A Framework for Capacity and Operations Planning in Services Organizations Employing Workers with Intellectual Disabilities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents an integrated framework for capacity and operations planning in Spanish sheltered employment centers (SECs). Employment provides socio-economic opportunities for people with disability. Well functioning SECs that provide opportunities for people with and without disability to work alongside each other are an important component of Spain’s current labor market. To be economically sustainable, SECs need to satisfy their clients expectations in terms of price, flexibility and performance, whilst taking into account and strengthening the diverse skills and abilities of their workforce like specific learning and forgetting processes. The SEC studied herein, a non-for-profit organization whose mission is to create employment for people with disabilities its workforce is deployed directly on clients’ premises. Efficient management across this multi-site environment, whilst supporting the diverse employment needs of its staff, is of paramount importance. This paper contributes an integrated framework to support SEC capacity and operations planning, which prioritizes the explicit training needs of workers with disability at all levels (strategic, tactical, and operational) as a lever for achieving the organization’s goals.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 it