‘You Can Really See the Pain in Their Eyes’: Stressors and Supports Affecting the Well-being of Homelessness Services Staff in Ireland During COVID-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite their crucial roles, the well-being narratives of those working in homelessness services have frequently been overlooked in research and policy. This paper addresses that gap, presenting qualitative evidence from interviews with homelessness service workers in Cork, Ireland, during 2021 and 2022. We explore the multidimensional, layered character of service staff members’ well-being narratives, showing they are intimately connected to relationships with their own families, commitment to service users, fears about COVID-19, and their motivation to the social mission of their work: to support vulnerable people with multiple, interlinking needs. Our data reveals that stressors encountered in pre-COVID times, relating to burnout, emotional labour, inter-agency working, and career progression, were exacerbated due to government restrictions and new challenges encountered by service users. We focus on the period covering pandemic-related lockdowns in 2020 and 2021, and the immediate aftermath, to consider how those delivering crucial services coped, the informal and formal support they accessed, and the value of this support in their lives. Significantly, our analysis reflects upon the longer-term implications of these findings, contextualised against the backdrop of the housing crisis in Ireland, changing demographics of persons accessing homelessness services, and increased systemic and social pressures.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".