California is currently grappling with a severe homeless crisis, with Los Angeles and particularly Skid Row, harboring the largest homeless population in the nation. The escalating prevalence of homelessness necessitates evidence-based practices for effective intervention. Despite extensive research on homeless services, the issue’s complexity leaves us without a definitive solution for addressing the diverse needs of homeless individuals. The spectrum of approaches, ranging from stringent criminalization to supportive services, poses a challenge for agencies dedicated to serving this population, requiring them to navigate conflicting ideologies. This study delves into the impact of collaborations between opposing service providers on homeless services, drawing insights from interviews with homeless service workers in Skid Row, Los Angeles. Situated within the institutional logics framework, the research theoretically explores how institutions with conflicting ideologies can collaborate. Furthermore, the study introduces the concept of adjacent logics as a novel way to understand collaboration amidst conflicting ideologies. This study contributes to our understanding of homeless services and provides a nuanced framework for comprehending collaboration in the face of conflicting ideologies. This study addresses a critical gap in our knowledge, offering insights that can inform scholars and practitioners on collaborative strategies and reforms to benefit individuals experiencing homelessness and similar interacting populations.

加州目前正在应对严重的无家可归者危机，洛杉矶，尤其是贫民窟，拥有全美最多的无家可归者。无家可归现象日益普遍，需要采取循证实践来进行有效干预。尽管对无家可归者服务进行了广泛的研究，但该问题的复杂性使我们无法找到解决无家可归者多样化需求的明确解决方案。从严格的刑事定罪到支持性服务，各种方法对致力于服务这一人群的机构提出了挑战，要求他们应对相互冲突的意识形态。这项研究深入探讨了对立服务提供商之间的合作对无家可归者服务的影响，并从对洛杉矶贫民窟无家可归者服务人员的采访中汲取了见解。该研究在制度逻辑框架内，从理论上探讨了意识形态冲突的机构如何进行合作。此外，该研究引入了相邻逻辑的概念，作为理解意识形态冲突中协作的一种新方法。这项研究有助于我们对无家可归者服务的理解，并为理解意识形态冲突时的合作提供了一个细致入微的框架。这项研究解决了我们知识中的一个关键差距，提供了一些见解，可以为学者和从业者提供合作策略和改革方面的信息，以造福于无家可归的个人和类似的互动人群。