This study demonstrates the value of non-medical intervention strategies for community dwelling older adults with chronic illnesses.

No abstract

The Long Term Care Ombuds man Pro gram pro vides an oppor tu nity to explore how a pub lic man date is imple mented through the use of paid and vol un teer ombuds men who inves ti gate com plaints in long-term care facil i ties. In this arti cle, the authors report partial find ings from a grow ing data base across six states, focus ing on what is known about the use of vol un teers and paid staff com plaint inves ti ga tion. Find ings reveal dif fer ences in the types of com plaints received, the sources of com plaints, and the per cent age of complex (dif fi cult) com plaints inves ti gated by vol un teers and paid staff. These dif fer ences result in a nat u ral triaging that occurs among vol un teers and paid staff, so that complaints viewed as dif fi cult to ver ify and resolve are auto mat i cally given to paid staff.In 1978, the Older Amer i cans Act (OAA) man dated the Long Term Care Ombuds man Pro gram (LTCOP) in response to poor con di tions in Amer ica's nurs ing homes.1 Each state was required to estab lish a state wide ombuds man pro gram designed to respond to com plaints from res i dents, fam i lies, staff, Note: An ear lier ver sion of this ar ti cle was pre sented at the an nual meet ing of the As so ci a tion for Re search on Non profit Or ga ni za tions and Vol un tary Ac tion (ARNOVA) in Se at tle, WA, on Novem ber 7, 1998. We want to thank the many state and lo cal om buds men who have shared their expe ri ences with us. The work re ported in this ar ti cle was sup ported, in part, by the Ad min is tra tion on Aging, DHHS, Grant 90AM0759. The con tents of this ar ti cle re flect our views and should not be con strued as those of the Ad min is tra tion on Aging.

No abstract

In this article, the authors report data from four states that have computerized their long-term care ombudsman databases and are using the same software. The authors explore the apparent differences among these four states to encourage critical thinking in interpreting the meaning of these data. Just as a national ombudsman database draws closer, so does the need for practitioners, researchers, educators, and policy makers to be vigilant in understanding that data must be contextualized. Otherwise, premature and inaccurate conclusions may be drawn. Critically important is the link between those persons who analyze and interpret and the ombudsman practitioners who collect and report these data. When the Long Term Care Ombudsman Program (LTCOP) was enacted into public law, congress and the Administration on Aging (AoA) were responding to widespread reports of the inadequacies of, and abuses in, nursing homes. The federal government, as principal payer for nursing home 3 AUTHORS' NOTE: We want to thank the many state and local ombudsmen who have shared their experiences with us. An earlier version of this article was presented at the American Society on Aging (ASA) in Nashville, Tennessee, in March 1997. The work reflected in this article was supported, in part, by the Administration on Aging, DHHS, Grant 90AM0759. The contents of this article reflect the views of the authors and should not be construed as those of the Administration on Aging. We support efforts toward gender-neutral language in the social sciences and prefer to use the term ombudsperson instead of ombudsman. We have learned, however, that program officials have decided to keep the original term as it came from Sweden. Our goal is to strengthen the program, not to offend ombudsmen, so we acquiesce to their preference of terms.