“More than the house”: a Canadian perspective on housing stability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The challenges of achieving housing stability are examinable from a variety of locations and perspectives, resulting in a range of solutions and recommendations for practice. Attending to the experiences and understandings of both service users and service providers within a broad environmental scan, one can obtain a more complete picture of how housing stability can be supported and sustained. The purpose of this research is to better understand the practical landscape, human relationships, interdisciplinary understandings and everyday activities of housing stability. Design/methodology/approach The paper draws on thematic analysis from expert informant interviews conducted during an environmental scan of housing options and facilities for those who have been labelled “hard to house” in a large, ethnically‐diverse urban city in western Canada. Interviews of selected service users yielded information on their perspectives of the barriers and facilitators of housing stability. Parallel interviews of service providers and/or policy makers were also conducted, and responses compared and contrasted with those of service users. Findings Three interconnected patterns on the path to housing stability were experienced by the expert informants, and are explored herein. The overlapping and developmental themes “more than a house,” “finding support,” and “connecting multiple supports” are discussed. Conditions and realities of coordinated support need, particularly for those deemed “hard to house” because of addictions or mental health problems were revealed by the expert informants in this study. Research limitations/implications Thematic analysis of the parallel interviews brought the landscape of housing stability into clearer focus and contributed to practice recommendations. This qualitative research approach was not intended to provide generalizable findings, but rather sheds light on particular experiences and understandings in ways that may contribute to further research. The themes identified may resonate in differing circumstances having arisen from the more generalized practical realities and social conditions which warrant an ongoing analysis. Practical implications The analysis revealed an ongoing gap of support for the management and coordination of the often complex requirements of support for housing stability for service users. Various service agencies, providing houses, providing financial aid, providing health and social support need to “connect multiple levels of support” something identified as an all too often missing link in achieving housing stability. Recommendations include recognizing the necessity of multiple sectors working together with multiple sites and layers of support, in particular for those who experience addictions or mental health problems. More tailored support, follow up and recognition of the potential for instability is a particular practical implication of the study. Invigorating a coordinative, case management role, with a view to bridging and bringing together seemingly disparate sectors and service providers are relevant practical implications of this study. Originality/value The research is novel in approach, drawing on a parallel expert informant interview process, and findings are of relevance to practical activities in housing, social and health services and policy as well as for scholarly dialogue and discussion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.067 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".