AbstractAccording to the prediction of population in 2012 from Council for Economic Planning Development (CEPD), Taiwan will become the Super Aged Society in 2025. Base on this condition, there are phenomena point out the issue on the elderly care, such as the increase of senior welfare policies, the change in socio-economic environment and the fast growing population of disabled elders. In this study, we will focus on problems in institutional care.
We found that the core concept of current policies and literatures related to institutional care were both the “Ageing in place”, saying that welfare care institutions should be involved in the community in any kind of way. However, there were literatures regarding this kind of facilities as NIMBY facilities. From here, we can see there is still gap between theories and public acknowledgement. Therefore, purposes of study are to: 1. Discover how the institutions exist and involve in the community, 2. Discover the difference of the level of involvement in the community between types of institutions and 3. Discuss the main reasons for affecting institutions implementing their services within the community and propose suggestions at last.
Research methods adopted in this study include: literature review, secondary databases, and field study. We propose a checklist to measure the level of involvement in the community base on literature, current care resource and the ageing index within each region. Tainan south district was therefore chosen to be the empirical region. Service providers are the proper objects for conducting the interview due to their complete understanding of their type of clients and the content of their services.
We found it hard for service providers to improve their images in the community, and the main factor for affecting this is the business type of institution. The nature of profit-making of the small private institutions make the owners care more about the quality of their services inside the institution than the type of activity they promote to the community. Also, the lack of incentives make the owner not only having no obligation but also no willingness to think about taking real actions inside the community. Relatively, large scales of foundations are more likely to work this out due to their rich in funds and number of staffs. Under current regulation, the feasibility of improving the level of community involvement is better for the big scale of institution than the small private sector. We suggest that there should be an overall plan controlling the distribution of all the care institutions considering the resource balance among all the regions, at the same time regulating the market. As for the practical level, we recommend the service providers take proactive actions or at least sustain the physical environment of the institution inside the community.
|Date of Award||2013|
|Supervisor||Tzu-Yuan Chao (Supervisor)|