“We actually came to a point where we had no staff”: Perspectives of Senior Leadership in Canadian Homelessness Service Providers During COVID-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadian homeless service providers (HSPs) serve individuals with complex needs. COVID-19 has introduced additional challenges to service provision leading to increased pressure on the organizations and the staff they employ. Little is known about how Canadian HSPs were affected by the global pandemic. The current research sought to address this knowledge gap by using qualitative research methodology to assess leaders’ perception of staff well-being and identify specific organizational challenges associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. 42 semi-structured interviews were conducted with senior leadership in Canadian HSPs, including Program Directors, Executive Directors, CEOs, key department managers and program coordinators. Although unanticipated, themes relating to positive outcomes and growth were also identified. Qualitative analysis revealed four overarching themes within the data: Organizational Challenges, Individual Challenges, Organizational Opportunities and Individual Opportunities. Implications of this study include informing pandemic preparedness in the homelessness sector and reducing occupational risks for staff.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".