Search results for ‘Subject term:"older people"’ Sort:
Results 1 - 8 of 8
Care regimes on the move: comparing home care for dependent older people in Belgium, England, Germany and Italy
- Authors:
- DEGAVRE Florence, et al
- Publisher:
- Universite Catholique de Louvan. Centre Interdisciplinaire de Recherche Travail, Etat et Societe
- Publication year:
- 2012
- Pagination:
- 290p.
- Place of publication:
- Charleroi
Taking the reforms of the 1990s as its starting point, this report examines the dynamics of change experienced by Belgium, England, Germany and Italy in their home care sectors. Central to our analysis is the process of “marketisation”. This constitutes one of the major trends in all these four countries, yet its nature and impact show important national variations. The data referred to in this report relate to developments in and around various home care sectors, and cover both societal and organisational dynamics. Country-based research teams gathered the information, each team following identical methodological guidelines. This report uses official documents and grey literature from the care sector to analyse the discourses underpinning reforms in the field. The conclusions of this research will be of relevance for any country or region struggling to design a home care system for an ageing population. The coordinators of this research project have submitted a proposal for a special issue of Ageing and Society based on the main chapters of this report.
Regulating the delivery of cash‐for‐care payments across Europe
- Authors:
- GORI Cristiano, LUPPI Matteo
- Journal article citation:
- Social Policy and Administration, 53(4), 2019, pp.567-578.
- Publisher:
- Wiley
The article aims to understand how governments across Europe have modified the regulation of the delivery of cash‐for‐care schemes (CfCs) to dependent older people since the beginning of the century. In our terminology, the regulation of the CfCs delivery defines the norms, rules, and practices that public actors adopt to manage how beneficiaries can use the benefits. To discuss the regulation of CfCs delivery, an original framework is employed that take three analytical dimensions into account: the degrees of freedom in benefits' utilization (“CfCs utilization” dimension), the provision of information/orientation/advices/counselling to older people and families (“professional support” dimension), and the relationship between the delivery of CfCs and the delivery of the other publicly funded long‐term care inputs (“care system” dimension). The analysis adopts a comparative perspective, looking at six countries—Italy, Austria, the Netherlands, France, Germany, and England. Among various findings, the main one consists in showing that there has been a shared and increased interest in consolidating the regulation of CfCs delivery. This trend has been mostly directed towards the new policy aim of strengthening the professional support, a goal underestimated in the past, when this dimension was not a major topic of both debate and practice concerning CfCs across Europe. (Edited publisher abstract)
An international comparison of long-term care funding and outcomes: insights for the social care green paper
- Author:
- INCISIVE HEALTH
- Publisher:
- Incisive Health
- Publication year:
- 2018
- Pagination:
- 49
- Place of publication:
- London
This report, commissioned by Age UK, highlights different approaches to long-term care taken by five countries in the developed world, and looks at how they compare to the system in England. These five countries have very different systems, but face similar demographic and financial challenges to those in England. The countries are France, Germany, Spain, Italy and Japan. The report compares the approaches in relation to: service structures, funding levels, funding models, and outcomes. The findings suggest that creating a sustainable social care system fit for a rapidly ageing population is a challenge in every one of these countries. However, it finds that the financial deal for citizens with care needs is often more generous in other countries in comparison to England, with other nations generally either providing some non-means tested basic level of support, and/or cap the amount of co-payment to be made, and/or use a more gradual means-test. Profiles for each of the five countries are also included. (Edited publisher abstract)
Varieties of migrant care work: comparing patterns of migrant labour in social care
- Author:
- HOOREN Franca J. van
- Journal article citation:
- Journal of European Social Policy, 22(2), May 2012, pp.133-147.
- Publisher:
- Sage
In some European countries the provision of elderly care services is highly dependent upon migrant labour. This article presents a comparative analysis of the role of migrant workers in elderly care in Italy, the Netherlands and England. The aim is to understand why the trend towards migrant workers in social care has occurred in some countries, such as Italy, more than others, such as the Netherlands. It investigates both the employment of migrant workers by care-providing organisations and by families. The data sources used included surveys (the Italian Indagine Multiscopo sulle Famiglie and the British Labour Force Survey) and expert interviews with, for example, representatives of trade unions, migrant organisations and policy makers. It is found that migrant workers work longer hours and do more night shifts than their native peers. Between country differences in the importance of migrant workers in social care can be explained primarily by differences in social care policies and care regimes, while the impact of immigration policies is more ambiguous. It is argued that a familialistic care regime induces a ‘migrant in the family’ model of care, while a liberal care regime leads to a ‘migrant in the market’ model of employment, and a social democratic care regime creates no particular demand for migrant workers.
Livindhome: living independently at home: reforms in home care in 9 European countries
- Authors:
- ROSTGAARD Tina, et al
- Publisher:
- Danish National Centre for Social Research
- Publication year:
- 2011
- Pagination:
- 252p., bibliog.
- Place of publication:
- Copenhagen
This report presents findings from the project Living Independently at Home: Reforms in organisation and governance of European home care for older people and people with disabilities (LIVINDHOME). The study provides an overview of recent and current reforms in the organisation and governance of home care systems in nine European countries, and analyses the intended and unintended results of these reforms, in particular, how the reforms have affected the organisation, supply and quality of care. The focus of the study is home care for older people and for people with disabilities. In countries that have more family-oriented welfare traditions (Austria, Germany, Italy, Ireland), comprehensive approaches to long-term care have started to develop only relatively recently. Despite increases in funding for long-term care, home care provision in Italy and Ireland remains highly fragmented, with major local variations in access to services. The second group of countries (Denmark, England, Finland, Norway, and Sweden) have had more or less comprehensive home care services in place for many years. These have been delivered by local authorities under a legislative framework set by central government. Reforms have here involved the introduction of market- and consumer-related mechanisms into the supply and delivery of home care.
Dependency care in the EU: a comparative analysis
- Author:
- KAMETTE Florence
- Publisher:
- Fondation Robert Schuman
- Publication year:
- 2011
- Pagination:
- 9p.
- Place of publication:
- Paris
The ageing population together with the collapse of family solidarity means that managing old age dependency is a problem common to all European countries. In France, reform of the ‘personalised autonomy allowance’ (APA) currently being paid to the dependent elderly is under debate. This policy paper analyses the way that 6 European Member States address the problem of old age dependency to provide an illustration of various possible solutions. These 6 countries, Germany, England, Denmark, Spain, Italy and the Netherlands have been selected because their social protection systems are inspired differently and offer more or less generous types of cover. Germany and Spain have introduced specific, all-encompassing measures to manage dependency, unlike Denmark where local social security payments have gradually developed to cope with the requirements of an ageing population. England, Italy and the Netherlands distinguish between care and other services which are required by increasingly dependent people, the former depend on the healthcare system and the latter are provided for by the local authorities.
Defining responsibility for care: approaches to care of older people in six European countries
- Author:
- BLACKMAN Tim
- Journal article citation:
- International Journal of Social Welfare, 9(3), July 2000, pp.181-190.
- Publisher:
- Wiley
This article examines the social care of older people in six contrasting European countries. Family, institutional and community care are compared, focusing on vulnerability, empowerment and the gatekeeping of resources. The article considers the position of older people in each care system by presenting individual case studies. The six countries include the family-oriented systems of Ireland, Italy and Greece, and the individual-oriented systems of Denmark, Norway and England. Overall, the different levels of provision of organised social care services are a major aspect of inequality within and between the countries. Whilst there is little prospect for any major policy transfer across national boundaries, there is potential for selective cross-national learning with regard to particular service developments.
COVID-19 and policies for care homes in the first wave of the pandemic in European welfare states: Too little, too late?
- Authors:
- DALY Mary, et al
- Journal article citation:
- Journal of European Social Policy, 32(1), 2022, pp.48-59.
- Publisher:
- Sage
This article examines COVID-19 and residential care for older people during the first wave of the pandemic in 2020, comparing a range of countries – Denmark, England, Germany, Italy and Spain – to identify the policy approaches taken to the virus in care homes and set these in institutional and policy context. Pandemic policies towards care homes are compared in terms of lockdown, testing and the supply of personal protective equipment. The comparative analysis shows a clear cross-national clustering: Denmark and Germany group together by virtue of the proactive approach adopted, whereas England, Italy and Spain had major weaknesses resulting in delayed and generally inadequate responses. The article goes on to show that these outcomes and country clustering are embedded in particular long-term care (LTC) policy systems. The factors that we highlight as especially important in differentiating the countries are the resourcing of the sector, the regulation of LTC and care homes, and the degree of vertical (and to a lesser extent horizontal) coordination in the sector and between it and the health sector. (Edited publisher abstract)