An Interview with Katherine Chislett

By: Rob Kirsic

February 2025

Katherine Chislett’s distinguished career in municipal and regional services began in 1987 with Ontario's Ministry of Housing and Municipal Affairs, where her work on rent control, social housing, and planning Markham’s Cornell community set the foundation for decades of impactful leadership. With Ontario’s download of programs, in 1998 Katherine joined the newly amalgamated City of Toronto to help build its social housing program. In her role as principal planner, she led efforts to protect rental housing and tenant rights amidst sweeping policy changes.

In Niagara Region as Commissioner of Community Services, Katherine expanded her reach, leading human services in homelessness prevention, child services, employment support, and long-term care. Her legacy included Niagara’s first housing and homelessness plan and contributions to the Niagara Regional Housing Board.

From 2017 to 2024, Katherine served as Commissioner of Community and Health Services for York Region and as President of Housing York, Inc., overseeing a $1 billion budget, 3,000 staff, and more than 300 programs that support York Region’s residents. Under her leadership, York achieved numerous strategic and service plans, including the region’s first Community Safety and Well-Being Plan and the York Region Inclusion Charter, recognized by the United Nations. Katherine’s focus on integrated service management and her dedication to equity and inclusion have enriched the lives of over 1.2 million residents.

She is also one of the recipients of the 2024 OMSSA Lifetime Achievement Award. OMSSA sat down with Katherine for an interview to discuss her career and thoughts on human services in Ontario.

This interview has been edited.

OMSSA: Human services delivery between more than one level of government brings challenges and opportunities, especially as governments and priorities change over time. In your experience, what should human services staff know and think about when it comes to the relationship between the Province and municipalities as it relates to the delivery of human services?

Katherine Chislett (KC): It's not that one is better than the other; they are different and, when we work together, we can maximize the value of those differences. Understand that the political environment we each work under is very different – not better or worse, different.

When I worked in Rent Control and in Social Housing at the Province, I felt that policy work was narrowly focused on the perspective of whichever party was in charge. While at a municipal level, without a party system, we need to consider every perspective and approach. We can get frustrated that important perspectives are missed; but for provincial staff and political staff, it must be frustrating to spend time on matters that just won’t get anywhere under the current political mandate. When a decision or lack of action is bad, municipal staff are looking for change, while provincial staff are often trying to mitigate.

At the Province, staff didn’t have the same relationship with politicians that we do at the municipal level. For example, as a Commissioner, we would often have far more interaction with MPPs than our provincial peers, and on a wider range of matters. As a municipal staff member, my opportunities to present ideas and support decision-making by elected officials was so much greater. We don’t only help our municipality, we can help provincial staff move policy in a better direction by using those connections.

We help provincial staff make better operational policy decisions when we share our 'on the ground' experience and learning with them, acting as trusted partners willing to work in the best interests of the people we serve. The tables OMSSA has established with the Province to work through program changes have made many huge strides in shaping those programs for the better, and that’s not just because of the governance structure, but because of the expertise and collaborative spirit of the individuals sitting at those tables. My heartfelt appreciation goes out to all municipal staff who invested the extra time and energy to participate in that type of work and OMSSA policy development and advocacy for the benefit of all municipalities and the people we serve.

Finally, play a long game: relationships matter. The staff person you work with today at the Province could be a municipal director tomorrow and vice versa. We’re all working hard and doing our best. The elected officials could change every four years, but our colleagues may be our colleagues for our entire careers.

OMSSA: Two of the most pressing challenges faced across the Province are housing (specifically around affordability) and housing asylum seekers. In your role as Commissioner of Community and Health Services and President of Housing York Inc. you managed both issues, so how do you tackle these issues with limited resources? And, on the horizon, over the next three to five years, where do you see progression being made to deal with both issues?

KC: We all knew a crisis of homelessness was in the making as far back as the 1980s when the social housing construction programs were cut, rent control was de-fanged, social assistance payments were slashed, and protections for existing rental housing protection was removed. This was all building on the loss of the only truly effective private market rental construction program which was cancelled in the 1990s. All of these were decisions of upper-tier governments, with the obligation and need to manage the fall out transferred to municipal governments. Not our fault, but now our problem.

As for asylum seekers, it really doesn’t matter where someone lived before – whether that is the next town or the next continent. People who live in our communities are our responsibility. Yes, additional or different types of support may be needed than those we traditionally provide, but that’s no different than what we do every day in human services – we learn what help the person needs, and then we help them get it. Asylum seekers are people who need housing too.

When I approach any complex or wicked problem, what works for me is to start with basic principles, and any decisions that follow such as program design, delivery approaches, or how funding is used are checked against those principles. Because in human services everything is connected when deciding how to use scarce resources and funding, you either do a few things really well, or you do a lot of things so-so.

A basic principle for me is that people need the safety and security of a home, to maximize their potential. Period.

I wish everyone could have a well located unit with enough bedrooms, amenities, and supports, because that’s what our society sets as our standard, but after years of poor policy choices, we don’t have the money to do that. I would rather have 100 people with a roof over their head and a door they can lock, than 20 people in the right type of unit. It’s a terrible choice to make, but leaving 80 people to live outside or in shelters is not something I can accept. It does not achieve that basic principle.

My advice is that you have those hard discussions about principles and the choices they can lead to with your team, and then your decision makers. For me it is worse spreading dollars and resources so thinly that there’s little meaningful impact, even when that opens us up to criticism by others with different principles.

As for the next three to five years?

With the current trajectory, I don’t feel all that hopeful.

Requiring municipalities to process planning applications faster or to transfer more of the cost of new builds onto existing property taxpayers isn’t going to get us the homes we need. The money that does become available to create new community housing continues to be limited, sporadic, and administratively challenging to access – I don’t see any indications of change. And even when you get the money to build, the costly and sometimes futile process of getting planning approvals in the face of NIMBY opponents runs up costs at its best and stops projects at its worst. And then there is the challenge of funding operations, including any support services the tenants need.

It’s time for senior governments to stop nibbling at the edges with so many initiatives and not enough impact.

Community housing needs a lot of money, long-term certainty, and ease of use. Making non-profits and municipal governments compete for limited funding wastes time and resources.

It's time to get serious about stigma. The Ontario Human Rights Commission should launch a Province-wide investigation into the impact that people zoning is having on community housing, and the Province needs to enforce laws that stop it. Education and engagement aren’t enough.

We are at the point where any rental is good rental to start balancing our market. Municipal incentives are nice, but to really get shovels in the ground requires major income tax incentives and reasonable financing tools.

I think all municipalities will need to significantly expand into the area of rental housing protection. We can’t make gains through new supply if existing affordable rental housing is lost through conversion, demolition and vacancy decontrol. The forthcoming federal program to buy existing rental could be promising here, provided it is well-funded and accessible. Bill 23 may be a concern because it could weaken the municipal regulations that already exist to protect supply or to require replacement.

A possible bright light are changes the Province has been making to support gentle density – basement apartments, second suites, along with encouraging greater residential density to be permitted in new developments. Densifying existing housing stock not only creates more housing units, it can provide income sources to help people buy homes in this very costly market, and can support more efficient use of existing municipal infrastructure and services meaning the new supply has less negative impact on the municipal tax base. Of course we need municipalities to support this move. Being able to have a second suite has been as of right for more than a decade in Ontario, but regulatory barriers imposed by some municipalities make it hard to actually create them. That’s something municipalities could change if they wanted to.

Finally, I am feeling positive about the opportunities that come with the end of mortgages in community housing. With the ability now for municipalities and providers to work together on how to repurpose the property tax dollars that used to pay for mortgages, we can find ways to keep existing buildings in a state of good repair and possibly even fund more supply. It’s a extraordinary opportunity to put billions back into the sector in a new way, and I will be watching to see how that plays out.

OMSSA: In your opinion, and based on your experience with OMSSA, what are some of the priorities the Association should focus on in the next few years? 

KC: One of OMSSA's many valuable services is in provincial advocacy. By working together, municipal staff can advocate to the Province and recommend changes based on our professional expertise, even when we may not be able to do that with our municipal Councils.

I think we need to do more to get our Council members advocating for human services to their provincial peers because, as we have seen, provincial staff seem to have less ability to apply their professional expertise to political decision-making and need our help. OMSSA and AMO have had a long, positive, and productive working relationship. OMSSA may want to consider partnering with AMO on training to council members to better understand human services – why they matter, how you know your municipality is doing a good job, and what they in their council roles can and should do to help.

Human services is very complex and the ROI is hard to understand; in contrast, hard services are much easier to grasp – and they often come with ribbon cuttings and legacy, visible improvements that look good in a councillor newsletter; much easier to get one time capital dollars in the budget process than multi-year operating dollars.

And waiving a magic wand, I would like to see some way to support provincial staff to get municipal working experience (secondment, maybe?) and vice versa. With download, I have seen over the years that as provincial staff are not directly involved in delivering services, they have lost that important perspective when developing policies and programs – they could benefit from the ‘on the ground’ experience. Municipal staff would benefit not only from understanding how the Province makes decisions, but the perspective of having to consider implications for this very large, diverse Province.

OMSSA: Looking back on your career to date, are there one or two achievements that stand out to you? What are they and what makes them stand out to you?

KC: Looking back, what strikes me about the big accomplishments is what they all had in common:

The impetus for change came from looking at a situation in a different way, setting a goal, and working towards it through practical, concrete, iterative actions – one step after another.

Nothing sudden or earth shattering at the time, no grand plan, though in retrospect it could look that way. For example: With the Streets to Homes program, it started with the very simple understanding that the only way to end homelessness is to have a home. Our unashamedly big, fat, hairy goal was that we would end homelessness.

Our insider motto was – house one person at a time, whatever it takes. Back then, and we’re talking 20 years ago, the belief was that the right thing to do was to provide a shelter bed. There were many reasons for this, with a main one being that because affordable housing units were so scarce, people who were homeless needed to earn it. They did this by spending their time in the shelter dealing with health, addictions, employment – whatever issues contributed to their homelessness (aka the staircase approach).

I had two big problems with that, and thankfully had other team members who felt as I did. First, when I was a City Planner, I did a lot of work saving affordable housing and helping it to get built, and I just couldn’t understand why, with all this effort, people living outside couldn’t get those homes. Second, the idea that someone could address all these personal challenges without the safety and security of a home was unfathomable. I can barely function with one night’s bad sleep! Why did people have to go into a shelter to get a housing unit? When housing is a human right, how is it that we can believe there are people who deserve a home and there are people who do not? Living in one of the wealthiest cities in the world, why do we say we can’t fix this?

Streets to Homes was not a grand plan, but a practical response to one of the many complex challenges people who were homeless were living with – housing. We started by finding a few really good housing workers willing to try something new, and then sent them into encampments with a phone and a milk crate to talk to and help the people living there. We learned they often didn’t have income supports so we took care of that too; then we saw landlords were a problem so we made them our partners; and we saw people with mental health problems that couldn’t get help so we put psychiatrists in a van and drove them out there. As decision-makers. and those who controlled funding and programs saw that we were having these successes, we scaled up by doing street counts to provide good evidence and set targets. And this led to getting more resources. This cycle continued. Within five years or so, Streets to Homes was a big program – a lot of staff, sophisticated systems, partners, and all of that, dealing with these huge social issues and doing it well. But programs are not fixed things – or they should not be – they are iterative trying and learning cycles that form a system. And this is something all of us can do when we see a situation that we know is wrong. Complex issues can't be resolved all at once. Pick a place to start. Set a north star, keep to your principles, try and learn, over and over again.

Solutions can come from really listening to other voices, and especially those we serve and unusual suspects. 

It’s easy to fall into patterns. In social media we call them echo chambers, at work we might call it silos or group think. I prefer patterns – customary ways of understanding the environment we work with - the causes of issues and the possible solutions. It’s important to challenge patterns; in fact, we should be regularly challenging what we know and believe. That’s especially true in human services – the demand is so great and we’re often the only game in town – when anything we can do helps, that can be misunderstood as meaning we are doing a good job, so we keep on doing it.

But how do we know we are doing the right thing, the right way, having the biggest impact possible with the resources available? Metrics, of course, can help, also benchmarking against what others do. I would add to this listening to the people we serve and including them in design and decision-making as much as possible. We all know how important this is so I won’t get into it other than to say how grateful I am to the many people with lived experience who took the time to help me understand. 

Less well known is unusual suspects and by that I mean the people, professions, sectors, and organizations that we as human service professionals typically don’t work with or consult. They are worth engaging with because they often have a different way of seeing what the issues are, and different ideas on what could be done. That pushes us into seeing differently, and may open the door to innovation.

Using Streets to Homes again as an example, it started through a partnership with Transportation Services. After all, they had workers outside who often interacted with people living in encampments, they cared about helping them and had good ideas how to do that, and the partnership resulted in a protocol that no one would be removed from public space until human service staff had done everything possible to help the individual(s) move voluntarily and there was no other solution. It was support from tourism, entertainment, and business improvement organizations, that convinced Toronto Council to commit $5 million in ongoing operating costs to significantly increase the program. Making landlord associations and landlords into partners (and treating them as such) resulted in offers of decent, affordable homes. When our social service systems fail, every sector is impacted, and every sector can be a partner and may contribute to solutions if we welcome them and listen to their ideas too.

The change resulted from relentless optimism, showing not telling, doing whatever it takes, and not giving up.

That’s an area that human services people are good at, because we are so skilled at meeting people where they are at and working with them to move on to a better place. That skill applies to getting new programs or changing existing ones, or money, or whatever you need.

OMSSA: Is there anything else you would like to share with our members that I did not ask about?

KC: Human services work is really hard, and it really matters. I have been incredibly fortunate to work with so many brilliant, thoughtful and caring people – as a leader, member, funder or as a contributor – to help make people’s lives better. I have seen that in human services, each of us, no matter our position, has the power and privilege to change lives for the better. People count on us, and they need us now more than ever.

The work is often hard - the resources may not be available, the program just doesn’t work in this circumstance, so many rules, and often our Council and support departments can’t appreciate the pressures and urgency of our work.

We don’t have the ribbon cuttings, or multiple award opportunities, we don’t have established methodologies and long planning cycles, and for much of our work we don’t even have college diplomas or university degrees to specifically train us for what we do. Nothing is straight-forward when you work with people and complex systems. Planning horizons are very short when you work in a crisis.

The stigma those we serve face often also reflects on us, adding another layer of challenge. Bridges, parks and roads are welcomed, but another shelter? How often have you heard finance or Council bemoan the fact that we deliver social service programs that should be funded from provincial income tax revenues, a quarter century after these programs were downloaded! (though it’s a fair point about municipalities not having the funding sources they need for these – somewhat – new obligations).

And we get tired. It’s a lot when you look ahead and it seems like the need for help by the people we serve just keeps growing, and sometimes their distress can lodge in our hearts.  

But that’s the way it is, and it doesn’t change our purpose. We must work within these difficulties; not let them slow us down or defeat us. We have an important job to do, and we are going to do it because people count on us.

Do the best you can for those you serve. Learn about ways to do even better. Identify the issues, figure out ways to handle them, and advocate when you can’t. Be inspired by the impact you and your peers have had and will continue to have.

In our work we need to be at our best – our most patient, creative, collaborative and persuasive – every day. That takes energy, so my second message is that you must care for yourself and keep an eye out to care for the people you work with. The challenges you face, you don’t face alone, and we need you well.

If you manage staff, set a standard that people come first – the people we serve, and the people who serve them. As leaders, that’s who we are here for. Showing up as a human services leader means understanding that it isn’t programs or dollars or staff reports, those are just the tactics, our purpose is helping people to have better lives as equitable members of our communities. And never forget that since the best of us always put a bit of our heart into our work, those of us who work in human services need to also be treated with caring.

Please be proud of what you do. Your legacy won’t be a road or a bridge or a park or anything that all the people in your municipality can see and appreciate and use if they want.  It will be homes where people can be safe and secure, it will be children who’s life trajectories are the best they can be, it’s people going to school, working, getting health care, and living longer lives, its seniors treated with the care and dignity they deserve as our elders. It is generations.

Don’t give up. Never forget there is a human life counting on you – often when they have no where else to go. You matter.

OMSSA: Thank you, Katherine.

About the Author

Rob Kirsic is the Communications and Member Engagement Manager with OMSSA. Rob started with OMSSA in 2021 and has over 15 years of communications and public relations experience in the private, public, and not-for-profit sectors.