Nurturing Neighbourhoods: Parent Outreach Worker Program, Guelph, Ontario. Evaluation Report: November 2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The "Parent Outreach Worker Program" (POW program) aims to identify, reach out to, and assist families with children who may be isolated or otherwise struggling by providing them with increased access to services and support. The POW program is currently being piloted in two priority neighbourhoods of Guelph, Ontario. The POW program is part of a cross-sectoral, community-based "Nurturing Neighbourhoods" initiative that is grounded in the philosophies and principles related to the social determinants of health, health equity, and early help in child welfare. This report details the findings of an evaluation that was conducted in 2013-2014 to determine whether the POW program is being delivered as planned and the extent to which it is achieving its intended outcomes. Evidence used for the evaluation include program implementation data inputted by the Parent Outreach Workers (POWs) and a series of interviews and focus groups conducted with program stakeholders including the POWs, parents who use the POW program, and a variety of associated service providers and community resource people. This early evaluation evidence indicates clearly that the POW program is generating very significant outcomes for priority families as direct supports and as intermediaries between those families and the community resources they need. The POWs occupy an important space in marginalized communities, the evaluation evidence shows, between formal services, informal community supports, and the families most in need of support. Also emerging from the evaluation data are some key "Impact Pathways" through which the POW program is generating results. These Impact Pathways reflect many of the strategies found to be effective in research literature on other outreach programs, and as such may serve as a best practices framework for the establishment of similar programs in other neighbourhoods.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.001 |
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".