Inside the Open Door: Considerations of Inclusivity Among Women Accessing an Open Door Housing Service in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The provision of shelter to individuals experiencing homelessness creates a 24/7 community of co-living in which the common denominator uniting members is lack of housing. Women of all ethnic, racial, religious, cultural backgrounds, as well as members of 2SLGBTQ+ communities, find themselves co-living in the shared and often challenging transitional space. As services have shifted to “open the door” to provide more inclusive access to services, little attention has been paid to the experiences of diverse communities within co-living spaces. Questioning the assumption that shared loss inherently binds a community of homelessness service users to a common identity, this research asks: what discourses of heterogeneity of service users emerge in descriptions from women experiencing homelessness of their trajectories through transitional housing services to stable housing? Interviews were conducted with 33 service users in a women’s transitional housing service between 2016-2018 in Montreal, Canada. Data collected over two waves of semi-structured interviews focused on service usage, homelessness histories, transitional programs experiences, and well-being, featuring 33 and 12 interviews, respectively. Qualitative thematic analysis revealed several instances of participants reflecting on the challenges and benefits of engaging with the heterogeneity of individuals in the space: reflections centered on the unsuitability of services, mental health and substance use, gender identity, as well as a sense of solidarity. In addition to an unexplored complexity associated with inclusive transitional housing user experiences, this analysis underlines a desperate need for refined perspectives on inclusive service policies.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.036 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".