Establishing Individual Care Plans for Rehabilitation Patients: Traces of Self-Targeting in the Norwegian Universal Welfare State

  • Ivan Harsløf
  • Mirela Slomic
  • Ole Kristian Sandnes Håvold
Keywords: Critical realism, Individual Care Plan, Rehabilitation, Social services, Service Universalism

Abstract

Several countries have introduced devices for coordination of complicated individual cases across care, health and welfare services. This study examined one such device: the individual care plan (ICP), introduced in Norway in 2001 to enhance user involve­ment and coordination across sectors and service providers. Despite strong political imperatives, however, ICPs have remained significantly underused. To understand why, this study investigated the experiences with ICPs among staff in municipal coordinating units, tasked with organising rehabili­ta­tion efforts and case­workers in local labour and welfare services. In focus groups, participants discussed the fictitious vignette of a patient with traumatic brain injury, a person clearly within the ICP target group. They praised ICPs for advancing the rehabilitation process but acknowledged that they were applied too rarely. Through abductive-retroductive recontextualisation, this study identified a practice of de-facto self-targeting: in some municipalities, patients had to request ICPs themselves. We argue that this mechanism may have emerged from ambiguous propensities of rehabilitation, simultaneously emphasising needs and potentials, and ultimately from ambiguities in the Norwegian welfare model balancing universalism and local autonomy.

References

Andelic, N., Hammergren, N., Bautz-Holter, E., Bautz-Holter, E., Sveen, U., Brunborg, C., & Røe, C. (2009). Functional outcome and health-related quality of life 10 years after moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, 120, 16–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0404.2008.01116.x

Benjaminsen, L. (2017). Hjemløshed i Danmark 2017: national kortlægning, report 09:25 [Homelessness in Denmark 2017]. Copenhagen, Denmark: VIVE.

Bhaskar, R. (2014). Foreword. In P. K. Edwards, J. O’Mahoney & S. Vincent (Eds.), Studying organizations using critical realism: a practical guide (pp. v–xv). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Bhaskar, R., Danermark, B., & Price, L. (2018). Interdisciplinarity and wellbeing. A critical realist general theory of interdisciplinarity. London, UK: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315177298

Bjerkan, J., Richter, M., Grimsmo, A, Hellesø, R., & Brender, J. (2011). Integrated care in Norway: the state of affairs years after regulation by law. International Journal of Integrated Care, 11. https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.530

Brazinova, A., Rehorcikova, V., Taylor, M. S., Buckova, V., Majdan, M., Psota, M., Peeters, W., Feigin, V., Theadom, A., Holkovic, L. & Synnot, A. (2016). Epidemiology of traumatic brain injury in Europe: a living systematic review. Journal of Neurotrauma. 33:1–30. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2015.4126

Breimo, J. P. (2015). Captured by care: an institutional ethnography on the work of being in a rehabilitation process in Norway. Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, 42(2).

Breimo, J. P., Normann, T., Sandvin, J. T., & Thommesen, H. (2015). Individuell plan: samspill og unoter [The individual care plan]. Oslo, Norway: Gyldendal Akademisk.

Bunt, S. (2016). Critical realism and grounded theory: analysing the adoption outcomes for disabled children using the retroduction framework. Qualitative Social Work, 17(2): 176–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325016664572

County Governor of Sør-Trøndelag. (2013). Kartlegging av status for arbeidet med koordinerende enhet for habilitering og rehabilitering (KE), herunder overordnet ansvar for individuell plan (IP) og koordinator [Mapping the status for the work with the coordinating unit for habilitation and rehabilitation]. Retrieved from http://www.fylkesmannen.no/Documents/Dokument%20FMST/Helse%20og%20omsorg/Individuell%20plan/2013%20Fylkesmannens%20kartlegging%20av%20status%20KE%20og%20IP/Kartlegging%20av%20status%20for%20arbeidet%20med%20koordinerende%20enhet%20individuell%20plan%20og%20koordinator%20-%20Rapport%20april%202013.pdf

County Governor of Buskerud. (n.d.). Individuell plan, koordinator og koordinerende enhet [Individual care plan, coordinator and coordinating unit]. Retrieved from https://www.fylkesmannen.no/globalassets/fm.../ip-og-koordinerende-enhet.pptx.

Danermark, B. (2004). Samverkan–en fråga om makt [Cooperation–a question of power]. Örebro, Sweden: LäroMedia.

Danermark, B., Ekström, M., Jakobsen, L., & Karlsson, J. C. (2002). Explaining society: critical realism in the social sciences. London, UK: Routledge.

Deloitte. (n.d.). FoU-prosjekt 144007: rehabilitering: konsekvenser for kommunene av den stille reformen. [Rehabilitation: consequences for the municipalities of the the quit reform] Retrieved from http://www.ks.no/contentassets/c0c501426c784c91ab253c9feaf7ac36/rapport.pdf.

Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge, UK: Polity.

Finset, A., Dyrnes, S., Krogstad, J. M., & Berstad, J. (1995). Self-reported social networks and interpersonal support 2 years after severe traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury, 9, 141–150. https://doi.org/10.3109/02699059509008187

Grue, L. P., & Næss, A. (2012). Habilitering som koordinerende tiltak: erfaringer fra tre brukergrupper. [Habi¬litation as a coordinating measure: experiences from three user groups]. NOVA rapport, Oslo, Norway. https://doi.org/10.7577/nova/rapporter/2012/4

Haddad, L., & Kanbur, R. (1992). Intrahousehold inequality and the theory of targeting. European Economic Review, 36, 372–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-2921(92)90093-C

Hagen, R., & Johnsen, E. (2013). Styring gjennom samhandling [Governance through collaboration]. In A. Tjora & L. Melby (Eds.), Samhandling for helse: Kunnskap, kommunikasjon og teknologi i helsetjenesten. Pp. 31–53. Oslo, Norway: Gyldendal Akademisk.

Hanssen, G. S., Helgesen, M. K., & Vabo, S. I. (2018). Politikk og demokrati: En innføring i stats-og kommunalkunnskap [Politics and democracy], 4th ed. Oslo, Norway: Gyldendal Akademisk.

Harsløf, I., Søbjerg Nielsen, U., & Feiring, M. (2017). Danish and Norwegian hospital social workers’ cross-institutional work amidst inter-sectoral restructuring of health and social welfare. European Journal of Social Work, 20(4). https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2016.1188783

Hatland, A. (2011). Rettsliggjøringen av velferdspolitikken [Juridification of welfare policies]. In A. Hatland (Ed.)., Veivalg i velferdspolitikken (pp. 153–172). Bergen, Norway: Fagbokforlaget.

Herps, M. A., Buntinx, W. H. E., Schalock, R. L., van Breukelen, G. J., & Curfs, L. M. (2016). Individual support plans of people with intellectual disabilities in residential services: content analysis of goals and resources in relation to client characteristics. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 60, 254–262. https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.12245

Hollingen, A. (2008). Brukererferinger med nettbasert individuell plan [User experiences with web-based ICP] (Unpublished master’s thesis). Molde, Norway: Molde University College.

Holum, L. C. (2012). ‘It is a good idea, but…’ A qualitative study of implementation of ‘individual plan’ in Norwegian mental health care. International Journal of Integrated Care, 12. https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.809

Houston, S. (2001). Beyond social constructionism: critical realism and social work. British Journal of Social Work, 31, 845–861. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/31.6.845

Håvold, O. K, S., Harsløf, I., & Andreassen, A. (2018). Externalizing an ‘asset model’ of activation: creative institutional work by frontline workers in the Norwegian labour and welfare service. Social Policy and Administration. 52(1): 178–196. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12305

Jacobsen, M. H. (2015). Den metaforiske fantasi: kreativ rekontekstualisering og rekonstruktion i kvalitativ metode [The metaphorical imagination: creative recontextualisation and reconstruction in qualitative method]. In J. E. Møller, S. S. E. Bengtsen & K. P. Munk (Eds.), Metodefetichisme: kvalitativ metode på afveje? [Methodological fetishism: qualitative methods astray?] (pp. 193–212). Århus, Denmark: Århus Universitetsforlag.

Jensen, C. (2011). The forgotten half: analysing the politics of welfare services. International Journal of Social Welfare, 20, 404–412. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2397.2010.00745.x

Kazepov, Y. (2010). Rescaling social policies towards multilevel governance in Europe. Surrey, UK: Ashgate.

Kjellevold, A. (2002). Retten til individuell plan og koordinator [The right to individual care plan and coordinator]. Bergen, Norway: Fagbokforlaget.

Kjellevold, A. (2014). Individuell plan i helse-og omsorgstjenesten–behov for endringer og ansvarliggjøring? [The individual care plan in the health care services]. Tidsskrift for erstatningsrett, forsikringsrett og velferdsrett, 11, 267–300.

Kortteisto, T., Laitila, L., & Pitkanen, A. (2017). Attitudes of mental health professionals towards service user involvement. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences. 32(2):681–689.

Law on patient rights (2001), LOV-2018-06-15-38. Retrieved from https://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/1999-07-02-63.

Leutz, W. N. (1999). Five laws for integrating medical and social services: lessons from the United States and the United Kingdom. The Milbank Quarterly, 77, 77–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0009.00125

Martinelli, F., Anttonen, A., & Mätzke, M. (Eds.). (2017). Social services disrupted: changes, challenges and policy implications for Europe in times of austerity. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786432117

May, P. J., & Winter, S. (2007). Collaborative service arrangements. Public Management Review, 9, 479–502. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030701726473

Morrison, R. L., Stettler, K., & Anderson, A. E. (2004). Using vignettes in cognitive research on establishment surveys. Journal of Official Statistics, 20(2), 319–340.

Normann, T., Sandvin, J. T., & Thommesen, H. (2004). A holistic approach to rehabilitation. Oslo, Noway: Kommuneforlaget.

Ministry of Health. (1998). St.meld. nr. 21 (1998–99), Ansvar og meistring [Responsibility and coping]. Oslo, Norway: Author.

O’Mahoney, J., & Vincent, S. (2014). Critical realism as an empirical project: a beginner’s guide. In P. K. Edwards, J. O’Mahoney & S. Vincent (Eds.), Studying organizations using critical realism: a practical guide (pp. 1–20). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665525.003.0001

Osgjelten, R. T., & Wirak, M. T. (2004). Foreldreerfaringer [Parental experiences]. In O. P. Askeheim, T. Andersen & J. Eriksen (Eds.), Sosiale tjenester for familier som har barn med funksjonsnedsettelser (pp. 47–55). Oslo, Norway: Gyldendal Akademisk.

Renner, I., Saint, V., Neumann, A., Ukhova, D., Horstmann, S., Boettinger, U., Dreibus, M., Kerl-Wienecke, A., Wulff, P., Mechthild, P. & Thaiss, H. (2018). Improving psychosocial services for vulnerable families with young children: strengthening links between health and social services in Germany. BMJ, 363, k4786. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k4786

Rudkjøbing, A., Strandberg-Larsen, M., Vrangbaek, K., Andersen, J. S., & Krasnik, A. (2014). Health care agreements as a tool for coordinating health and social services. International journal of integrated care, 14, e036. https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.1452

Scambler, G. (2002). Health and social change: A critical theory. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

Smith, C., & Elger, T. (2014). Critical realism and interviewing subjects. In P. K. Edwards, J. O’Mahoney & S. Vincent (Eds.), Studying organizations using critical realism: a practical guide (pp. 109–131). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665525.003.0006

Sayer, A. (1992). Method in social science: a realist approach. London, UK: Routledge.

Star, S. L. (1988). The structure of ill-structured solutions: boundary objects and heterogeneous distributed problem solving. In M. Huhns & L. Gasser (Eds.), Readings in distributed artificial intelligence. Menlo Park, CA: Kaufman. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-55860-092-8.50006-X

Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science, 19, 387–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631289019003001

Timmermans, S., & Tavory, I. (2012). Theory construction in qualitative research: from grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociological Theory, 30, 167–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275112457914

Titmuss, R. (1974). What is social policy?. In B. A. Smith & K. Titmuss (Eds.), Social policy: an introduction. London, UK: Allen and Unwin.

Vabo, S. I. (2010). Actors and governance arrangements in long-term care for older people. In Y. Kazepov (Ed.), Rescaling social policies: towards multilevel governance in Europe (pp. 343–364). Surrey, UK: Ashgate. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315244433-10

Vabo, S. I. (2014). Flernivåorganisering—lokal skreddersøm og nasjonale standarder [Multi-level governance—local tailoring and national standards]. In M. Vabø & S. I. Vabo (Eds.), Velferdens organisering (pp. 158–174). Oslo, Norway: Universitetsforlaget.

Vabø, M., & Szebehely, M. (2012). A caring state for older people? In A. Antonnen, L. Häikiö & K. Stefánsson (Eds.), Welfare state, universalism and diversity (pp. 121–143). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Valset, K. (2018). Investigating the link between school performance, aftercare and educational outcome among youth ageing out of foster care: a Norwegian nationwide longitudinal cohort study. Nordic Social Work Research. 8(1):79–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/2156857X.2018.1457557

Vike, H. (2018). Politics and bureaucracy in the Norwegian welfare state: an anthropological approach. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64137-9

Weber, M. (1971). Makt og byråkrati: essays om politikk og klasse, samfunnsforskning og verdier [Power and bureaucracy: Essays on politics and class, social research and values]. Oslo, Norway: Gyldendal.

Wilks, T. (2004). The use of vignettes in qualitative research into social work values. Qualitative Social Work, 3, 78–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325004041133

Øverbye, E. (2018). Er selektivisme bedre enn universalisme i velferdspolitikken? [Is selectivism better than universalism?] Norsk sosiologisk tidsskrift, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.2535-2512-2018-01-04

Published
2019-06-14
How to Cite
Harsløf, I., Slomic, M., & Sandnes Håvold, O. K. (2019). Establishing Individual Care Plans for Rehabilitation Patients: Traces of Self-Targeting in the Norwegian Universal Welfare State. Nordic Journal of Social Research, 10(1), 24-47. https://doi.org/10.7577/njsr.2686
Section
Articles