| Summary: | 碩士 === 世新大學 === 行政管理學研究所(含博、碩專班) === 95 === In recent years, social welfare privatization has become one of the important channels for providing social services in Taiwan. Taipei County Government began the promotion of public social welfare institution run by private firms in 1996. Now, there are more than ten public social welfare institutions run by authorized non-government agencies. Yet, there are several problems arisen from the interaction between county government and the non-government organization; how to reach consensus and provide a better service for physically and mentally disabled citizens in Taipei County is, indeed, an important issue for mutual benefit. The purpose of this study is as follows:
1.To understand the current condition and future outlook of the public-owned-and-private-run social welfare institution for physically and mentally disabled in Taipei County;
2.To understand the current operation and authorized agency’s future plan of continuing the management of the social welfare institution for the physically and mentally disabled;
3.To understand the problems and difficulties, at present, faced by Taipei County private-operated social welfare institution for physically and mentally disabled, Taipei County Government and the authorized agency of the institution;
4.Research results show the solution of the problems; we also offer suggestions to the Taipei County Government and the authorized agency on improving the administrative performance for both parties.
Through literature review, we examined and analyzed the information collected; then after comprehensive study of the background information on research subject, we also exchanged opinions with the colleagues of county government who are in charge of the administrative affairs of social welfare institution. Consequently, we had an interview outline which became the content of depth interview after guidance from the academic advisor. Research subjects in the interview are department chief in county government, the government official who is in charge of the program and the manager from the authorized organization.
Due to the innate difference of the organizational nature between government agency and non-government organization, and the discrepancies of roles, rights and obligation, there comes a cognitive gap in many aspects. From depth interview, it proves that there are subjective and objective differences. In view of this situation, we study from three perspectives including policy formation, execution and evaluation; we also propose suggestions for government agency and the authorized non-government organization so that hopefully, in the future, we can relieve the difference between two parities to achieve the goal of caring for the physically and mentally disabled.
|
|---|
