Intake priorities and criteria in a Family Service agency : a survey of waiting list cases and administrative implications.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Present trends and stresses in family service agencies are related to external and internal demands for more effective service for an increasingly diversified clientele. In the face of these demands, the device of the "waiting-list" has become widely prevalent in family service agencies throughout North America. This represents a backlog of accepted applicants who cannot be given immediate- service, and it inevitably necessitates giving some applicants priority over others, on the basis of relative urgency. The waiting-list developed as a result of efforts to protect the quality of casework service to families, but it does pose some serious questions about the quality as well" as the quantity of service to the community. What is urgency? What happens to those who wait for service? What is the relationship of the waiting-list and priority decisions at intake to the changing constituency of the family service agencies? This study examines some of the questions that arise when there is a waiting list in a family agency, by focusing on certain aspects of the waiting-list of one agency. This is an exploratory survey of the waiting-list of one agency (The Family Service Agency of Greater Vancouver), as it is reflected in a block of 95 cases accepted for service during a two month period -of 1958. It includes a statistical survey of the applicants and their families and the main problems they presented at the time they approached the agency. The sample is then divided into two main groups - .brief service and continued service cases (according to the Family Service Association of America-definition). Statistical information about the length of the waiting period, opening status, length of service, and main presenting problems is related to each of these groups, and also to cases which received priority service and those which did not get this consideration. Case study of brief service cases is focused on evaluation of services they received, and particularly on the effects of the waiting period and priority decisions. Study of continued service cases includes statistical information about the total items of service provided to this group, and the family members who received direct service. For the purpose of case study the continued service cases are divided into three groups according to the length of service they received, and described as short-term, medium-term and long-term cases. Case examples give a picture of the range of the clientele and services provided to these three groups. Although three-quarters of the initial applicants were women, in continued services cases the male marital partner was usually involved and men received a substantial amount of direct service. The employment of the male bread-winners in the sample was mainly lower middle class and upper working class in status, but there was representation from groups of higher and lower status. However, information about the applicants’ family groupings, interpreted in the light of current literature, suggests that most of them are identified with the so-called "middle class values" of family life, and this is supported by examination of case material. Among adult clients, particularly those who received service over long periods, there appears to be a high incidence of personality disorders. Others, particularly among the new applicants, are persons easier to help by casework methods. The study points up the importance of new applicants, and the need for giving them greater consideration at intake if new clientele are to be reached in any numbers. The most positive fact revealed by the study is that "loss" of cases in the process of intake is almost entirely a problem of "engaging", the new applicant. It is suggested that when there is a waiting-list, personal intake interviews should be offered to all who are making a first application. Apart from the need for more consideration for new applicants, extension of effective service appears to be related to the quality of intake service, rather than to any concrete rules for priority determination.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,025 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».