Homeless, the world of work and the specialized reference centers for population in street situation (centro pop): perspectives on actions for productive inclusion¹

Abstract

Introduction

Unemployment is one of the factors that contribute to homelessness and the actions for productive inclusion is recommended as strategic to increase autonomy, social participation and overcoming this situation.

Objective

To identify productive inclusion actions carried out by Centros Pop (Centers of Specialized Reference for Population in Street Situation) of the state of São Paulo and the view of the coordinators of this equipment about this dimension of the work with the homeless people.

Method

This is qualitative research, carried out through the application of a protocol of personal and professional identification and identification of equipment and a semi-structured questionnaire with coordinators of 13 Centros Pop in the state of São Paulo. The data were analyzed descriptively and for the open questions, the thematic analysis was used.

Results

The productive inclusion was associated with the overcoming of the street situation to access to the labor market and income and to social belonging. The role of the Centro Pop in the provision of information, referrals, and intersectoral articulation, especially for professional qualification and training, as well as challenges such as prejudice, low qualification and schooling, and the use of psychoactive substances were highlighted.

Conclusion

Collective and intersectoral actions are needed that recognize access to work as a right, in line with the desires, needs, and singularities of street people, where productive inclusion, through the articulation between different policies and services, can contribute to the vulnerability reduction and creation of autonomy. In this scenario, Centros Pop can play an important role

Keywords:
Homeless Persons; Work; Social Work

Resumo

Introdução

O desemprego figura entre os fatores que contribuem para a situação de rua e as ações para inclusão produtiva são preconizadas como estratégicas para ampliação da autonomia, participação social e superação dessa situação.

Objetivo

Identificar ações de inclusão produtiva realizadas por Centros Pop (Centros de Referência Especializado para População em Situação de Rua) do estado de São Paulo e a visão dos coordenadores desses equipamentos acerca dessa dimensão do trabalho com a população em situação de rua.

Método

Trata-se de pesquisa qualitativa, realizada por meio de aplicação de protocolo de identificação pessoal e profissional, identificação dos equipamentos e de um questionário semiestruturado com coordenadores de 13 Centros Pop do estado de São Paulo. Os dados foram analisados descritivamente e para as questões abertas utilizamos Análise Temática.

Resultados

A inclusão produtiva foi associada à superação da situação de rua ao acesso ao mercado de trabalho, à renda e ao pertencimento social. Destacou-se a função dos Centros Pop na oferta de informações, encaminhamentos e na articulação intersetorial que ocorre, especialmente, para capacitação/qualificação profissional, além de desafios, como preconceito, baixa qualificação e escolaridade e o uso de substâncias psicoativas.

Conclusão

São necessárias ações coletivas e intersetoriais que reconheçam o acesso ao trabalho como direito, alinhado aos desejos, necessidades e singularidades das pessoas em situação de rua, na qual a inclusão produtiva, por meio da articulação entre diferentes políticas e serviços, possa contribuir para a diminuição da vulnerabilidade e criação de autonomia. Nesse cenário, os Centros Pop podem assumir importante papel.

Palavras-chave:
Pessoas em Situação de Rua; Trabalho; Serviço Social

1 Introduction

Although the existence of people living on the streets has a long and varied history in almost everyone, its fundamental milestone lies in the revival of cities; in the beginning of capitalism (SNOW; ANDERSON, 1998; BURSZTYN, 2003; SILVA, 2009) and even if there are multiple determinations related to this phenomenon, its resurgence would be related to the crisis/restructuring of the capitalist mode of production from the 1970s (ROSA, 2005; SILVA, 2009), in the consolidation of globalization and the transformations in the productive processes, materializing in structural unemployment, the increasing precariousness of jobs and the loss of social rights linked to it (ANTUNES, 2005, 2006, 2015). On the other hand, in recent decades, there has been progress in social policies aimed at homeless people in Brazil in the context of Social Assistance policy, which through the Specialized Reference Centers for the Homeless Population (Pop Centers) they play an important role in guaranteeing the social rights of this population through articulation with other public policies, including work.

Regarding the economic, political and social changes of the last quarter of the twentieth century, Bursztyn (2003) stated that changes in the world of labor and the guarantees attached to it pushed large portions of the population out of the system, excluding them from employment and consumption and putting increasingly heterogeneous groups on the street, especially characterized by unemployment (BURSZTYN, 2003; ROSA, 2005; SILVA, 2009; NEVES, 2010).

This economic approach of living on the streets (BÜLL, 2010) has intensified since the 1970s, taking shape in Brazil in the following decades, guided in some way by different researchers (BURSZTYN, 2003; VIEIRA; BEZERRA; ROSA, 1992; ROSA, 2005; FARIAS, 2007; MATTOS; HELOANI; FERREIRA, 2008; SILVA, 2009; NEVES, 2010; BULL, 2010; SCHWEITZER, 2017).

Although it is not possible to establish a direct (and unique) relationship between unemployment and homelessness (ESCOREL, 1999), the importance of work with other social links is undeniable, as it confers identity in our society (SILVA, 2012), besides being a hegemonic reference, which enables to understand it as one of the causes that lead to life on the street, but also as an element that keeps the individuals in this situation, together with the fragility of family ties and the community.

The double experience of weak family/social ties and relationships and the precariousness of work intensified the vulnerability that leads the individuals to live on the streets (ROSA, 2005; NEVES, 2010), in a process in which the break with work and with supportive social networks together lead to social disaffiliation (CASTEL, 2013), placing these individuals in a vicious cycle of fragility, disruption, and difficulty in rescuing their family and work ties.

According to Prates, Prates and Machado (2011, p. 194), although the literature points to the confluence of causes that would lead the individuals to live on the streets, unemployment still seems to be a determining factor in the “sterilization processes”, or even of maintenance of individuals in this situation, pointing to a significant importance of work in this scenario. However, for these authors, there would be a contradiction between the importance of work, pointed out by public policies and the homeless people and the difficulty of this segment to access it, which is reiterated by Farias (2007).

Thus, the precariousness of labor relationships (as well as the consequences of the political, economic and social conjuncture that feed it) seems to act doubly on the phenomenon of the street situation: both as a reason for going to the street and, mainly, as a support for the maintenance of this situation. Since the work performed by this population is hardly a viable financial autonomy, since it is almost always transitory, temporary, varied and irregular, often developed under unhealthy and risky conditions and barely allow survival (SNOW; ANDERSON, 1998; ESCOREL, 1999; VIEIRA; BEZERRA; ROSA, 1992; BURSZTYN, 2003; ROSA, 2005; BORIN, 2004; COSTA, 2005; FARIAS, 2007; MATTOS; HELOANI; FERREIRA, 2008; VALENCIO et al., 2008; SILVA, 2009; PRATES; PRATES; MACHADO, 2011), establishing a “revolving door pattern” in which regular work becomes temporary and cyclical (SNOW; ANDERSON, 1998, p. 200). These are invisible, disqualified, and poorly paid jobs that virtually never guarantee the right to work and workers' rights to these people.

Despite the lack of national census research aimed at quantifying this population, ignored by this type of survey, the latest estimate predicts 101,854 people living on the streets in Brazil (NATALINO, 2016), in extreme vulnerability conditions, exposed to multiple violence and the daily violation of their social rights.

Regarding the work, according to the report of the First National Meeting on Homeless Population, held in 2006, the implementation of productive inclusion strategies was considered fundamental in guaranteeing material living conditions for this population, stressing that

even when the central issue that was problematized was not worked, it arises articulated with other needs, as an alternative to overcome the limit situation imposed by vulnerability or as an element that enables self-valorization (BRASIL, 2008a, p.58).

Since then, the claim deals with the work performance as a social right of every citizen, provided for in article 6 of the Federal Constitution (BRASIL, 1988), which requires a change of social attitude, legitimizing the rights of the population on street situations (COSTA, 2005), historically stigmatized as a slut, accommodated, lazy, responsible and blamed for his own condition. By distancing from these hegemonic ideas, it is possible to create spaces for making and exchanging, where homeless people can once again find in the role of workers, because more than a guarantee of economic gains, work can enhance building individual life projects (GHIRARDI, 2016) or even favoring the overcoming of the street situation, as pointed out by Medeiros (2010).

Integrated with Social Security, the public policy of Social Assistance in Brazil is aimed at those who need it, guaranteeing a right of all citizens and a duty of the State, organized by the Organic Law of Social Assistance (LOAS) (Law 8724/1993), and must provide social minimums, in which integration in the labor market appears in its article 2 as one of the objectives advocated by politics (BRASIL, 1993). In the following decade, the National Social Assistance Policy was created, materialized by the Unified Social Assistance System (SUAS), which organizes the services, programs, projects, and benefits related to the public social assistance policy (BRASIL, 2004, 2005).

As a demand raised from Decree 7,053/2009, which establishes the National Policy for the Homeless Population, the Specialized Reference Center for the Homeless Population (Centro Pop), in the context of the Social Assistance policy, becomes the venue for the provision of the Specialized Service for Homeless People, marking the emergence of a new paradigm for the care of homeless people, breaking with welfare and guardianship and acquiring legal status (BRASIL, 2011). This Service is aimed at people who make the streets their living and/or survival space, through integrated actions, focusing on social inclusion, access to rights and social protection. It should offer individual and/or family support and promote cross-sectoral articulation with other public policies, such as health, housing, food security, work, and income, favoring conviviality, social participation, new life projects, collective and social strengthening, as well as self-esteem and autonomy (BRASIL, 2011).

Although there is no explicit concept of productive inclusion within the scope of Social Assistance policy, this is the term used to refer to the inclusion in the world of work of individuals accompanied by this public policy, which implies the preparation and the attempt to enter the labor market, especially formal, but also alternative strategies such as self-employment and cooperative work. Thus, it was chosen to use this term, since we will deal with the institutional responses that Pop Centers, as an equipment of this policy, have sought to offer to those who live on the street, even though it is clearly possible to limit the term, especially for a population historically removed from the formal labor market, using moonlights, informality, begging, and in some cases even illegality, for income and survival.

The articulations with the local policies for the promotion of work, aimed at training/qualification, as well as the offer of information about opportunity and job openings appear as possibilities offered by the equipment among the actions foreseen for productive inclusion (BRASIL, 2011). Thus, reflecting, organizing and articulating strategies about the productive inclusion of homeless people become a relevant aspect of Pop Centers' role in organizing the follow-up of these individuals.

As Ghirard (2012, p. 20) points out, the dimension of work approached here is based on the expansion of social participation, in which an important premise when thinking the world of work for the homeless population is not the idea of rehabilitating their labor force for the market to become (more) productive, but of guaranteeing access to work as a social right and not just as an obligation of some, considering the sociological dimensions and economic aspects of the world of work and as a category of social life.

Thus, this article aimed to identify productive inclusion actions carried out by Pop Centers (Specialized Reference Centers for Homeless Population) in the state of São Paulo and the view of the coordinators of this equipment about this dimension of work with the population on the street situation. This is a clipping of doctoral research that aimed to understand social inclusion through work in the current scenario, from the homeless people, through the identification and characterization of actions and experiences of productive inclusion with this people.

2 Method

It is a qualitative approach, exploratory, descriptive and analytical research. Two instruments were used: a protocol for identifying personal and professional data of the participants and their workplace (Pop Centers) and a semi-structured questionnaire with open and closed questions related to the understanding of the productive inclusion aspect of people on street situations and existing/articulated actions by the Pop Centers². Both instruments were evaluated by five judges, with accumulated knowledge and experience in the area, to adapt the content to the research theme and objectives.

By telephone contact, an invitation was made to the Pop Centers of the state of São Paulo that answered the 2015 SUAS Census (SÃO PAULO, 2017), totaling 58 units distributed in 48 municipalities. After systematic attempts of telephone and/or electronic contact, the following scenario was obtained: three municipalities had closed their Pop Centers; three municipalities refused to participate by the lack of human resources/time to do so or lack of action in the scope of productive inclusion; three requested to file the request in person, which was impossible for researchers to access it; fifteen did not respond to contact attempts and eleven expressed interest and acceptance, but did not complete their participation because they did not complete the authorization or questionnaire.

Thus, coordinators of 13 Pop Centers in the state of São Paulo/SP participated, meeting the following inclusion criteria: being a coordinator of the Pop Center for at least 6 months, accepting to participate in the study, completing and signing a letter of authorization from the institution and the Informed Consent Form (ICF).

After accepting and obtaining the authorizations, it was agreed with each participant to send an electronic form, elaborated in the Google Docs Platform, as well as guidelines for filling out. The answers were obtained between January and April/2018. The data from the identification protocol were analyzed descriptively, while the analysis of open questions was performed with an open-access software (Iramuteq), which organized the data from the questionnaires into four vocabulary groups using similarity and cloud analysis words (CAMARGO; JUSTO, 2013). In them, the answers were grouped according to the similarity or correlation between their contents, allowing the identification of common themes by the researchers. At the same time, the answers to the open questions in the questionnaires were read thoroughly to identify the meaning cores and their coding into themes, verifying if there was a correspondence between these themes and those identified with the help of Iramuteq. The themes were corresponding in both methods and aggregated into categories of analysis.

3 Results and Discussion

Seven women and six men, with an average age of 39 years old, participated: six psychologists, five social workers, and one social scientist. All participants had completed higher education and six of them had specialization/MBA/enhancement as the highest level of education. This information is grouped in Table 1.

Table 1
Characterization of participants according to gender, age, vocational training, time since graduation (in years) and the highest level of education.

	GENDER	AGE	GRADUATION	TIME SINCE GRADUATION (YEARS)	HIGHER LEVEL OF EDUCATION
P1	M	36	Psychology	08	Specialization
P2	F	37	Social service	14	Graduated
P3	M	40	Psychology	13	Specialization
P4	M	56	Psychology	33	MBA
P5	F	43	Social Sciences	17	Graduated
P6	F	45	Psychology	22	Specialization
P7	M	42	Psychology	16	Graduated
P8	F	37	Social service	11	Graduated
P9	F	40	Psychology	17	Specialization
P10	F	29	Social service	09	Graduated
P11	M	24	Psychology	02	Specialization
P12	M	54	Social service	Without information	Graduated
P13	F	33	Social service	10	Graduated

• Source: Author (2019).

The average working time at Centro Pop was 2.8 years. Although all the participants held the position of coordinator, six of them stated that they had previously held other positions in the same equipment. Regarding working time with homeless people, one participant stated “less than one year”; five participants reported being between “1 and 3 years”; three participants between “3 and 5 years”; three participants between “5 and 10 years” and one participant for “more than 10 years”. Table 2 shows this information.

Table 2
Characterization of participants according to time worked at the Pop Center surveyed, current position/other positions held, professional activity performed and time spent working with the homeless population.

	TIME WORKING AT POP CENTER	CURRENT POSITION/OTHER POSITIONS	PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITY	TIME WORKING WITH STREET POPULATION
P1	2 years	Coordinating Director	Policy coordination for homeless people	5 to 10 years
P2	4 years	Coordinator/Social Worker	Coordination/social worker	3 to 5 years
P3	2 years and 3 months	Reference Center Coordinator	Coordination	1 to 3 years
P4	3 years and 6 months	Coordinator/Psychologist	Coordination	3 to 5 years
P5	5 years and 6 months	Unit Supervisor	Coordination /educador social de rua	5 to 10 years
P6	2 years and 6 months	Manager	Psychologist	1 to 3 years
P7	4 years	Coordeinator	Coordination	More than 10 years
P8	01 year	Technical Coordination	Coordination	1 to 3 years
P9	01 year	Manager of the Technical Division of Special Social Protection of medium complexity	Management of 06 social assistance units of the municipality	1 to 3 years
P10	05 years	Coordinator/Social Worker	Coordination	3 to 5 years
P11	08 months	Coordinator/Program Coordinator Minha Casa Minha Vida	Program, project and resource management	Less than 1 year
P12	3 years	Coordinator/Social Educator	Multi-professional Team Coordination	5 to 10 years
P13	2 years	Coordinator	Technical and administrative coordination of the Pop Center and Reception Center (municipal hostel).	01 to 3 years

• Souce: Author (2019).

Twelve Pop Centers were located in Large Size municipalities (between 100,001 to 900,000 inhabitants) and one was located in Metropolis (over 900,000 inhabitants) (SÃO PAULO, 2017), distributed in eleven of the 26 Regional Assistance Directorates and Social Development (DRADS), according to the division of the state government of São Paulo/SP.

Pop Centers' operating times ranged from 1 to 2 years (one unit), between 3 and 4 years (seven units) or more than 5 years (five units). As for the number of people assisted daily, five units receive up to 30 people, six units assisted between 30 and 50 people and two units assisted more than 50 people per day. The number of professionals in the teams (including elementary, middle and higher levels) ranged from 5 to 18 members, is common to all the presence of the reference team recommended by SUAS, that is, coordinator, psychologist, and social worker.

In addition to actions such as welcoming, individualized and/or family care, socio-educational groups, workshops and social approach, actions that can be configured as important support in daily life were also reported, including by creating conditions for engagement in other activities, such as acquisition assistance personal documentation, meals, space for hygiene and personal care, storage of belongings, donation of clothes, inclusion in the Federal Government's Single Registry, among others.

Among the aspects related to Productive Inclusion, it was identified that the collection of information about the work path of users followed by Pop Centers is performed during the reception/first attendance in 6 of the units; in the construction of the follow-up project in 12 of them and in the process of disconnection in 2 of the units, which suggests that the main issue is the work with the individuals being monitored in the equipment, in the elaboration of individual follow-up projects.

Twelve units approached the topic in individual service; six in specific individual attendance, seven in workshops or socio-educational groups and seven in workshops or specific socio-educational groups, reiterating that the topic of “work” is essentially addressed individually.

Among the specific actions aimed at the productive inclusion carried out by the Pop Centers, based on the actions planned and questioned by CENSO SUAS, in the survey conducted annually with all the units of the social assistance policy, the referral for professional training or vocational training was made by 11 units; the assignment of physical space for professional training courses offered by other institutions occurs in 3 units; the registration for participation in professional qualification programs in 09 units; the referral for job and income generation programs in 11 units; the advice for forming cooperatives or associations in 2 units; and up-to-date information on vacancies available in the labor market in 11 units of the participating Pop Centers. Therefore, in the field of productive inclusion, the predominance of actions aimed at referral was identified, reiterating the aspect that the role of the Pop Center should act by articulating cross-sectorial actions and institutional partnerships, focused primarily on actions of professional qualification and training.

From the analysis of the open questions of the questionnaire, themes that were aggregated into the following categories of analysis emerged: The meaning of productive inclusion of the homeless population; Important points for the productive inclusion of the homeless population; Criteria and attributes considered in homeless people for participation in productive inclusion actions and Difficulties and challenges for productive inclusion of homeless people.

3.1 The meaning of productive inclusion of the homeless population

Regarding the category called “The meaning of productive inclusion of the homeless population”, the results showed different meanings attributed by the research participants to the “productive inclusion” of homeless people. However, a common point was the association of access to work with autonomy and emancipation, factors that could contribute to overcoming the homeless situation. They also reiterate the relationship that often occurs between unemployment and going and staying on the streets.

In general, productive inclusion was identified as access to the formal or informal labor market and income generation. Facing a society in which inclusion is based on work, the results also related productive inclusion to social belonging. The following are statements that relate to the themes raised.

The main objective for the homeless person's demand is to work in the process of leaving the streets, which is why we need to work on the autonomy and emancipation of the individual in their social inclusion process, where productive inclusion in the labor market comes from meeting for such objectives and goals (P2).

Actions aimed at the inclusion of users in the labor market (formal or informal) (P3).

Means of providing the population with access to the formal work world through income generation and the offer of professional qualification (P5).

We understand that for the work in the emancipation and autonomy of the homeless person, the most successful process is the productive inclusion because the users start to feel truly belonging to the society and community where they are located (P2).

Understanding the meanings that the Pop Center coordinators who participated in the research attribute to productive inclusion may signal that the understanding of this unit and the services it offers are building on this dimension.

The coordinators' perspective on work as a way of achieving autonomy and emancipation, contributing to overcoming the street, for example, is reiterated by the National Policy for Homeless People (BRASIL, 2009), as well as by their movements that guide productive inclusion as a privileged way to overcome unemployment and homelessness (BRASIL, 2008a; BRASIL, 2009; MOVIMENTO…, 2009). The association between unemployment as a contributing factor to the street situation and the work to overcome it, are also pointed out in different studies (O'GRADY; BRIGHT; COHEN, 1998; MATTOS, 2006; MAKIWANE; TAMASANE; SCHNEIDER, 2010; MEDEIROS, 2010; MARCOLINO, 2012; SHIER; JONES; GRAHAM, 2012; BURKE et al., 2013; GRAY et al., 2017).

In a study to understand trajectories of overcoming the homeless situation, Medeiros (2010) identified that motivation, the presence of support, the return to family, education and the resumption of work would be the main factors for this outcome. Authors such as Mattos (2006) and Marcolino (2012) also pointed out that the process of leaving the streets seems to be facilitated by work, whose role would be central to the process of reconstructing life projects and accessing other social rights for those who live on the street, etc.

However, for Marcolino (2012, p. 12), overcoming the street situation does not always “[...] have the meaning of reconstructing life for a new personal and social project”, because this exit is often associated with only to change places, to rent a pension room, to precarious and unstable jobs, without promoting concrete conditions of transformation and new possibilities of reconstruction of life projects, that is, of autonomy and emancipation.

Moreover, the exit from the street cannot be taken as a general imperative, but as a personal demand, respecting the autonomy of each one (MATTOS, 2006), that is, understanding the exit from the street, either via of work or not, as the only form of autonomy of the individuals can be limited or even mistaken, creating impositions that can further stigmatize and exclude these individuals from the social circuit. Choosing to live on the streets or away from the job market also consists of exercising autonomy, and it is up to the social assistance unit, such as the Pop Centers, to create projects of life and existence with these individuals that can fit this desire and respect this choice.

Participating coordinators of Pop Centers understand productive inclusion beyond the formal labor market, provided that there can be continuity and access to income that allows homeless people to live beyond daily survival without being criminalized or stigmatized, as commonly occurs in the works developed by this population (SNOW; ANDERSON, 1998; ESCOREL, 1999). In a way, it runs against the notion that work is just what is tied to the formal job market, broadening the understanding that often street work, informal work, and variations are also productive activities that keep alive the social role of workers for these people, although society often denies and refutes this idea.

Thus, it is important to reflect on the concept of work as an alternative to overcome the homeless situation, since formal and regular salaried work seems to have clear limits to the insertion of this population (MATTOS; HELOANI; FERREIRA, 2008). In other words, as the social facilities and the individuals place expectations of productive inclusion only in the formal work can be limiting and frustrating in the process of monitoring and supporting those who live on the street. And worse, generally blaming the individuals for the failure of not entering the labor market, as Costa (2005, p. 09) pointed out,

it has already been seen that, given the contemporary changes in the world of work, few productive alternatives remain for a population that survives from the streets.

The understanding of the productive inclusion of homeless people as a way of rescuing belonging in society supports the defense of work as an integrating mechanism by excellence in contemporary society. Authors such as Castel (2013), Paugam (2003) and Santos (1999) started from the conception of work as a dimension that occupies a fundamental position in the attachment of individuals to contemporary society, in which the detachment of the economic-occupational sphere would have significant relevance in the phenomenon of social exclusion (ESCOREL, 1999), producing useless and disposable subjects to the economic and social aspects (SANTOS, 1999).

Contradictorily, as labor integration is conditioned as a privileged form of social insertion in the capitalist scenario, the apartment of this dimension of life is also necessary for the survival of this mode of production. According to Silva (2009), the homeless population, especially in recent decades, is a direct consequence of this perverse scenario.

3.2 Important points for the productive inclusion of the homeless population

The Pop Centers coordinators listed actions that in their perspective are relevant and may favor the productive inclusion of homeless people, especially in the functions of the Pop Center and their dialogue with the cross-sectorial network. Pop Centers, for example, seem to favor actions that ensure/facilitate access to the world of work, ranging from information dissemination, such as job openings on the unit´s murals, such as assisting users in curriculum production, access to computers, providing an address as a home reference and landline number. Also, the coordinators also identified that the articulation of different types of partnerships and cross-sectorial actions is also relevant. In this context, the professional qualifications carried out in partnership with educational and work promotion institutions were highlighted as an action that contributes to the viable inclusion of those who live on the street. The search for alternatives to the formal labor market, such as cooperatives, was also mentioned by the coordinators as a relevant action that favors the productive inclusion of this population.

It is important because the homeless population does not have daily access to the computer network, but through the murals, they become aware of the offer of vacancies and can apply for them [...] The Pop Center makes and provides curricula that contain the address and telephone number of the unit. It receives and transmits calls for selection processes. It also sends resumes by e-mail or registers them on websites on the user request [...] (P1).

Facilitating the access for these people, since competing on an equal footing with the rest of the population generally disadvantages and cannot be included (P3).

Likewise, mobilization of other public policies with a view to the gradual inclusion for participation in fairs, training workshops, etc. [...] There is the previous work of sensitizing the user of the service and also of the other sectors for the insertion of the homeless person, without aiming at discrimination. There is articulation with some public and/or private sectors to break with the prejudiced view of the potential of the public served and for the inclusion (P6).

Actions and initiatives that promote training, professional qualification and insertion in the labor market (P10).

We think it is important to empower users to have a better chance of competing in the labor market (P13).

Cooperativism is pointed as one of the forms of productive inclusion of the homeless population. Although the cooperatives operating today in the municipality are not exclusive to the homeless population, they add many people in this situation (P7).

In general, the actions listed indicated the importance and role of Pop Centers in linking and establishing references to users, whether material (by providing the address, for example) or symbolic, as well as strengthening, supporting, brokering and facilitating access to information regarding opportunities and the labor market, whether for vacancies, interview opportunities, courses, etc. Also, assistance, guidance, and referral for the removal of civil documentation is also an important action that favors access to other social rights to homeless people, including work.

By integrating different perspectives, knowledge and practices, so there is an integrated construction of solutions, cross-sectorial is the most appropriate response to the complexity of social problems, the individual and collective needs of the individual, and their quality of life, certainty that an isolated social policy cannot solve alone the problems that this population faces (JUNQUEIRA, 2004). In this sense, cross-sectorial becomes fundamental in the construction of policies for the homeless population (BORYSOW; FURTADO, 2014; FIORATI et al., 2014), reiterating the perspective of participants about actions in partnership, either with public institutions, with private organizations or with civil society, in the elaboration of strategies that go beyond assistance, punctual and poorly integrated actions (PRATES; PRATES; MACHADO, 2011).

This corroborates the understanding that productive inclusion cannot be viewed in isolation (PICKETT-SCHENK et al., 2002; MARRONE, 2005; BRASIL, 2008a; PRATES; PRATES; MACHADO, 2011), reinforcing the fundamental role of Pop Centers and Social Assistance Policy in social mobilization and other public policies, raising awareness of the establishment of partnerships and articulations to guarantee access and rights of the homeless accompanied, especially in work.

The actions of qualification and professional training are among the possibilities of Pop Centers to assist in overcoming the homeless situation (BRASIL, 2011) and as work and employment strategies recommended by the National Policy for Social Inclusion of the Population on Street Situation (BRASIL, 2008a). In the literature, vocational training and qualification are also highlighted as facilitators of access to the labor market and consequent overcoming of unemployment and homelessness (PICKETT-SCHENK et al., 2002; ROSENHECK; MARES, 2007; FERGUSON et al., 2012; FERGUSON, 2012). According to Prates, Prates and Machado (2011, p. 202), training actions for homeless people tend to restore the self-esteem and identity of workers of these individuals, conducted in a way that breaks with precarious insertions and which only camouflage or reinforce the exclusion and precariousness of work for these individuals, and should consider their previous trajectories and current work-related desires.

However, when disconnected from support, follow-up, orientation, articulation and continuity, qualifying in isolation tends to attribute and hold only the user in search of work, in a mistaken perspective that there is a wide offer of employment to these people, exempting the public power from co-responsibility in the creation and viability of concrete opportunities for access to the formal labor market by those who live in homeless situations.

The cooperativism is among the work and employment strategies advocated by the National Policy for Social Inclusion of Homeless People (BRASIL, 2008a), emphasizing the Solidarity Economy as a potent alternative to capitalist work, which tends to be extremely competitive and unwelcome in terms of differences and vulnerabilities, including reinforcing them. According to Lussi, Ricci, and Pinho (2017), the Solidarity Economy enables the individuals to experiment new forms of relationship with work, mobilizing different resources, affects and desires, through the construction of protagonism, autonomy and citizenship, which makes it an interesting possibility for the productive inclusion of the homeless population. Also, it has a commitment to the promotion of individual and collective well-being through material and social exchanges, with the valorization of individual and collective capacities and the recovery of social value (GHIRARDI et al., 2005).

Thus, from the Pop Centers, it is important to build a shared support network to overcome individual and social issues, involving different sectors and institutions, promoting attention to different aspects related to the street situation, through collective and non-individualizing strategies, in which the rights and autonomy of people are respected and guaranteed through public policies focused on their needs and singularities.

3.3 Criteria and attributes considered in homeless people for the participation in productive inclusion actions

Regarding the “criteria and attributes considered in homeless people for the participation in productive inclusion actions”, the results identified aspects considered necessary by the Pop Centers coordinators for the participation, referral, and intermediation of their users for the actions of productive inclusion.

Among them, the specific requirements of the vacancies offered, both for employment and for participation in courses such as education and professional experience were highlighted. Other aspects considered by the unit for productive inclusion to be present in the monitoring of users include “motivation”, “interest”, “health/mental health”, “good behavior”, or simply, “being on the street”.

The first criterion is the user wanting to be part, then the screening made in consultations with the user about their real desire and interest, in cases of educational level requirement this also comes as the main criterion (P2).

The criteria are specific to each activity. However, they involve interest, effective participation in the Pop Center, Monitoring and Good Behavior (P11).

The criteria are daily and participatory attendance of the user at the Pop Center and staying overnight at Casa de Passagem, without unjustified absences, and avoiding the abuse of alcohol and psychoactive drugs (P12).

Undoubtedly, the interest and the motivation are fundamental factors for the individuals' engagement in any activity, and personal interest is identified as a relevant factor for the participation in work-oriented actions and for the successful inclusion of homeless people (FERGUSON; XIE; GLYNN, 2012). However, to have interest and motivation for work, the proposition of actions for productive inclusion must include demands, personal interests, occupational trajectories and the participation of the users in their construction, as well as breaking the idea that any population would suffice, perpetuating propositions that may further exacerbate the processes of exclusion and exploitation experienced by these subjects.

On the other hand, the perspective presented by the participants indicated an understanding that work cannot be mandatory in the follow-up of these people, providing them with the desire, interest, and choice to participate in actions aimed at productive inclusion, that is, despite the importance attributed to work, it is a choice and it is necessary to be part of it, possibly breaking with the hegemonic idea of the obligation to work for those who are considered “vagabond” precisely because they are not engaged in socially productive activities (CASTEL, 2013).

However, conditions such as attendance and participation in the service, as well as in hostels, are noteworthy, although studies indicate that, often, the very stay in night care institutions tends to hinder engagement in work, due to practices that prevent/hinder the access to work (little chance of rest, rigidity in schedules, timelines and rules etc.) (SNOW; ANDERSON, 1998; POREMSKI; WHITLEY; LATIMER, 2014), as such unit would concentrate on the general condition of people, providing temporary shelter and meeting the basic needs of the homeless, almost never being specific to support work (SHIER; JONES; GRAHAM, 2012).

The results of the First National Survey on Homeless Population indicated that 46.5% of respondents said they prefer to sleep on the streets oversleeping in hostels, mainly due to the lack of freedom, schedules, and routines of these units (BRASIL, 2008b), This shows the uniqueness of this relationship between homeless people and night-time care institutions, and staying in these spaces is a right, but it may be a choice and not an imposition for access to other social rights.

Thus, making the frequency in social units a condition may discourage and exclude those users who do not adapt to the recommended models, especially night care, or create difficulties for those who need flexible hours to search and maintain certain jobs.

Similarly, applying numerous criteria for starting a job such as recent experience, specific skills, defined work goals, certain levels of education and a good resume would create the idea that most unemployed homeless people will never be prepared for the job until they meet all the criteria (COOK et al., 2001; SHAHEEN; RIO, 2007). Moreover, it presupposes a hegemonic understanding that these subjects need to meet various criteria to be able to access social inclusion programs.

3.4 Difficulties and challenges for the productive inclusion of homeless people.

Finally, in the category called “Difficulties and challenges for the productive inclusion of homeless people”, participants brought the perception that the productive inclusion of homeless people is permeated by difficulties and challenges, which go through characteristics attributed to the individuals, aspects related to the offering of actions to this people and to the discrimination and prejudice historically rooted in our society and in the labor market in relation to the homeless population.

From the participants' perspective, the low education, lack of training and professional experience, abuse of psychoactive substances and the experience of mental disorders, prison history and the difficulty of adherence and financial management were pointed as barriers to access to and maintenance of work activities, from a perspective that actually understands the individualization of social problems and the possible difficulty in dealing with them. Moreover, prejudice and discrimination, which reiterate the negative social imaginary about these individuals, are aspects against the productive inclusion of those who live on the street.

The biggest challenges are low education and lack of training. Once the training is offered, it runs into a lack of professional experience in that area (P7).

It is a great challenge because, in the great majority, there are great potentialities for the work, however, the great and biggest difficulty found by the users is the fight against the chemical dependence of psychoactive substances, licit or illicit (P13).

(It is a challenge) Breaking with discriminatory values of society against the homeless population, which severely hurts the people's self-esteem, significantly inferring in their work potential and reflection on their decision to break family ties and often make use of alcohol and/or drugs (P9).

To deconstruct the popular culture that generalizes homeless people as vagabonds and rioters as well as with the tradition of welfare and paternalism, bring the understanding of the importance of guaranteeing citizens' rights and publicize those rights (P12).

According to Abbott and Blake (1988), early school leaving and low levels of education and low qualifications are a reality and a difficulty for the productive inclusion of homeless people. However, these limitations are not restricted to people who live on the streets, but permeates the reality of millions of people in the country, where vulnerability, low education, and difficulty in accessing qualifications and minimum guarantees of access to the labor market has intensified in recent decades, as the demands of this labor market, which is even more inflexible and insensitive to the singularities of those who live on the street (SNOW; ANDERSON, 1998).

Thus, low levels of education and qualifications, and restricted work experience associated with the specific conditions of street life (lack of personal hygiene, laundry, etc.) seem to be one of the biggest obstacles for people on street situations, further increasing its disadvantage compared to other workers (SNOW; ANDERSON, 1998).

Based on their daily experience of practice, the perspective of the Pop Centers coordinators is also supported by data from the First National Survey on Homeless Population regarding the information on education. Among the respondents, while 74% could read and write, 17.1% could not write and 8.3% could only sign their own names. Also, almost half of them (48.4%) did not complete elementary school and only 3.2% finished high school. Finally, almost all (95%) did not study at the time of the research (BRASIL, 2008b). They are individuals whose trajectories were and are marked by the lack of opportunities for access to education, which can directly affect other dimensions of life, such as access to other social rights, such as the work.

Despite the undeniable impact of the use of alcohol and other drugs on the homeless population, it is necessary to break with the prevailing idea that every homeless person is dependent/use psychoactive substances or, even in the face of this problem., see them only from this perspective, restricting and limiting the view on the potentialities that are beyond this bias, reinforcing the stigma and discrimination about these people, mistakenly seen only as drug users (BARBOSA, 2015). Therefore, the fragility of family and social ties and the difficulty of maintaining occupational activities resulting from alcohol and other drug dependence results for many individuals going to the street as the only alternative for survival (MENDES; FILLIPEHORR, 2014), in a context in which drugs not only precipitate going to the street but also favor staying there, hindering to overcome and greatly expanding the social and health vulnerabilities of the homeless population.

The data collected in the First National Survey on Homeless Population (BRASIL, 2008b) reinforce this finding, pointing out that more than one third of the respondents (35.3%) stated that alcoholism or drug use make them live in the streets, which can also reveal an important impact of this condition on other contexts of street life, such as access to foster care, social rights, deterioration of physical and mental health conditions, increased vulnerability and greater exposure to violence, relationships and conviviality established on the street, permeated by the use of psychoactive substances, etc.

Concerning prejudice and discrimination, in general, it is common for homeless people to be directed to discriminatory practices, which classify them in an oppressive and derogatory manner, and the inferiority stigma is the representation of the marginalization process experienced by these subjects that

discrimination in the prejudice aims at maintaining social order by attributing to certain groups of characteristics of dangerousness and perversity (MOURA JUNIOR; XIMENES; SARRIERA, 2013, p. 19).

The authors also interfere with the way the homeless population sees and represents them.

Changing this reality is not an easy task, but the role of the Pop Centers and the Social Assistance policy is highlighted in the continuous work of sensitization, orientation and information of the society and the other sectors that make up the network of attention to the population on street situation including those related to the productive inclusion, demystification and denaturalization of the negative representations of the people assisted, along with the creation of opportunities for these people to resignify their self-esteem, (re) discover their potential and be able to reconstruct new identities based on in more positive experiences and references.

4 Final Considerations

Through this research, we aim to understand how the inclusion of homeless people is being proposed and articulated by the Pop Centers of the state of São Paulo/SP, from the perspective of the coordinators of these units. Although it did not cover a larger quantity of the unit initially contacted, it was possible to identify relevant results among the participants.

In general, the results indicated the association of productive inclusion with the access to the formal and informal labor market and income, and as a fundamental action for overcoming homelessness, autonomy, emancipation, and redemption of social belonging. To this end, it requires them to be offered in a continuous and integral manner, built from the repertoire and together with the homeless population, so they can respond to their unique and collective needs, such as housing, health, food, education, etc.

Participants also indicated that Pop Centers are powerful spaces for productive inclusion actions, not only through their performance but especially through articulation with different sectors and public and private initiatives to ensure access to rights and social awareness about this aspect. The importance of professional support throughout the process is highlighted, helping in the effectiveness of productive inclusion and social inclusion. However, the lack of initiatives specifically aimed at the interests and needs of the homeless population was pointed out. The actions performed by the unit are very focused on formal employment and professional training, although cooperativism has been highlighted as an alternative to the experience that has been tried in some realities.

For the participation in productive inclusion actions, the results showed that attributes such as interest and motivation are desired, understanding that work cannot be treated as a mandatory element for the homeless population, but as a desire and individual choice, and should be encouraged for these aspects. There are also several barriers to be overcome for the productive inclusion of homeless people, encompassing individual and social factors; historical and exclusionary factors such as prejudice, discrimination and lack of opportunity for this population group and mental health problems, especially those associated with substance abuse, also need to be strained for effective social inclusion and full support for these people.

Also, the need to think about collective and non-individualizing strategies from the perspective of productive inclusion for homeless people is highlighted, breaking the responsibility of the subject only for their insertion in the labor market.

Although the perspectives of the professionals who work with the homeless population were brought in at this moment, the view of those who live in the street is fundamental to broaden this understanding, whether regarding the meanings they attribute to work, their desires and perspectives for this context of life, its difficulties and perceptions about this inclusion, etc., which can guide actions that, in fact, correspond to the real demands and needs of these subjects in relation to the world of work.

Finally, the work is an important element but does not act in isolation in overcoming the street situation, understanding the need for a broader look and the creation of policies that contemplate the complexity of living on the streets.

Research such as this seeks to give visibility to people who, by having their affective and social ties broken, have lost access to their rights, including work, raising awareness of the importance of comprehensive attention to the demands of this population, including productive inclusion actions, although there are still few projects, programs and public policies that address the complexity of the issues related to the street situation and its exit. Thus, the power in the reconstruction of life projects, support and support networks and in the intermediation of access to social rights, the performance of the Pop Centers is fundamental.

• 1
  The text contains preliminary reflections on the doctoral thesis of the first author, under the guidance of the latter.
• 2
  The research was submitted and approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of UFSCar, under the opinion nº 2.243.665, approved on 08/28/2017.
• Funding Source The work received funding from the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) and the Apoio da Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior – Brasil (CAPES) - Financing Code 001.

Referências

• ABBOTT, M. L.; BLAKE, G. F. An intervention model for homeless youth. Chinese Sociological Review, Estados Unidos, v. 6, n. 1, p. 148-158, 1988.
• ANTUNES, R. As formas contemporâneas de trabalho e a desconstrução dos direitos sociais. In: SILVA, M. O. S.; YAZBEK, M. C. Políticas Públicas de trabalho e renda no Brasil contemporâneo São Paulo: Cortez; São Luís: FAPEMA, 2006. p. 41-51.
• ANTUNES, R. Adeus ao trabalho? Ensaio sobre as metamorfoses e a centralidade do mundo do trabalho. São Paulo: Cortez, 2015.
• ANTUNES, R. O caracol e sua concha Ensaios sobre a nova morfologia do trabalho. São Paulo: Boitempo, 2005.
• BARBOSA, A. Saúde da população em situação de rua e questão social na contemporaneidade: intersetorialidade e gestão das margens. In: SEMINÁRIO INTERNACIONAL DE CIÊNCIAS SOCIAIS, 1., 2015, Marília. Anais... Marília, 2015.
• BORIN, M. Os moradores de rua em São Paulo e suas relações com o mundo do trabalho. Cadernos Metrópole, São Paulo, n. 12, p. 49-64, 2004.
• BORYSOW, I. C.; FURTADO, J. P. Acesso, equidade e coesão social: avaliação de estratégias intersetoriais para a população em situação de rua. Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP, São Paulo, v. 48, n. 6, p. 1069-1076, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0080-623420140000700015
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0080-623420140000700015
• BRASIL. Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil. Diário Oficial [da] República Federativa do Brasil, Poder Executivo, Brasília, DF, 05 out. 1988.
• BRASIL. Lei Federal nº 8742, de 7 de dezembro de 1993. Lei Orgânica da Assistência Social. Diário Oficial [da] República Federativa do Brasil, Poder Executivo, Brasília, DF, 8 dez. 1993.
• BRASIL. Resolução nº 145, de 15 de outubro de 2004. Política Nacional de Assistencia Social – PNAS. Diário Oficial [da] República Federativa do Brasil, Poder Executivo, Brasília, DF, 28 out. 2004.
• BRASIL. Ministério do Desenvolvimento Social e Combate à Fome. Norma Operacional Básica do Sistema Único de Assistência Social Brasília: NOB/SUAS, 2005.
• BRASIL. Política nacional para inclusão social da população em situação de rua Brasília, 2008a. Disponível em: <http://www.mpsp.mp.br/portal/page/portal/cao_civel/acoes_afirmativas/Pol.Nacional-Morad.Rua.pdf>. Acesso em: 17 jul. 2018.
  » http://www.mpsp.mp.br/portal/page/portal/cao_civel/acoes_afirmativas/Pol.Nacional-Morad.Rua.pdf
• BRASIL. Pesquisa nacional sobre população em situação de rua: sumário executivo. Brasília, 2008b.
• BRASIL. Decreto nº 7053, de 23 de dezembro de 2009. Política Nacional para a População em Situação de Rua. Diário Oficial [da] República Federativa do Brasil, Poder Executivo, Brasília, DF, 23 dez. 2009.
• BRASIL. Orientações técnicas: centro de referência especializado para população em situação de rua (centro pop) e serviço especializado para pessoas em situação de rua. Brasília, 2011.
• BÜLL, S. Histórias de trabalho e outras histórias no trecho 2010. 136 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Psicologia) - Pontíficia Universidade Católica, Campinas, 2010.
• BURKE, C. et al. Losing work: regional unemployment and its effect on homeless demographic characteristics, needs and health care. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, United States, v. 24, n. 3, p. 1391-1402, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/hpu.2013.0150
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/hpu.2013.0150
• BURSZTYN, M. Da pobreza à miséria, da miséria à exclusão – o caso das populações de rua. In: BURSZTYN, M. (Org.). No meio da rua – nômades, excluídos e viradores Rio de Janeiro: Garamond, 2003. p. 27-55.
• CAMARGO, B. V.; JUSTO, A. M. IRAMUTEQ: um software gratuito para análise de dados textuais. Temas em Psicologia, Ribeirão Preto, v. 21, n. 2, p. 513-518, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.9788/TP2013.2-16
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.9788/TP2013.2-16
• CASTEL, R. As metamorfoses da questão social: uma crônica do salário. Petróplis: Vozes, 2013.
• COOK, J. A. et al. Vocational outcomes among formerly homeless persons with severe mental illness in the ACCESS program. Psychiatric Services, Washington, v. 52, n. 8, p. 1075-1080, 2001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.52.8.1075
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.52.8.1075
• COSTA, A. P. M. População em situação de rua: contextualização e caracterização. Revista Textos & Contextos, Porto Alegre, v. 4, n. 4, p. 1-15, 2005.
• ESCOREL, S. Vidas ao léu: trajetórias de exclusão social. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Fiocruz, 1999. http://dx.doi.org/10.7476/9788575416051
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.7476/9788575416051
• FARIAS, V. C. C. Possibilidades de inserção/reinserção produtiva dos moradores de rua do município de Porto Alegre. 2007. 139 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Assistência Social) – Pontíficia Universidade Católica, Porto Alegre, 2007.
• FERGUSON, K. M. et al. Employment status and income generation among homeless young adults: results from a five-city, mixed-methods study. Youth & Society, United States, v. 44, n. 3, p. 385-407, 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0044118X11402851
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0044118X11402851
• FERGUSON, K. M. Merging the fields of mental health and social enterprise: lessons from abroad and cumulative findings from research with homeless youths. Community Mental Health Journal, Lexington, v. 48, n. 4, p. 490-502, 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10597-011-9440-7
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10597-011-9440-7
• FERGUSON, K. M.; XIE, B.; GLYNN, S. Adapting the individual placement and support model with homeless young adults. Child and Youth Care Forum, United States, v. 41, n. 3, p. 277-294, 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10566-011-9163-5
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10566-011-9163-5
• FIORATI, R. C. et al. População em vulnerabilidade, intersetorialidade e cidadania: articulando saberes e ações. Saúde e Sociedade, São Paulo, v. 23, n. 4, p. 1458-1470, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0104-12902014000400027
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0104-12902014000400027
• GHIRARD, M. I. G. Terapia Ocupacional em processos econômico-sociais. Cadernos de Terapia Ocupacional da UFSCar, São Carlos, v. 20, n. 1, p. 17-20, 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.4322/cto.2012.002
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.4322/cto.2012.002
• GHIRARDI, M. I. G. et al. Vida na rua e cooperativismo: transitando pela produção de valores. Interface -Comunicação, Saúde, Educação, Botucatu, v. 9, n. 18, p. 601-610, 2005. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1414-32832005000300014
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1414-32832005000300014
• GHIRARDI, M. I. G. Terapia Ocupacional e processos econômico-sociais. In: LOPES, R. E.; MALFITANO, A. P. S. (Org.). Terapia Ocupacional Social: desenhos teóricos e contornos práticos. São Carlos: EdUFSCar, 2016. p. 69-82.
• GRAY, H. M. et al. How do homeless adults change their lives after completing na intensive job-skills program? A prospective study. Journal of Community Psychology, Brandon, v. 45, n. 7, p. 888-905, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcop.21900
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcop.21900
• JUNQUEIRA, L. A. P. A gestão intersetorial das políticas sociais e o terceiro setor. Saúde e Sociedade, São Paulo, v. 13, n. 1, p. 25-36, 2004. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0104-12902004000100004
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0104-12902004000100004
• LUSSI, I. A. O.; RICCI, T. E.; PINHO, R. J. Percepções sobre trabalho: análise de concepções de pessoas em situação de rua. Cadernos Brasileiros de Terapia Ocupacional, São Carlos, v. 25, n. 4, p. 779-793, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.4322/2526-8910.ctoAO0942
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.4322/2526-8910.ctoAO0942
• MAKIWANE, M.; TAMASANE, T.; SCHNEIDER, M. Homeless individuals, families and communities: the societal origins of homelessness. Development Southern Africa, South Africa, v. 27, n. 1, p. 39-49, 2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03768350903519325
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03768350903519325
• MARCOLINO, S. C. Saída das ruas ou reconstrução de vida A trajetória de estudantes universitários ex-moradores de rua em São Paulo. 2012. 80 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Serviço Social) – Pontifícia Universidade Católica, São Paulo, 2012.
• MARRONE, J. Creating hope through employment for people who are homeless or in transitional housing. American Journal of Psychiatric Rehabilitation, United States, v. 8, n. 2, p. 13-35, 2005. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15487760590953939
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15487760590953939
• MATTOS, R. M. Situação de rua e modernidade: a saída das ruas como processo de criação de novas formas de vida na atualidade. 2006. 249 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Psicologia) - Universidade São Marcos, São Paulo, 2006.
• MATTOS, R. M.; HELOANI, R.; FERREIRA, R. F. O trabalhador em situação de rua: algumas ações coletivas atuais. Mental, Barbacena, v. 6, n. 10, p. 103-122, 2008.
• MEDEIROS, A. Pessoas em situação de rua: a saída para a saída – um estudo sobre pessoas que saíram da rua. 2010. 188 f. Tese (Doutorado em Serviço Social) - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, São Paulo, 2010.
• MENDES, C. R. P.; FILLIPEHORR, J. Vivência nas ruas, dependência de drogas e projeto de vida: um relato de experiência no CAPS-ad. Revista Psicologia e Saúde, Campo Grande, v. 6, n. 1, p. 90-97, 2014.
• MOURA JUNIOR, J. F.; XIMENES, V. F.; SARRIERA, J. C. Práticas de discriminação às pessoas em situação de rua: histórias de vergonha, de humilhação e de violência em Fortaleza, Brasil. Revista de Psicología, Chile, v. 22, n. 2, p. 18-28, 2013.
• MOVIMENTO NACIONAL DE POPULAÇÃO DE RUA. População de rua: vidas e trajetórias. In: BRASIL. Ministério do Desenvolvimento Social e Combate à Fome. Rua: aprendendo a contar – pesquisa nacional sobre a população em situação de rua. Brasília: Secretaria Nacional de Assistência Social, 2009. p. 173-186.
• NATALINO, M. A. C. Estimativa da população em situação de rua no Brasil. Brasília: IPEA, 2016.
• NEVES, D. P. Habitantes de rua e vicissitudes do trabalho livre. Antropolítica, Niterói, n. 29, p. 99-130, 2010.
• O’GRADY, B.; BRIGHT, R.; COHEN, E. Subemployment and street youths: an analysis of the impact of squeegee cleaning on homeless youths. Security Journal, Canadá, v. 11, p. 315-323, 1998. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0955-1662(98)00083-6
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0955-1662(98)00083-6
• PAUGAM, S. Desqualificação social: ensaio sobre a nova pobreza. São Paulo: Educ Cortez, 2003.
• PICKETT-SCHENK, S. A. et al. Employment histories of homeless persons with mental illness. Community Mental Health Journal, Lexington, v. 38, n. 3, p. 199-211, 2002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1015211622877
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1015211622877
• POREMSKI, D.; WHITLEY, R.; LATIMER, E. Barriers to obtaining employment for people with severe mental illness experiencing homelessness. Journal of Mental Health, Abingdon, v. 23, n. 4, p. 181-185, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/09638237.2014.910640
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/09638237.2014.910640
• PRATES, J. C.; PRATES, F. C.; MACHADO, S. Populações em situação de rua: os processos de exclusão e inclusão precária vivenciados por esse segmento. Temporalis, Brasília, v. 11, n. 22, p. 191-215, 2011.
• ROSA, C. M. M. Vidas de rua. São Paulo: Hucitec, 2005.
• ROSENHECK, R. A.; MARES, A. S. Implementation of supported employment for homeless veterans with psychiatric or addiction disorders: two-year outcomes. Psychiatric Services, Washington, v. 58, n. 3, p. 325-333, 2007. http://dx.doi.org/10.1176/ps.2007.58.3.325
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1176/ps.2007.58.3.325
• SANTOS, B. S. A construção multicultural da igualdade e da diferença Coimbra: Centro de Estudos Sociais, 1999. Disponível em: <https://www.ces.uc.pt/publicacoes/oficina/135/135.pdf>. Acesso em: 25 jul. 2018.
  » https://www.ces.uc.pt/publicacoes/oficina/135/135.pdf
• SÃO PAULO (Estado). Censo SUAS: Centro Pop – Estado de São Paulo 2015. São Paulo: Secretaria de Desenvolvimento Social, 2017.
• SCHWEITZER, L. Os sentidos do trabalho para trabalhadores informais em situação de rua. 2017. 231 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Psicologia) – Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, 2017.
• SHAHEEN, G.; RIO, J. Recognizing work as a priority in preventing or ending homelessness. The Journal of Primary Prevention, Netherlands, v. 28, n. 3-4, p. 341-358, 2007. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10935-007-0097-5
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10935-007-0097-5
• SHIER, M. L.; JONES, M. E.; GRAHAM, J. R. Employment difficulties experienced by employed homeless people: labor market factors that contribute to and maintain homelessness. Journal of Poverty, Georgia, v. 16, n. 1, p. 27-47, 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10875549.2012.640522
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10875549.2012.640522
• SILVA, C. L. Estudos sobre população adulta em situação de rua: campo para uma comunidade epistêmica? 2012. 125 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Serviço Social) – Pontifícia Universidade Católica, São Paulo, 2012.
• SILVA, M. L. L. Trabalho e população em situação de rua no Brasil. São Paulo: Cortez, 2009.
• SNOW, D.; ANDERSON, L. Desafortunados: um estudo sobre o povo da rua. Petrópolis: Vozes, 1998.
• VALENCIO, N. F. L. S. et al. Pessoas em situação de rua no Brasil: estigmatização, desfiliação e desterritorialização. Revista Brasileira de Sociologia da Emoção, Paraíba, v. 7, n. 21, p. 556-605, 2008.
• VIEIRA, M. A. C.; BEZERRA, E. M. R.; ROSA, C. M. M. População de rua Quem é, como vive, como é vista. São Paulo: Hucitec, 1992.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  12 Sept 2019
• Date of issue
  Jul-Sep 2019

History

• Received
  07 Dec 2018
• Reviewed
  31 Jan 2019
• Reviewed
  24 Mar 2019
• Accepted
  20 May 2019