The Coordinated Individual Plan – is this a solution for complex organizations to handle complex needs?

ABSTRACT

Persons with mental health problems and substance abuse often have complex needs requiring many kinds of help concurrently. In Sweden, an attempt has been made to counterbalance the effects of fragmentation by means of legislation on collaboration, requiring on the individual level the use of Coordinated Individual Plans (Sw. Samordnad Individuell Plan, SIP). The aim of the study is to explore collaboration as it is indicated in SIP and other case documentation with focus on how SIP is motivated, and what kind and degree of collaboration is indicated by the documentation. 12 individual case files have been studied in six local authorities and the results have been analyzed in relation to a regional collaboration agreement and local collaboration agreements. The results show unclear motivation for SIP and that SIP is primarily used for documentation of short-term planning. Use of SIP and participation in SIP appears also to be uneven. The authors characterize SIP as an unsystematic form of interagency meeting, with documentation indicating a relatively low to moderate level of collaboration. The authors question whether SIP is an optimal form for collaboration and suggest that more distinct models such as case management or multidisciplinary teams could be more effective.

Abbreviation SIP: Coordinated Individual Plan (Sw. Samordnad Individuell Plan)

KEYWORDS:

• Coordinated Individual Plan
• collaboration
• complex needs
• mental health
• integrated care

Disclosure statement

This article is based on a collaborative project between the Institution for Social Work at Stockholm University and FoU-Nordväst (RD Northwest), which is a joint research and development unit funded by eight local authorities.

Notes

1. Representatives from other agencies, such as the state employment service or the state social insurance, may be invited to participate. A new version of the regional agreement has retained the original structure (Stockholm Association of Local Authorities and Stockholm County Council 2016).

2. Second-tier managers are defined here as having personnel and budgetary responsibility for their units, as opposed to front-line managers who are mainly responsible for work supervision (Shanks, Lundström, and Wiklund 2015).

Additional information

Funding

The project was completed within existing resources, i.e. without special funding. The authors would like to thank the local authorities for their cooperation.