|
Article 1:
|
This enforcement is stipulated according to Paragraph 4 of Article 37 in the Senior Citizens Welfare Act (hereinafter referred to as “the
enforcement”).
|
|
Article 2:
|
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.
|
|
Article 3:
|
The central competent authority has to
make an evaluation of senior citizens’ social
welfare organizations at least once every three years.
|
|
Article 4:
|
The central competent authority has to set up an evaluation group
to conduct the evaluation of senior citizens’ social welfare organizations, at which seventeen to
twenty-one committee members are placed and one of them is the
chief committee member, held by the chief of the business
unit, and the other committee members are formed by the staff below,
employed by the central competent authority:
1.Six or seven representatives in the central competent
authority and other related authorities.
2.Seven or eight scholars in related fields of senior citizens’ social welfare.
3.Three to five experts
with over five years’ practical experience in senior citizens’ social welfare.
The
committee members in the evaluation group should follow the rule of refusal
of interests.
|
|
Article 5:
|
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.
|
|
Article 6:
|
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.
|
|
Article 7:
|
The evaluation results can be marked as the grades below:
1.Excellent
2.Grade A
3.Grade B
4.Grade C
5.Grade D
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.
|
|
Article 8:
|
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.
|
|
Article 9:
|
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 10:
|
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
|
|
Article 11:
|
The enforcement will be enacted starting from the date of
promulgation.
|