The need to bring an end to the era of eligibility policies for a person-centred, financially sustainable future

Structuration processes of client-oriented and system-oriented social work practice: the view point of client documentation

“…The consideration of client needs, which is the focus of client-oriented social work practice, is realized when the interaction between structure and actors is active, easy and reciprocal, and actions are conducted in true collaboration during encounters. In a client-oriented social work practice, this takes place in an open manner without clients needing to know in advance for which specific services they are applying and without having to adapt their individual needs to the organization's standard service delivery and service-specific criteria (Beresford and Croft 2004;Payne 2009;Slasberg and Beresford 2017;Martinell Barfoed 2018). Client-oriented social work practice emphasizes the meaning of mutual negotiations between the client and the social worker and -instead of formally completing separate work phases -focuses on a more holistic and dynamic understanding of social work, which originates in the roots of social work but also includes the ability to respond to current and future challenges (Richmond [1922] 1939; Ebsen 2018; Harrikari and Rauhala 2019).…”

“…The human actors in social work are the social workers and the clients; however, they do not have equal positions as actors. In relation to agency, social workers have professional and ethical obligations that are challenged by the clients' needs and organizational requirements (Heffernan 2006;Laitinen and Niskala 2016;Slasberg and Beresford 2017;Grell, Blom, and Ahmadi 2019). Although social workers are qualified professionals, rather than operating in a completely independent manner, they are, at least to some degree, institutionalized and structured actors who perform repetitive routines and are socialized into the prevailing structure of the service system.…”

Making person-centred assessments

“…Assessments should represent a different (and prior) activity to support planning and there might therefore be different implications in what it means to be personcentred. One example of an attempt to put people in the centre of their assessments was the provision for disabled people to conduct their own self-assessments, but has been argued to have failed because of the requirement for local authorities to apply eligibility criteria (Slasberg & Beresford, 2017). From the beginning of the personal budgets agenda, however, Glendinning et al (2006) argued for people to identify their own 'outcomes' in their lives as a means of assessments becoming more 'person-centred' and this focus on outcomes has been incorporated into the Care Act.…”

‘It was clear from the start that [SDS] was about a cost cutting agenda.’ Exploring disabled people’s early experiences of the introduction of Self-Directed Support in Scotland

“…However, a major structural limitation to the expansion of true choice and control in the UK has arisen through historical inconsistencies in the funding and organisation of social care. Despite numerous attempts at policy change (Pearson 2012;Beresford 2014b) path dependencies have been difficult to shift (Slasberg & Beresford 2017). The success of campaigning by disabled people in the UK in 1990 which led to the introduction of DPs was aided considerably by research (Zarb and Nadash 1994) that indicated that the approach would likely result in a reduction in spending per head in social care.…”

“…This has been compounded by the requirement on local authorities to deliver a balanced budget. (Beresford 2009;Slasberg and Beresford 2016b;Slasberg and Beresford 2017). As a result councils operate strict eligibility criteria to identify those who qualify for support (Slasberg and Beresford 2016b).…”