation of new programs, even for already existing programs, there was a considerable additional cost involved in the move to virtual service delivery and thus posed significant implementation challenges. The additional costs were towards enabling the provision of computer and IT costs, subscription of online services, creation of additional space and staff training and development. Participants discussed the benefits of resource pooling as a way of overcoming some of these challenges through achieving a higher pool of funds to cover a larger client base and minimize waste.
Many participants also spoke about the associated challenge of recruitment, deployment and burnout in staff during the pandemic. Pointing to the burnout in staff, one of the managers suggested that networking with the newcomer population has been reduced because of the nature of the pandemic and staff burnout. As the manager described, “there is no time, there are only eight hours in a day, also staff burnout as well. Instead of providing services that are much needed, talking about the clients that we serve, and instead of focusing on trauma-related issues and things like that, if we do only outreach, the bigger issue of the wellbeing of the individuals is going to be affected.” (Participant #13, CBO Manager). This reduced their capacity to focus on well-being, where they needed to talk to their clients about trauma and provide them with access to information to make informed choices.
Another challenge managers faced was redeployment. Many projects initiated during the pandemic had shorter funding cycles that did not allow for hiring permanent human resources, so organizations either deployed resources from other programs or used volunteers to sustain the human resources.
Sustaining initiatives beyond the pandemic and the associated challenges
When asked about sustaining the interventions beyond the pandemic, many participants agreed that many elements of the programs during COVID-19 should continue. The programs focused on building vaccine confidence in the newcomer communities had created trust in the community; these relationships can be used for addressing other forms of vaccine-preventable diseases. These programs also built capacities among community workers and volunteers to develop trustworthy relationships in the community and can be leveraged for other health promotion programs. As described by one CBO manager, “that’s it’s all about immunization… And then you have even the pre-pandemic fears about whether these vaccines are impacting children’s health and development. And there’s a lot of information and misinformation going around these days that needs to be addressed. So, part and parcel of keeping this kind of project alive is to help people navigate those fears and concerns and give them accredited information that they can rely on and trust and have it come from a source that would be already trusted.” (Participant #8, CBO Manager). Another manager from a community organization shared the example of collaboration between provincial, municipal and community organizations to increase the outreach and scope of programs to the newcomer population. An enhanced culture of collaboration enabled fundraising, system navigation, and door-to-door outreach for the newcomer population, which was essential and needed to be continued beyond the pandemic.
The most reported challenge was the limited funding envelope, which was only for the pandemic and gradually tapered off with each wave, making it difficult to sustain the programs. However, a provincial policymaker highlighted that the pandemic shifted and changed the usual siloed approach of departments and organizations, as it required joint efforts to initiate a swift and responsive approach for newcomers and made the argument for continuing a partnership approach to work.
One of the managers from the local health unit described multiple pathways to sustaining initiatives beyond the pandemic as a spiderweb and not a mere financial one. She explained that the large programs that are run citywide are complex systems to manage; a mere scaling down or smaller scope may need to transition into a completely new model and may not have components of the original program. The second approach to program sustainability would be incorporating the learnings into an existing model, where some of the newly hired staff can be retained, but that would depend on the social issue the program is addressing and how much upscaling of the skills is required in the new program. For example, as the manager further explained, “in a lot of the other social issues [it’s]an easy fix because we’re looking at very intricate problems. That requires a skill level of education and lived experience like that.” (Participant #25, Health Unit Manager).