Housing Issues and Realities Facing Grandparent Caregivers Who Are Renters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study determined the prevalence of grandparents raising grandchildren who are living in rental housing and explored the sociodemographic characteristics and challenges faced by such renters. DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were obtained from the Census 2000 Supplementary Survey, a nationally representative survey of 700,000 households with a response rate of 96.8%. Frequencies and bivariate analyses were focused on the 2,639 respondents who were grandparent caregiver renters. RESULTS: Of the 2,350,000 grandparent caregivers in the United States in 2000, 26% were renters, almost one third of whom were spending 30% or more of their income on rent. For the quarter of a million grandparent caregiver renters living below the poverty line, 60% were spending at least 30% of their household income on rent and 3 of 10 were living in overcrowded conditions. IMPLICATIONS: Grandparent caregivers who are renters represent a particularly vulnerable population. The need for further research, policy, and programs for this group is discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".