Dosent, Institutt for barnevern og sosialt arbeid, Norges arktiske universitet aina.a.kane@uit.no
SammendragUt fra Navs samfunnsmandat om å fremme arbeidsinkludering for brukere med ulike ressurser og behov har jeg undersøkt hvordan Nav-ansatte erfarer sitt arbeid med å fatte vedtak om brukernes bistandsbehov. Jeg har drøftet hvordan rettsriktig vedtak fordrer en tilstrekkelig kartlegging, hvordan kvaliteten i beslutningsgrunnlaget fremmes gjennom brukerens deltakelse, samt hvordan brukernes bistandsbehov kan omhandle mer enn arbeidsrettet bistand. Undersøkelsen synliggjør hvordan brukeres overgang til arbeid også kan fordre at Nav identifiserer og adresserer deres sosiale problemer i vid forstand.
NøkkelordRettssikkerhet, behovsvurdering, Nav-loven § 14a, brukerinvolvering, arbeidsrettet bistand
AbstractBased on Nav's mandate of promoting work inclusion for clients with different resources and needs, I have examined how Nav employees experience their work with assessments of clients' assistance needs, and how this can affect the legal security of their users. I have discussed how decisions concerning a client's assistance needs require proper assessments, how the quality of decisions is promoted through the client's participation, and how the clients' assistance needs can exceed work-related assistance. The research work also shows how clients' transition into employment requires Nav identifying and addressing their social problems in a wider sense.
Barn og familier kan motta kommunale velferdstjenester i form av helse-og omsorgstjenester og/eller barneverntjenester. Tjenestene kan vaere like i formål, innhold og saksbehandlingsregler, og begge instanser skal utøve sitt arbeid forsvarlig. Barn og familier må likevel forholde seg til instanser og personale med forsvarlighetskrav som er ulikt beskrevet i lovgivningen. Helselovgivningens mer utfyllende beskrivelser kan gi ulike bidrag til økt forsvarlighet i barneverntjenester, herunder ved at instansens og personalets forsvarlighetskrav tilpasses deres målgruppe og mandat og ved lovfesting av kompetansekrav i barneverntjenester.
Based on the issue, I have studied the decision-making principles related to social assistances and interviewed work coaches at two NAV-offices in Northern Norway, to gain an insight into what considerations are most prominent in drafting decision-making. The data is analyzed with respect to human rights, legislation, current legislative work and circulars, and legal literature. Work coaches' justifying of decisions is influenced by legal knowledge, internal procedures/instructions and time resources. I emphasize how the rights of the individual can be secured through the legal expertise of the supervisors as well as increased visibility of the individual circumstances on which decisions have been taken, and what information has been brought in by the claimant. These could be important contributions to promote claimants' confidence that their case has been assessed adequately.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.