Housing for Assisted Living in Inner-City Winnipeg: A Social Analysis of Housing Options for People with Disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
People with disabilities who have complex health and housing needs have limited housing options. Younger adults with disabilities, for example, are inappropriately placed in personal care homes with seniors when the cost of supporting a person in her or his own home exceeds the cost of supporting her or him in an institutional setting. Over the last decade, a working group called the Housing for Assisted Living (HAL) Committee has been seeking a solution to this problem in Winnipeg. The HAL Committee recently identified a building in the Logan area of Winnipeg's Inner City to re- develop as an assisted living facility that will provide a range of on-site support services for people with disabilities within an integrated setting. \n \nThis research project gathered information about social issues in the area where the assisted living facility is being developed. The findings will help ensure the long-term success of the HAL project, which will be beneficial for people with disabilities in particular and Winnipeg as a whole. \n \nWorking from a cross-disability perspective, we utilized a participatory action research approach. Thirty in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with people with disabilities who have complex health and housing needs, people with disabilities currently living in the Inner City, and representatives of agencies that provide housing and other services in Winnipeg to people with disabilities. The data from these interviews was analyzed and the major themes were compiled into a preliminary report that was distributed to all study participants who reviewed the research findings and provided feedback.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".