This enforcement is stipulated according to Paragraph 4 of Article 37 in the Senior Citizens Welfare Act (hereinafter referred to as “the enforcement”).
The evaluated and rewarded subjects in this enforcement are listed as follows:
1.National public, provincial public, and government subsidized senior citizens’ social welfare organizations, and those of juridical persons or syndicates.
2.Municipal public, county and city public, and government subsidized senior citizens’ social welfare organizations, and those of juridical persons or syndicates, first evaluated by municipal, county or city competent authorities and amounting to above a certain level.
The central competent authority has to make an evaluation of senior citizens’ social welfare organizations at least once every three years.
In order to evaluate the performance of welfare organizations for old folks, central competent authorities may establish an evaluation committee, with 19 to 25 members, one of which is the chairman. The position of the committee chairman is concurrently held by top executive of the authorities directly handling the said business. Other committee members are concurrently held by the following officials of central competent authorities:
Five or six representatives of central competent authorities or other relevant organizations
Eight to ten scholars specialized in welfare for old folks or other relevant fields
Five to eight scholars with at least five years’ actual experience in welfare for old folks
The chairman of the evaluation committee chairs all committee meetings. When the chairman is absent, he may appoint a committee member to act on his behalf.
All committee members shall observe the principle of conflict of interest.
The evaluation items of senior citizen’s social welfare organizations include the items below:
1.The organization of the administration and the management.
2.Daily cares and the professional service.
3.The equipments of the environment and the maintenance of security.
4.Protection of rights and interests.
5.Improvement and innovation
6.Items according to other related laws and rules on senior citizens’ social welfare and evaluation items determined by the evaluation group.
The implementation plan of evaluation will be publicized by the central competent authority twelve months before the evaluation.
The senior citizens’ social welfare organizations in Paragraph 1 of Article 2 after doing the evaluation by themselves according to the implementation plan in the previous article should be sent to the central competent authority for the second evaluation.
The evaluation procedures and methods of the senior citizens’ social welfare organizations in Paragraph 2 of Article 2 are as follows:
1.Self evaluation: Conducted by the evaluated organizations themselves according to the implementation plan in the previous article and sent to the central competent authority for the first evaluation.
2.The first evaluation: Conducted by ways of examination in written forms and investigation on the spot by municipal, county, or city competent authorities and whose result is reported by mail on the date assigned by the central competent authority.
3.The second evaluation: conducted by ways of examination in written forms and investigation on the spot by the evaluation group of the central competent authority.
If the contents in the evaluation items conducted by municipal, county, or city competent authorities a year before the central competent authority implements the evaluation, are reported and agreed on by the central competent authority, its evaluation result can be the first evaluation in Paragraph 2 in the previous article.
The evaluation results can be marked as the grades below:
Those with the results of the second evaluation listed as above Grade A will be commended and issued with medals; those private senior citizens’ social welfare organizations will be considered with bonuses.
The senior officers and related staff of those public senior citizens’ social welfare organizations with results of the second evaluation listed as excellent should be rewarded administratively by the competent authority.
Those senior citizens’ social welfare organizations with results of the second evaluation listed as excellent or grade A have priority to be subsidized by the governments or entrusted with conducting businesses.
Those with results of the second evaluation listed as grade C or D are improved in a time limit should be re-evaluated in six months by the central competent authority; those with results of the re-evaluation listed below grade B should be terminated with government subsidies or entrustment of the business and dealt with by the competent authority following the regulations in this enforcement.
The bonuses obtained in accordance with this enforcement by the private senior citizens’ social welfare organizations should be utilized for conducting businesses of the senior citizens’ welfare, facilitating installations, equipments and rewards of the staff, and should be calculated in account in details.
Article Ten The evaluation of the senior citizens’ organizations can be entrusted to civil professional teams, organizations, or schools; the cost for the evaluation should be attended to via the budget drawn up by the central competent authority
The enforcement will be enacted starting from the date of promulgation.