Condiciones higiénicas

In order to inform the sampling strategy and provide context for further in-depth qualitative investigation, I first conducted a desk-based review of publicly available information relating to the employment and skills support offered by third sector homelessness organisations operating in Greater Manchester. Prior to conducting this review, I had intended to select only a small number of these organisations in which to conduct interviews. Through a comparative case study approach, I was then going to compare and contrast different ‘types’ of organisation along the lines they were selected (for example larger versus smaller organisations; those in receipt of varying levels of state funding). However, the desk-based review highlighted considerable diversity amongst the organisations and their activities, with no obvious basis on which to select one for investigation over any others. Given that the topic under consideration was unexplored, I did not want to unnecessarily restrict the research at the

outset in this way. Thus, the decision was taken to sample widely across the organisations operating within the Greater Manchester homelessness sector. As is common with qualitative research, the research design was flexible and evolved as these new findings came to light (Mason, 2002, 3).

A purposive, non-random sampling strategy was employed (Mason, 2002), inviting all staff and volunteers working in organisations identified in the desk- based review to participate in the study. In recognition of the likelihood of the presence of differing perspectives within each organisation and warnings that ‘we should not assume that senior managers are the most knowledgeable… different locations within the wider practitioner/managerial division of labour are likely to be characterised by distinctive perspectives and priorities’ (Smith and Elger, 2014, 120), an attempt was made to conduct multiple interviews within each organisation involved in the research, in order to capture the perspectives and experiences of multiple actors working in different roles and at different levels who had an influence on the development and/or delivery of employment and skills support in each setting. This allowed for triangulation both across and within organisations. It was not possible to sample multiple interviewees in all organisations. However, where multiple interviews were conducted this did not produce any contradictory results – respondents were merely able to elaborate in more depth about the different activities of the organisation they were involved in day-to-day.

Arranging access to interviewees was fairly straightforward. An initial email was sent out to all homelessness organisations offering some sort of employment- related support and operating in the Greater Manchester area (as identified through the desk-based review) detailing the nature of the study and asking for

participants. Follow up phone calls were made where emails were not answered. Once fieldwork was in progress, additional recruitment efforts were made in an attempt to include skills tutors and volunteers in the sample. Further targeted emails were sent, and attempts to recruit were made via social media and through an advertisement on the Greater Manchester Centre for Voluntary Organisation (GMCVO)’s website (however, these attempts proved unsuccessful). Where potential participants expressed a willingness to take part, interviews were then arranged at a time and location to suit them.

Whilst staff from some organisations declined the invitation to participate due to work pressures, a sufficient sample size was obtained, drawn from a large proportion of organisations operating within the Greater Manchester area. In total, 27 semi-structured interviews were conducted with practitioners working in 12 third sector organisations which in some way aimed to support homeless people to move into (or closer to) work (see Table 1 below for an overview). The sample includes 12 ‘strategic-level’ workers (i.e. those working at the highest levels of an organisation with responsibility over the strategic direction of the organisation’s activities, such as chief executives and directors), six ‘managerial-level’ workers (i.e. those in charge of managing other staff in the organisation) and nine ‘operational-level’ workers (i.e. those with front-line roles and responsibilities such as ‘support workers’ or ‘project workers’).

The sample includes organisations working in seven of the ten local authorities in Greater Manchester. Interviews were conducted between August and November 2015. All of the interviews were conducted face-to-face. All except two were conducted in a private room within the organisation in which participants worked (interviews were scheduled at the workplace for the

interviewee’s convenience) – one in a busy café, another in an open plan area of the organisation from which they were sampled. With respondents’ permission, all interviews were digitally recorded. The interview duration ranged from 25 minutes to 68 minutes, with an average running time of 49 minutes.

In order to ensure that participants fully understood the purpose of the study and what it would involve for them, all participants were provided with an information sheet which was discussed prior to conducting the interviews. Participants were encouraged to ask any questions they had about the research, although it can be noted that they all felt that they understood and were happy to take part. They were all asked to sign two copies of a consent form, one of which was kept by them, the other was kept in a locked filing cabinet at my place of work (see Appendix One for a copy of the consent form). To ensure interviewees were comfortable, it was emphasised from the outset that there were no right or wrong answers, and that they were under no pressure to take part in an interview or to answer any questions that they felt uncomfortable with. Organisation Staff members interviewed 1 1 2 1 3 4 4 1 5 1 6 4 7 3 8 1 9 3 10 1

11 2

12 5

Total 27

Table 1: Sample details