Ufdcimages.uflib.ufl.edu



How the Perceptions that Downtown Gainesville Businesses have Toward the Homeless Community can Result in the Implementation of Adverse Social PolicyCleopatre M. Thelus and Dr. Lynn H. LevertyUniversity of FloridaAbstractThis study attempts to find how negative perceptions about the homeless can result in adverse social policy and evaluates the perceptions that downtown Gainesville, Florida employers and employees have toward the homeless community. For the purposes of this study, adverse social policy refers to the enforcement of policy that is harmful to the well-being of an individual. “Perceptions” include implicit discriminatory and stereotypical attitudes. Information about this topic was gained from newspaper articles, research and analysis on adverse social policy that has been implemented in relation to the homeless, a literature review, and video resources about homeless advocacy in Gainesville. Data for this study was gathered by a voluntary self-report survey. Participants were evaluated with the Attitudes Toward Homeless Questionnaire (ATHQ), a scale that is highly valid and reliable. Participants did not receive compensation of any kind and the survey was taken voluntarily. Drawing from previous studies about perception and treatment of out-groups, downtown Gainesville employers and employees are expected to score highly on the ATHQ scale. Implications of this research include helping the city of Gainesville to understand business concerns to develop better policies toward care of the homeless. Recommendations for methods in further research on implicit attitudes toward the homeless focus on, experimental methods, and naturalistic observation. Keywords: Homelessness, Policy, Political Psychology, Implicit Attitudes, Downtown Gainesville, Perceptions, Stereotype, DiscriminationPerceptions about the Homeless and Adverse Social PolicyNegative perception toward a group has the potential to result in adverse treatment toward the group that is negatively perceived (Marcus, G. E., 2005, p. 949). Negative treatment ranges from discrimination to unequal treatment and even oppression. If negative attitudes towards certain groups were completely overt, they would be more readily addressed, lessening the probability of harmful treatment toward others, however, these attitudes are often implicit, causing some individuals to apply negative treatment to certain groups with reasoning that is flawed, unethical, discriminatory, and stereotypical.For example, a study conducted by Habibian, Elizondo, and Mulligan, 2010, evaluated the attitudes of dental students toward homeless patients and found that after dental students from the Herman Ostrow School of Dentistry at the University of Southern California spent seven days (one day per week), treating homeless patients, their overall attitudes towards treating homeless patients improved. Although the dental students’ attitudes towards homeless patients were positive in their pre-test, the improvement in their post-test suggests that there may have been stereotypes about the homeless that were eradicated after spending time with these patients. These stereotypes or attitudes that the dental students may have had toward the homeless may have been implicit, and possibly affected the way that they approached treating the homeless before they began spending time with them.The idea of “the undeserving poor” can also be the driving force behind negative treatment toward certain groups. Everatt 2008, defines “undeserving poor” as, “relying on “handouts” and “dependent” on the state, [and] lacking the moral fiber to enjoy the benefits of economic growth (Everatt, D., 2008, p. 2).” When individuals in society are thought to be undeserving [of help,] society generally is less likely to help these individuals. This is unfortunate because believing that someone is undeserving is subjective and may be a specious stereotype, which can hinder advocacy and improvement for certain groups and produce and promote adverse treatment toward those groups. The stereotypes that tend to follow the homeless population (lazy, violent, and uneducated) parallel characteristics that many people would associate with someone who is undeserving.The psychological concept of “Not in my backyard or “NIMBY” can also help to explain how attitudes toward a group or issue can produce inappropriate treatment. “NIMBY” refers to an oppositional attitude from local residents against some risk generating facility that they have been chosen to host either by government or industry. The attitude is claimed to be characteristic of someone who is positive to a facility but who wants someone else to be its host. Since siting cannot be provided if everyone has this attitude, society ends up in a worse situation (Hermansson, H., 2007, p. 23).” This belief that responsibility should not fall onto their shoulders is an interesting way to help understand how perception can affect decision-making and treatment, especially at the community level. A film titled “Civil Indigent (2010)” followed the leading advocate for feeding the homeless in Gainesville, Florida, and his journey of trying to eradicate a meal limit policy placed on one of Gainesville’s soup kitchens. The journey followed in this film also highlights how perception plays a role in treatment, with policy being viewed as treatment. Some of the aforementioned stereotypes about the homeless were voiced explicitly by individuals who own and are affiliated with the businesses that are being surveyed for this research project in the film. A Gainesville resident who supports the meal limit expresses in the “Civil Indigent” film that, “we are feeding criminals.” This expression is an example that supports the idea of the “undeserving poor” and the effects that believing that an individual or group is undeserving of help can have on the treatment that is given to that group.Powers-Costello and Swick 2008, explored teachers’ perceptions of homeless children and families from a social justice perspective through an extensive literature review and found that negative perceptions about their homeless students can impede teacher development of nurturing and supportive perspectives of their students (Powers-Costello and Swick, 2008, p. 241). As relates to this concept, Swick (2000) found that, “perhaps the single most powerful barrier that homeless children and families face is that of teachers who hold negative attitudes toward them (Powers-Costello and Swick, 2008, p. 243).” These articles further highlight how negative perception toward groups, in these cases, the homeless, can also result in adverse treatment toward that group and in some cases hinder the group from advancement. With that being said, the relevance of investigating the issue of implicit attitudes toward the homeless and adverse social policy becomes more apparent. Implicit attitudes toward the homeless and adverse social policy is relevant to the findings of previous research, which has evaluated implicit attitudes and what may predict them, as well as implicit attitudes toward certain out-groups such as the homeless and the homosexual community, with some evaluating the reactions that these implicit attitudes produce towards out-groups. However, there has not been research conducted on the possible correlation between negative perceptions about the homeless out-group and the implementation of adverse social policy against the homeless. This study investigates a unique policy that has been placed onto the St. Francis House in downtown Gainesville, FL, limiting the shelter to serving 130 meals a day. The homelessness issue in Gainesville, FL is optimal to examine because of the history that Gainesville Florida has with its homeless. This research focuses mainly on a meal limit placed on St. Francis House, Gainesville’s primary soup kitchen, and seeks to understand the attitudes that the business owners, managers, and employees have toward the homeless because these businesses surround St. Francis House. Understanding the attitudes of the individuals associated with these businesses is important, as many of them have supported and influenced the enforcement of the St. Francis House meal limit. Gainesville continues to be an interesting area to evaluate this research question because the city of Gainesville was ranked number five out of ten, for cities who are meanest toward their homeless in the nation, through a National Coalition for the Homeless report in 2009 (Martin 2009 & Honeycutt 2011). This rank is likely to have come about because of several incidents between the city of Gainesville and their homeless, which include, the shutting down of tent-city, a self-made residential area for homeless in the woods in southeast Gainesville, in June 2009, and the 130 meal limit policy on St. Francis House, which began to be enforced in March 2009. Gainesville’s tent-city is where homeless have created a community to live in the woods because they have no place else to go. In June 2009 police gave tent-city residents a “deadline to get out or be charged with trespassing (Voyles 2009).” In March 2009, the city of Gainesville began to enforce an eighteen-year-old meal limit ordinance. The ordinance is a part of Gainesville’s city code and limits any place of food distribution that is not a religious assembly or the Salvation Army to serving up to 130 meals within a twenty-four hour period (Honeycutt 2011). St. Francis House, the largest food distributor in regards to soup kitchens in Gainesville, is the only soup kitchen affected by the meal limit (Honeycutt 2011). Several townspeople and organizations in Gainesville were highly opposed to the meal-limit and began to form advocacy organizations soon after the meal limit began to be enforced. Among those who opposed the meal limit were an organization titled Coalition to End the Meal Limit NOW, which grew remarkably in August 2011 having eighteen member organizations and over seven hundred local residents and nearly fifteen thousand online supporters who signed their petition (Honeycutt 2011). A local activist named Pat Fitzpatrick also opposed the meal limit and collaborated with University of Florida students to create a documentary titled “Civil Indigent,” which follows Fitzpatrick on his journey of protest against the meal limit and advocacy for the homeless. Others picketed Gainesville’s city hall and insisted that the meal limit be lifted, a limit that causes “between eighty and one hundred soup kitchen patrons to be turned away daily (Smith 2011).” Members on Gainesville’s city commission who supported the meal limit felt that keeping the meal limit in place would lessen the concentration of soup kitchen patrons in downtown Gainesville and help to spread the concentration of soup kitchen patrons out to other Gainesville soup kitchens (Honeycutt 2011). Other reasoning for the support of the meal limit is the belief that it is the best way to keep the downtown community safe until an alternative could be found. However, due to continuing and increased protesting against the meal limit, as of November 2011, the city code ordinance has changed from serving 130 meals a day to serving unlimited meals within a three-hour window (Smith 2011). The three-hour window is a temporary solution, which Kent Vann, director of the St. Francis House; hopes will be removed very soon in addition to all other restrictions on food distribution at the St. Francis House (Rutland 2011). The inability of the city of Gainesville to come to a consistent, concrete solution for homelessness is surprising because the city has comprised an extensive, detailed ten-year plan titled GRACE (Gainesville Region/Alachua County Empowerment) to end homelessness (The plan can be accessed here: files/654_file_Gainesville_Alachua_Co_FL.pdf). GRACE intends to end homelessness by providing an additional 350 beds for homeless persons, expanding the local inventory of, and access to, affordable housing; increasing access to services through a first entry/ one stop center, increasing access to free medical care, providing supportive services (such as life skills, budgeting, job training, mentoring, etc.), increasing faith-based initiatives, increasing homelessness awareness among public safety providers and the community, reducing the number of homeless arrests, implementing an effective discharge planning system, homeless prevention through education, job training, and supportive services. Although the GRACE program was proposed in December 2005, there has not been much of a step forward. Homelessness continues to be a major unresolved issue in Gainesville, and at a time when Gainesville could have been pushing extremely hard to get the proposals in the GRACE plan on their way, a meal-limit on Gainesville’s primary soup kitchen was being enforced.The question that this study explores is whether the owners, managers, and employees of the businesses surrounding the St. Francis House will have significant negative perceptions toward the homeless. Results from this study may help to explain reasons behind why many of the businesses have been supporting the city of Gainesville’s seemingly arbitrary enforcement of a meal limit ordinance on the soup kitchen. Several of the downtown businesses near the St. Francis House support the meal limit and have influenced the decisions that the Gainesville, Florida city commission made about enforcing the meal limit. Although the meal limit ordinance has been in place for many years, the city of Gainesville did not begin to enforce the meal limit until 2009, a time period that Gainesville’s homeless population was on its way to an increase of about thirty-eight percent as of February 2011 (Cockrell, 2011). Gaining data on perceptions that downtown Gainesville businesses have toward the homeless and how it can result in adverse social policy can help the city of Gainesville to develop better policy toward care of the homeless through better understanding of the homeless community and reflection of what may be hindering the progress in dealing with homeless issues.MethodProcedure and MaterialsThe sample included thirty-eight downtown Gainesville business owners, managers and employees located in close proximity of the St. Francis House soup kitchen. Upon receipt of consent, participants were asked to take a self-report voluntary questionnaire and answer items for a scale that measures attitudes toward homeless. Participants did not receive compensation to assist with this research, and were informed that their identity would be kept confidential.The Attitudes Toward Homeless Questionnaire (ATHQ), a highly reliable and valid scale was used to assess attitudes toward the homeless in downtown Gainesville. The ATHQ is a validated twenty-item questionnaire and has been tested for validity and reliability (Habibian, Elizondo, and Mulligan, 2010, p. 1192). When the ATHQ was used in the medical education setting, it received a Pearson’s test-retest reliability correlation coefficient of 0.8 and 0.74 (Habibian, Elizondo, and Mulligan, 2010, p. 1192). For the purposes of this study, the ATHQ scale was modified from a twenty item survey into a fourteen item survey, because items such as “I entered dentistry because I was good at science,” and “you only need to learn about homelessness if you want to be a general dentist” did not fit our research needs, thus questions such as these were removed from the original ATHQ found in the 2010 Elizondo study in order to better evaluate downtown Gainesville business employers and employees. In this study, the ATHQ is a 14-item scale that is on a 5-point likert-scale, ranging from 1(strongly agree) to 5(strongly disagree). The scale includes items such as “Nearly all homeless people are drug addicts.” Data obtained from participants were analyzed using descriptive statistics with the SPSS program version 20 and this modified scale returned a .719 Cronbach’s alpha.For the purposes of this study, Florida’s definition of homelessness was followed. Homelessness in Florida is defined as follows: an individual who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence or an individual who has a primary nighttime residence that is: 1. A supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designed to provide temporary living accommodations, including welfare hotels, congregate shelters, and transitional housing for the mentally ill; 2. An institution that provides a temporary residence for individuals intended to be institutionalized; or 3. A public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings. The term does not refer to any individual imprisoned or otherwise detained pursuant to state or federal law. (Section 420.621, Florida Statutes) (2005 April 25).” The meal-limit policy significantly affects persons living in Gainesville, FL who fall under this definition of homelessness. ResultsFindings obtained from this study show that the majority of those who are owners, managers, or associates of businesses in downtown Gainesville strongly agree or agree with the stereotypes on the Attitudes Toward Homeless Questionnaire with a mean of about (20%) out of (100%). However, significantly more participants strongly disagreed or disagreed than strongly agreed or agreed with items on the questionnaire that focused mainly on external factors that effect homelessness. For example, on item one on the ATHQ scale, about (45%) of the participants either strongly disagreed or disagreed that, “homeless people do not choose to be homeless,” while about (11%) of participants strongly agreed or agreed with this item. Disagreeing with this item implies that homelessness is an event that is in control of the individual being affected by homelessness. This misconception is unfortunate because people fall into homelessness for various reasons, and oftentimes for reasons that are beyond the individual’s control. In addition, (50%) of participants strongly disagreed or disagreed with item fourteen, which states, “the state should spend more money on the care of the homeless,” while nearly (16%) of participants strongly agreed or agreed with this item, indicating that most of the participants do not have the desire to allocate money to improving the condition of the homeless community. This information can also be used to help to inform why the GRACE project, which was proposed seven years ago has yet to be under way. Participants strongly agreed or agreed with item twelve on the questionnaire, which reads, “alcoholism is a personal weakness,” at about (42%), while about (32%) of participants strongly disagreed or disagreed with this statement. Again, there seems to be a lack of desire among the majority of participants to view the issue of homelessness as a community issue, which speaks to Gainesville’s lack of progression in resolving homeless issues that require community effort to resolve. All of these items are out of (100%). DiscussionThe owners, managers, and employees do not necessarily agree with general stereotypes about the homeless, however, judging from the results in the study, they may not have an understanding about the true need of external aid for the homeless population and the type of aid the homeless community requires. For example, families tend to fall into homelessness because of lack of affordable housing, poverty, and unemployment, while homeless singles tend to fall into homelessness because of substance abuse, lack of affordable housing, and mental illness (Facts and Figures: The Homeless 2009). Despite data about why homelessness truly occurs, with most of the reasons for homelessness being external and requiring external aid from the community, many individuals tend to believe that homelessness is a self-inflicted state. For example, over fifty percent of respondents from this study disagreed that “homeless people do not choose to be homeless.” Such misconceptions causes people to mistakenly place the homeless in the undeserving poor group (Everatt, D., 2008, p. 2), and make serious decisions that are poorly informed, when the majority of reasons for falling into homelessness are external, and can be solved with external help, such as lack of affordable housing. A large percentage of participants disagreed that the state should spend more money on the care of the homeless, which may also serve as a reflection as to why some of these businesses have supported the meal limit placed on the soup kitchen in downtown Gainesville. In addition, although the participants may not have an understanding about the true degree to which the homeless in Gainesville need assistance, these participants are aware of the need for external aid to some degree, because a high percentage of participants agree that homelessness is a problem in our society. Because of these results, the most pressing issue may be that the participants do not believe that the responsibility of helping the homeless out of their situation, financial or otherwise, should fall on them, an issue that resonates with the psychological concept of “Not In My Backyard.” NIMBY is a very useful way to help explain why the participants generally do not agree with many of the stereotypes found on the survey, but disagree with the survey items that would require society to be more involved with helping the homeless to receive aid.As mentioned earlier, the idea of the “undeserving poor (Everatt, D., 2008, p. 2)” may also serve as an explanation as to why the majority of participants disagreed with the statements on the survey that read, “homeless people do not choose to be homeless,” “the state should spend more money on providing housing,” and “the state should spend more money on the care of the homeless.” For one reason or another some of these participants believe that this group does not deserve to receive financial assistance from the State as an effort to help improve their condition. The best item on the survey that supports how the participants may feel that the homeless are “undeserving” of help is the one that states that the “homeless do not choose to be homeless.” Over half of the participants disagreed at some degree with this statement, which can suggest that the majority of participants believe that the homeless had a choice in becoming homeless. If participants believe that the homeless chose their current situation, they may also believe that they should not receive aid or do not deserve aid because they played a very personal role in reaching their homelessness.The majority of participants chose the neutral “neither agree or disagree” item on the questionnaire. Respondents who gravitate to the neutral option may “satisfice,” choosing the first acceptable option instead of taking time to think about which option best describes them (Krosnick, J. A., 1999, p. 547). Other research has found that “satisficing” is more prevalent among respondents who are less motivated, or for questions that require more cognitive effort (Shoemaker, Eichholz and Skewes, 2002, p. 195-196). (Madden and Klopfer, 1978, p. 260, 261, 262) suggested that issues regarded as less important are frequently answered more neutrally. With this in mind, we can better understand why the issue of homelessness remains unresolved in Gainesville, especially when the GRACE project has been developed and proposed about seven years ago and with no implementation in sight. When respondents who have the ability to induce or hinder societal movements for the homeless do not believe that homeless issues are important; the result can be the enforcement of a 130 meal-limit on the city’s primary soup kitchen and projects such as Gainesville Region/Alachua County Empowerment (GRACE) never begin. ConclusionImplications. The data obtained from this study about the perceptions of downtown Gainesville businesses toward the homeless and interpretations about how their perceptions have the potential to result in adverse social policy can help the city of Gainesville, and other Florida cities, such as St. Petersburg, FL, Orlando, FL, and Bradenton, FL, which also made it onto the “Meanest cities toward their homeless (Martin 2009)” list, to develop better policies toward care of the homeless. Other cities around the country can also benefit from this study to develop better policy toward care of their homeless and move forward in resolving issues such as these. The extensive Gainesville Region/Alachua County Empowerment project can benefit from these research findings to better understand why this project, which was scheduled to begin seven years ago, has yet to commence, and how the city can induce a movement for the many goals they have proposed to come into fruition. The predictions made about the majority of downtown Gainesville business owners, managers, and employees, holding negative perceptions and stereotypes toward the homeless were not entirely supported, a reflection of how the downtown Gainesville area has a large concentration of homeless, which causes the sample of this study, downtown Gainesville businesses, to come into frequent contact with the homeless. Just as in the Habibian, Elizondo, and Mulligan, 2010 study, where the participant’s views on the homeless improved after spending seven days with them, this Gainesville sample of participants generally did not hold negative, stereotypes, perceptions, or attitudes toward the homeless because of their frequent contact with the homeless. On the other hand, the survey data shows that the majority of participants do not believe that aid for the homeless is a priority. These findings can be implicated toward other national policies that deal with homelessness in their respective states, to compare how attitudes such as the disbelief that aid for the homeless is a priority has an effect on the homeless situation in their communities.Understanding why policies and projects that are influenced and supported by the community and effect the community, whether positive or negative are being enforced, such as the 130 meal limit policy on the St. Francis House, or are not being enforced such as the Gainesville Region/Alachua County Empowerment (GRACE) project, can help policy-makers and those who serve on city commissions to make better informed and more successful decisions. Other benefits of understanding how to make policies more effective are the positive dominoe-effects that follow. For example, if the GRACE project does what it was created to do: end homelessness in Gainesville, nearby residents of the St. Francis House, and businesses surrounding the St. Francis House would not have concerns regarding the meal limit or the homeless that congregate around St. Francis House while waiting on a meal because homelessness would not be as pressing of an issue. There are many organizations in Gainesville/Alachua county who are concerned with ending or improving the homeless situation in Gainesville, however, there has not been much of a move forward in regards to resolving Gainesville’s homeless issues. The Alachua County Coalition for the Homeless and Hungry has twenty-six organizations listed on their website who provide services for the homeless and/or advocate for the homeless. The lack of progression toward resolving homeless issues seems disproportionate when the amount of interest and advocacy for the homeless in the Gainesville/ Alachua county area is considered. Improved knowledge about the community’s understanding and motivation about the homeless issues around them is essential in a move forward because it will help policy-makers to motivate and educated the unmotivated. Unfortunately over fifty-percent of the participants who took part in this survey, individuals who are in the midst of the majority of the homeless population and homeless issues in Gainesville, do not understand that the majority of the homeless do not choose to be homeless. These participants seem to be misinformed about the true need that homeless issues require through community effort and otherwise. This research has uncovered how perception, misinformation, lack of motivation, education and concern, can serve as a barrier and roadblock to resolving homeless issues, and has stimulated ideas that can help communities and cities move closer to solutions for homeless issues.Strengths, Limitations, and Future Research. The limitation of this study is that the instrument used to evaluate participants is a self-report survey. Because self-report methods are more prone to error variance than experimental methods and naturalistic observation, I suggest that experimental methods and naturalistic observation be used in future studies that evaluate this type of research question. Self-report methods are also subject to several biases, including the social desirability bias (replying on a survey in a manner that will be viewed favorably by others). Other biases that may have skewed the data that participants self-reported is the “tendency to nay-say or acquiesce” while reporting. “Nay-sayers” insincerely report heavily on the “disagree” and “strongly disagree” choices of a survey, while those who tend to “acquiesce” insincerely report heavily on the “agree” and “strongly agree” choices of a survey (Cottrell 2010).In addition, certain characteristics of those who agreed to participate in the study may have skewed the research data. Research volunteers tend to be better educated, have higher social class status, have higher IQ scores, a higher need for social approval, and are more sociable (Cottrell 2010). The people who chose not to participate in the survey may not have the types of characteristics of the majority of people who chose to participate in the survey, and thus may have caused the data to be less representative of the downtown Gainesville business population and skewed. Due to these biases that are found in self-reported data, future research should investigate this question and those similar to it with experimental methods and naturalistic observation. Based on the results obtained from this study, it would also be important to evaluate the (degree of) desire and responsibility others feel about helping underserved groups such as the homeless to receive the aid that they need. ReferencesAnnual Report on Homeless Conditions. In Florida Department of Children and Families (Part II: The Demographics of the Homeless) Retrieved from: HYPERLINK "" Indigent. Dir. Nicholas Corrao, David Hafter, Peter Salomone. Perf. Francis “Pat” Fitzpatrick. Civil Indigent, 2010. DVD.Cockrell, Al. St Francis House 130 Meal Limit Could be set for Revision. Gainesville News. Gainesville City Commission. 17 February 2011. Citizen Comment.Cottrell, C. (2010). Methods and Measurement [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from: , C. (2010). Descriptive Research [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from: , C.E, Erwin, D.T. (2005, August) Neutral or Unsure: Is there a difference? Poster presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.Everatt, D. (2008). The undeserving poor: Poverty, provision, and politics in the poorest nodes of South Africa. Paper prepared for the 11th Conference of Africanists, Institute for African Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow. Facts and Figures: The Homeless. (2009, June, 6). NOW on PBS. Retrieved from , M., Elizondo, L., & Mulligan R. (2010). Dental students’ attitudes toward homeless people while providing oral health care. Journal of Dental Education 74(11), 1190-1196.Hermansson, H. (2007). The ethics of NIMBY conflicts. Ethic Theory Moral Practice (10), 23-34. doi:10.1007/s10677-006-9038-2Honeycutt, D. (2011, August, 19). Soup Kitchen Limits End in Gainesville. Bring America Home Blog. Retrieved from: , J. A. (1999). Survey Research. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 537-567. Madden, T. M., & Klopfer, F. J. (1978). The “Cannot Decide” option in Thurstone-type attitude scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 38 (2), 259-264. Marcus, G. E., Sullivan, J. L., Theiss-Morse, E., & Stevens, D. (2005). The Emotional Foundation of Political Cognition: The Impact of Extrinsic Anxiety on the Formation of Political Tolerance Judgments. Political Psychology, 26(6), 949-963. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00452.xMartin, J. (2009, October 27). Fifth meanest city, Gainesville, FL. National . Retrieved from , E., & Swick, K. (2008). Exploring the Dynamics of Teacher Perceptions of Homeless Children and Families during the Early Years. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36(3), 241-245. doi:10.1007/s10643-008-0249-0Rutland, M. (2011, February, 16). St. Francis house seeks to reword meal limit rule. The Independent Florida Alligator. Retrieved from , P. J., Eichholz, M., Skewers, E. A. (2002). Item nonresponse: Distinguishing between don’t know and refuse. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 14, 193-201.Smith, C. (2011, October, 6). Lifting of city’s meal-limit gets final OK. The Gainesville Sun. Retrieved from , C. (2011, November, 1). Meal-limit officially lifted for St. Francis house. The Gainesville Sun. Retrieved from Swick, K. (2000). Building effective awareness program for homeless students among staff, peers, and community members. In J. Stronge & E. Reed-Victor, (Eds.), Educating homeless students: promising practices (pp. 165–181). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.Voyles K. (2009 June 19). Tent city homeless in limbo. The Gainesville Sun. Retrieved from: AppendixPlease circle the number that most closely represents your views on the questionnaire.There are no right and wrong answers to these questions. You do not need to spend long on each statement-often your first response is the most accurate.STATUS OF EMPLOYMENT AT THIS ESTABLISHMENT: OwnerManagerAssociate1 = strongly agree2 = agree3 = neither agree nor disagree4 = disagree5 = strongly disagree1. Homeless people do not choose to be homeless 1 2 3 4 52. Nearly all homeless people are drug addicts 1 23 4 53. Homeless people are victims 1 2 3 4 54. Homeless people are rude 1 2 3 4 55. Homeless people are aggressive 1 2 3 4 56. Homelessness is a major problem in our society 1 2 3 4 57. Homelessness is a self inflicted state 1 2 3 4 58. Homelessness is not a health issue 1 2 3 4 59. People make themselves homeless to get a better house 1 2 3 4 510. No one in this country has to `sleep rough' 1 2 3 4 511. The State should spend more money on providing housing 1 2 3 4 512. Alcoholism is a personal weakness 1 2 3 4 513. Homelessness is not a significant problem in the US 1 2 3 4 514. The State should spend more money on the care of the homeless 1 2 3 4 5 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download