Résumés
Abstract
Community nonprofit organizations (CNPOs) are a vital component of the social infrastructure that addresses the needs of older adults aging in place. Despite this, CNPOs are overlooked in political research and relevant policies, such as the age-friendly cities program. This article examines CNPO work during the COVID-19 pandemic in Montréal, Québec. Policy analysis, surveys, and interviews with CNPO staff, local policy actors, and older adults reveal that CNPOs became increasingly essential frontline social service providers during the pandemic. While CNPOs fill gaps in public and private social infrastructures, they are facing considerable service, labour, administrative, and financial challenges due to inadequate policy support. Policy on aging must incorporate CNPO work in different sectors and communities, facilitate partnerships that respect CNPO autonomy, and improve CNPO funding.
Keywords:
- community nonprofit organizations,
- social infrastructure,
- age-friendly cities,
- aging in place,
- COVID-19 pandemic
Résumé
Les organismes sans but lucratif (OSBL) communautaires sont une composante essentielle de l’infrastructure sociale qui répond aux besoins des aînés vieillissant chezeux. Pourtant, malgré leur importance, les OSBL communautaires sont négligés dans la recherche politique et dans la mise en oeuvre de politiques, comme on le voit dans le programme des villes « amies des aînés ». Cet article examine le travail des OSBL durant la pandémie de la COVID-19 à Montréal, au Québec. L’analyse des politiques—ainsi que celle de sondages et d’entrevues effectués auprès du personnel des OSBL, de responsables locaux et d’aînés—montre que, pendant la pandémie, les OSBL sont devenus des fournisseurs de services sociaux de première ligne de plus en plus essentiels. Cependant, même si les OSBL communautaires comblent les lacunes des infrastructures sociales publiques et privées, ils font face à des défis considérables en matière de services, de main-d’oeuvre, d’administration et de finances en raison d’un soutien politique inadéquat. Les politiques sur le vieillissement doivent tenir compte du travail des OSBL dans différents secteurs et communautés, faciliter les partenariats qui respectent l’autonomie des OSBL, et augmenter le financement des OSBL.
Mots-clés :
- organismes sans but lucratif communautaires,
- infrastructure sociale,
- villes adaptées aux aînés,
- vieillir chez soi,
- pandémie de la COVID-19
Parties annexes
Bibliography
- Ball, S. and Lawler, K. (2014). Changing practice and policy to move to scale. A framework for age-friendly communities across the United States. Journal of Aging & Social Policy, 26. 19-32.
- Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
- Buffel, T., Phillipson, C., and Rémillard-Boilard, S. (2019). Age-Friendly cities and communities: New directions for research and policy. In D. Gu & M. E. Dupre (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Gerontology and Population Aging. Springer, Cham.
- Caillouette, J. (2004). The community and social economy movement in Québec: Development and recognition (1989-2003). Centre de Recherche sur les Innovations Sociales, no ET0415.
- Coule, T. M., Dodge, J. and Eikenberry, A. M. (2022). Toward a critical non-profit studies: A literature review. Non-profit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 51(3), 478-506.
- Cunningham, I., Baines, D., Shields, J., and Lewchuk, W. (2016). Austerity policies, ‘precarity’ and the nonprofit workforce: A comparative study of UK and Canada. Journal of Industrial Relations, 58(4), 455–472.
- Evans, B., Richmond, T., and Shields, J. (2005). Structuring neoliberal governance: The non-profit sector, emerging new modes of control and the marketisation of service delivery. Policy and Society, 24(1), 73-97.
- Evans, B. and Shields, J. (2018). The third sector, the neo-liberal State and beyond: Reshaping contracting and policy advocacy. In C. Dunn (Ed.), The handbook of Canadian public administration (pp. 489-500). Don Mills: Oxford University Press.
- Gouvernement du Québec. (2018). Un Québec pour tous les âges. Le plan d’action 2018–2023. Report. Québec, QC : Secrétariat aux aînés du ministère de la Famille et Ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux.
- Hamel, P., & Autin, G. (2017). Austerity governance and the welfare crisis in Montréal. Alternate Routes, 28, 165–188.
- Hebblethwaite, S., Young, L., and Martin Rubio, T. (2021). Pandemic precarity: Aging and social engagement. Leisure Sciences, 43(1–2), 170–176.
- Joy, M. (2020). The right to an age friendly city: Redistribution, recognition, and senior citizen rights in urban spaces. Montreal, Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
- Joy, M. and Shields, J. (2020). The political economy of the non-profit sector. In H. Whiteside (Ed.), Canadian Political Economy (pp. 215-233). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
- Joy, M., Marier, P. and Séguin, A-M. (2018). La démarche villes-amies des aînés. Un remède universel pour vieillir chez soi? In V. Billette, P. Marier, & A-M. Séguin (Eds.) Les vieillissement sous la loupe : entre mythes et réalités (pp. 75-84). Laval: Presses de l'Université Laval.
- Laforest, R. (2011a). Voluntary sector organizations and the state: Building new relations. Vancouver: UBC Press.
- Laforest, R. (2011b). “L’étude du tiers secteur au Québec: Comment saisir la spécificité québécoise? Politique et Sociétés, 30(1), 43-55.
- Lasby, D. and Barr, C. (2021). The uneven impact of the pandemic on Canadian charities. Sector Monitor. Imagine Canada.
- Marier, P. (2021). The four lenses of population aging: Planning for the future in Canada’s provinces. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
- Menec, V. H. (2017). Conceptualizing social connectivity in the context of age-friendly communities. Journal of Housing For the Elderly, 31(2), 99–116.
- Phillips, S. D., and Wyatt, B. (2021). Intersections and innovations: Change for Canada’s voluntary and nonprofit sector. Edmonton: Muttart Foundation.
- Réalisons Montréal. (2018). Plan d’action municipal pour les personnes aînées 2018–2020. Montréal, métropole à l’image des personnes aînées [Report]. Montrèal, QC : Service de la diversité sociale et des sports de la Ville de Montréal. https://www.realisonsmtl.ca/aines [March 20, 2025].
- Richmond, T., & Shields, J. (2024). The Canadian non-profit sector: Neoliberalism and the assault on community. Halifax, NS: Fernwood Publishing.
- Russell, E., Skinner, M. W., and Fowler, K. (2022). Emergent challenges and opportunities to sustaining age-friendly initiatives: Qualitative findings from a Canadian age-friendly funding program. Journal of Aging & Social Policy, 34(2), 198-217.
- Salamon, L.M. (2015). The resilient sector revisited: The new challenge to nonprofit America, 2nd edition. Washington: Brookings Institution.
- Shields, J. and Abu Alrob, Z. (2020). COVID-19, migration and the Canadian immigration system: Dimensions, impact and resilience. Building Migrant Resilience in Cities (BMRC) Project. Toronto: York University.
- Shields, J., Joy, M., & Cheng, S.M. (2024). The limits of the community nonprofit sector resilience: Evidence from Canadian nonprofit sector surveys during the pandemic. Canadian Journal of Nonprofit and Social Economy Research, 15(1), 1–21.
- Smith, M. (2005). Diversity and identity in the non-profit sector: Lessons from LGBT organizing in Toronto. Social Policy & Administration, 39(5), 463-480.
- White, D. (2001). Maîtriser un mouvement, dompter une idéologie : l’État et le secteur communautaire au Québec. Canadian Journal of Policy Research, 2(2), 132-141.
- World Health Organization. (2007). Global age-friendly cities: A guide. Geneva: WHO Press.
10.7202/1006058ar