Supervised consumption sites are closed since the overdose increases in Toronto drop-in centers, the network says

According to a coalition by community agencies, the provincial government has increased the drop-in centers in Toronto since the closure of four supervised consumption sites in April.

Before the closure of supervised consumption sites, drop-in sites typically had less than 10 overdos-which included the church, food bank and neberhood centers-the manager of the Toronto Drop-in Network, Melani Joy said.

Now, these sites are reporting overdose every month in the high thirtys, she said.

Joy said that this boom is happening throughout the city, not only in the core of the city.

“This is a dramatic growth, without an increase in resources or support,” he told CBC Radio Metro morning On Friday.

It comes in the form of Toronto Public Health (TPH) data, which has shown a deadly and non-fatal opioid overdose call for paramedics. Bottom in 2025 Compared to the last two years.

But Joy says that TPH does not track overdose that are happening in drop-in centers, in the community, or the remaining supervised consumption sites that are still open.

Downtown Church has become a ‘injection site’

More than 50 community agencies are part of the Toronto Drop-in Network, with Metropolitan United Church, Queen Street E and Church Street.

Property manager Frank Cormier said that 30 to 50 people use drugs on church property during a day.

He said that he takes him to Naloxone all the time. In the last summer, he said that he used it once a month, but now he is using it two or more times a week.

After the shutdown of safe injection sites, Cormier said that those who use drugs have a shortage of spaces to go for support.

“Right now, the front lawn injection site of Metropolitan United Church has become,” he said Metro morning.

On 1 April, the province closed nine supervised consumption sites in Ontario – which included four in Toronto – located within 200m schools or Decards. Law is currently being done Challed in court By the Kensington Market Overdose Prevention Site, a tenth site was slated to shut down, but is still open due to legal prohibition and funding.

The nine sites that discontinued, agreed to become homeless and become addicted recovery (heart) hubs, a restrained model that provides recovery and treatment systems for people struggling with addictions and mental health issues, but does not provide drug consumption services.

The province says that 9 out of 28 heart hubs opened in April

While the heart hub was to be completely operational by 1 April, Joy said that “not what we are seeing in reality.”

Until last month, many heart hubs are yet to be seen to run full slate and run of services. In the heart hub of Toronto Public Health, now running temporarily on Asplaynade, Only one program of 10 is operationalThis summer or beyond with the rest was planned.

The province said in a statement that nine heart hubs replaced supervised consumption sites “planned on 1 April, which included in Toronto, which has no interval in the distribution of mental health aid services.”

The government is spending $ 550 million to create a total of 28 hubs throughout the province, which will provide people with 24/7 assistance, reads the statements.

The statement stated that the remaining 19 continues to work with the hub “to finalize the operational budget,” the statement states.

Joy said that heart hubs offer services that both are working in the sector and those who use drugs have increased long supervised consumption site models, such as more detox beds, one case management and counseling.

But he said that the hub does not include major services provided by usually supervised consumption sites, such as access to clean needles, which help reduce the spread of infectious diseases.

“It is disappointing that there was no foresight to include all these services together,” Joy said.

Meanwhile, Carmere said that the government failed to plan adequate infections from supervised consumption sites to heart hub.

He said, “The system suddenly changed, to a large extent, and did not think anyone thought what the difference between a model and the next model was going to happen,” he said.

“I think it’s really a bad plan and really poor change is management.”