A Study on Function of Ombudsman System and Ombudsman's Skills in Autonomies

这项研究的目的是界定福利监察员制度作为社会服务使用者的宣传制度有效运作的条件和挑战。本研究发现，在已实施福利申诉专员制度的自治地方，相关制度的功能及现状。福利服务投诉处理委员会是自主福利监察员的先锋，该委员会于1990年在东京中野县成立。查看1990年后市政当局收养福利监察员的时间，我们可以看到，在颁布新的社会福利法和通过长期护理保险制度后，实施的次数有所增加。然而，我们发现，收养的基础有时会遵循不同的市政法律和规则，这些制度不一定被称为“申诉专员”。此外，在相关系统的运行和活动…的范围中，各自治机构之间也存在差异更多S。在进行这项研究时，我们了解到，许多自治州已经意识到，申诉专员制度还不够为人所知，实际成果有限：投诉和处理的数量很少。这项研究的对象是在社会福利领域专门设有监察员制度的自治机构和/或与行政有关的监察员制度，这些制度处理与自治行政有关的所有问题。在这项研究的整个两年期间进行了询问调查和听证会。然而，我们收集的样本仅来自两个目标机构的大约50个自治组织。这一数字清楚地表明，福利监察员制度并没有牢固地确立为那些想要使用和没有普遍使用的人提供支助的制度。考虑到在监察员和秘书处听证会上收到的意见，以及两年来在东京与目标自治地方举行的两次联络会议上分享的信息和意见，我们了解到，当我们了解监察员制度的实际状况和挑战时，该制度具有更大的潜力。特别值得注意的是，在了解监察员运作方式的差异后，向有关各方传播关于监察员的作用以及他们如何处理索赔的信息，将振兴福利监察员制度，并有助于为那些尚未采用相关制度的自治机构制定模式。较少

The aims of this study are to define conditions and clarify challenges for a welfare ombudsman system to function efficiently as an advocacy system for social service users. This research finds the functions and the status quo of the relevant systems in the autonomies that have already implemented welfare ombudsman systems. The vanguard of an autonomous welfare ombudsman was The Complaints Handling Committee of Welfare Service, established in Nakano word, Tokyo, in 1990. Looking at the timings of welfare ombudsman adoptions in municipalities after 1990, we can see that the number of implementations increased after enactment of a new social welfare law and the adoption of a long-term care insurance system. We have found, however, the basics of adoptions sometimes follow different municipal laws and rules and that these systems are not necessarily referred to as "ombudsman." Also, there are differences found among autonomies in operations of relevant systems and in the range of activitie … More s. Undertaking this research, we have learned that many of the autonomies have realized that ombudsman systems are not yet well enough known and practical accomplishments have been limited: complaints and handlings are small in number. This study targets the autonomous bodies that have ombudsman systems exclusively in the social welfare field and/or administration-related ombudsman systems, which deal with all problems in regard to autonomy administration. Inquiry surveys and hearings were conducted throughout a two-year period for the study. The samples we collected, however, were only from about fifty autonomies of both targeted bodies. This number clearly shows that the welfare ombudsman systems are not firmly-established as a support system for those who want to use them and not universally utilized. Considering the views received in the hearings of ombudsmen and secretariats and also the information and opinions shared from two liaison meetings with targeted autonomies in Tokyo over two years, we have learned ombudsman systems have greater potential when we understand the actual state and challenges of the systems. Of special note, disseminating information to concerned parties on the roles of ombudsmen and how they deal with claims, after understanding differences in the manner of their operations, will vitalize welfare ombudsman systems and help to lay out models for those autonomies that have not adopted relevant systems yet. Less