Intelligibility and Clarity of the Decision Documents
Kela must provide sufficient, objective and intelligible justifications for the benefit decisions it makes. This legal obligation to provide justification is particularly weighty if the customer does not receive the benefit they have applied for, i.e. the decision is a rejection. When an application for sickness allowance or disability pension is rejected by Kela for reasons related to work ability, the solution experts rely on statements written by Kela’s expert doctors in particular. The legislative reform (875/2014) which entered into force in 2015, aimed to improve the justifications for Kela’s decisions, especially in benefit decisions requiring medical assessment.
The study uses a survey to find out how Kela’s solution experts who process disability pensions and sickness allowance matters feel that work practices support the making of objective, clear and intelligible decision texts in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act (Section 9) and to what extent the legislative reform (875/2014) is considered to have succeeded in its objectives, i.e. to have affected the improvement of the reasoning behind decisions. The focus is particularly on the functionality of technical tools (information systems and phrases) and the impact of the assessments by expert doctors to whom the decisions refer.
The study is carried out in co-operation between Kela’s research and the Institute for the Languages of Finland (Kotus). The results of the study can be used in the development of work practices and of benefit decisions and their justifications, and more generally in the development of administration.
Researchers
- Hanna-Mari Heinonen, Leading Researcher
- Markku Laatu
- Hannu Mattila
- Ulla Tiililä
- Jenni Viinikka
Project Implementation Period
1.2.2023–31.7.2024. The project has ended.
Cooperation Partner
Project Results
A survey was conducted during this study to examine the extent to which Kela’s Administrative Specialists are able to issue decisions that are clear, easy to understand and to the point as required by section 9 of the Administrative Procedure Act. The study focused on decision notices whereby Kela denied a customer sickness allowance or a disability pension. The results of the survey highlighted two problematic phenomena: Benefit decisions are official documents whose language is usually considered difficult to understand. The decisions selected for the study were also accompanied by an assessment issued by a Kela Medical Advisor, and the Medical Advisor system has long been subject to criticism and development. Respondents identified rigid information systems that do not always allow enough room to expand on the reasons for the decision as a hindrance to writing decision notices that are easy to understand. Respondents also brought up problems with the background materials, such as the application form, statements issued by the doctors in charge of the customers’ care and the Medical Advisors’ assessments. The majority of Kela’s Administrative Specialists found, however, that both the Medical Advisors’ assessments and the grounds provided for each decision have become somewhat clearer in recent years. Going forward, reasonable points for further development would be daily work routines and the customer’s service path. Attention should also be paid to improving customer service and the conditions for producing clear official documents that are easy to understand. Decision notices are part of the implementation of social security, which should be understood as multiprofessional work that is focused on the production of language and different types of texts and which is dependent on technical solutions. As such, language and language technology experts should always be consulted during its development.
