Constant crisis management: service provider perspectives on adapting homeless resources for people who use drugs and alcohol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Homeless service providers in Montreal, Canada face increasingly challenging circumstances in delivering services to people who use drugs and alcohol experiencing homelessness. While this group continues to be overrepresented in homeless counts and conditions to their sustainable exit to homelessness continue to be difficult, this research asks, 1) What are the limitations of the current service provision in Montreal for addressing the needs of homeless substance users? How can services be adapted?; and 2) Which larger societal conditions create barriers for homeless individuals who use drugs and alcohol to access services? Drawing on 10 semi-structured interviews with staff of homeless service providers, this research uses a trauma-informed spaces of care framework to examine the relationship between people, place, and care, with the added variable of trauma. Findings revealed a need for continual harm reduction supports; that the absence of adequate support teams and management led to poor psychosocial accompaniment, lending itself to a state of constant crisis management; that homeless resources were traumatogenic spaces (that is, can cause trauma) for both service users and service providers; and finally, that larger system-level changes need to be addressed to improve the conditions of people experiencing homelessness who use drugs and alcohol. Cumulatively these findings underline the dire and traumatogenic conditions of homeless services in the locus of a housing affordability crisis, opioid crisis, failing public health system, and under an environment of increased stigma towards people who use drugs and alcohol.
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 | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| 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".