“Are New York State’s government administrative efforts in aiding the homeless more or less
effective than nonprofit organizations?”
The dependent variable in this research study is the effectiveness of initiatives aimed
at assisting individuals experiencing homelessness.
1) Specify, explain and justify the unit of analysis.
2) Explain and justify the population AND sample size most appropriate for this case study. Data gathering should continue to the point of saturation.
Are New York State’s Government Administrative Efforts in Aiding the Homeless More or Less Effective than Nonprofit Organizations?
Homelessness remains a persistent and complex issue in New York State, affecting tens of thousands of individuals and families annually. In response, both government agencies and nonprofit organizations have implemented various initiatives aimed at reducing homelessness and improving quality of life for those affected. The purpose of this study is to examine whether New York State’s governmental administrative efforts are more or less effective than those of nonprofit organizations. The dependent variable in this research is the effectiveness of initiatives aimed at assisting individuals experiencing homelessness. To carry out this comparison, it is essential to define the unit of analysis, determine the population, and justify the sample size based on data saturation principles.
1. Unit of Analysis: Explanation and Justification
The unit of analysis in this study is homeless service programs implemented by either New York State government agencies or nonprofit organizations. These programs may include transitional housing, emergency shelters, supportive housing, job readiness training, substance abuse rehabilitation, mental health counseling, and other wraparound services.
Justification:
Choosing service programs as the unit of analysis allows for an objective and structured comparison of how resources are allocated and managed, how services are delivered, and ultimately, how successful these initiatives are in moving people out of homelessness. By examining the design, reach, and outcomes of these programs, researchers can evaluate effectiveness across both public and nonprofit sectors without conflating individual experiences with systemic performance. This approach also permits the use of program-level metrics such as cost-efficiency, recidivism rates, service completion rates, and client satisfaction.
2. Population and Sample Size: Explanation and Justification
Population:
The population for this study includes all active homeless service programs in New York State that are operated by either government administrative bodies (e.g., New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance, city-level Human Resources Administration departments) or nonprofit organizations (e.g., Coalition for the Homeless, Bowery Mission, Breaking Ground). This includes both urban centers like New York City and smaller municipalities across the state.
Sample Size and Saturation:
Given the qualitative nature of this comparative case study, purposive sampling will be used to select a diverse range of programs representing both government and nonprofit sectors. The sampling criteria may include geographic location, type of services offered, size of the program (number of individuals served annually), and length of time the program has been in operation.
The sample size should continue until data saturation is achieved. This occurs when additional interviews, observations, or document analyses yield no new insights, themes, or patterns. In qualitative case study research, this often occurs between 12–20 cases, but the exact number can vary depending on the diversity and complexity of the programs studied.
Justification:
Saturation ensures comprehensive data collection and robust comparative insights without redundancy. It allows the researcher to make well-founded claims about the relative effectiveness of programs while maintaining methodological rigor. Collecting data until saturation also helps mitigate bias and enhances credibility by ensuring that all major variations and perspectives within each category (government and nonprofit) are captured.
Conclusion
In evaluating whether New York State’s governmental efforts to combat homelessness are more or less effective than those of nonprofit organizations, a clear and structured methodology is required. By selecting homeless service programs as the unit of analysis and employing purposive sampling until data saturation is reached, this study will enable a meaningful comparison of program outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and overall impact. The findings will have significant implications for policy makers, stakeholders, and advocacy groups aiming to optimize resource allocation and program design in the fight against homelessness.