1. IVO’s Risk Analysis EPSO Conference 2014-09-26 Janna Kokko The Health and Social Care Inspectorate, IVO Departement of Analysis and Development Arbetsmaterial

2. The starting point According to the ordinance (2013:176) with instructions for the Health and Social Care Inspectorate, it is determined that IVO is to plan and implement supervision based on own risk analysis, unless otherwise dictated by law or regulation. IVO has developed and tested a model for the agency's comprehensive risk analysis. The work resulted in a memorandum, which constitutes a basis for the Director General when preparing the strategy directives for the 2015 year of activity.

3. Material IVO's statistics and reports such as the annual inspections report and financial report. Workshops with reference groups at the departments in the mid and south region. Audit reports from county councils and selected municipalities Other authorities’ reports Data from the Swedish patient insurance company Information from service users Patient advisory committees Some international actors.

4. The method The following steps were carried out for the area of health and social services: 1.Inventory of risks - mostly qualitative data, content analysis 2.Systematisation and thematisation of risks - aggregation through iteration 3.Selection process - workshops, iterative process 4.Analysis and prioritisation – normative and qualitative

5. The prioritisation A qualitative and normative analysis based on the principles defined in the ethical platform for prioritisation in the health care sector Principle of Human Dignity: All people are of equal value and have equal rights regardless of personal characteristics and functions in society. Needs and Solidarity Principle: Resources should primarily be allocated to the areas of greatest need.

6. The Prioritisation in practice Overall risk areas that particularly affect the risk groups of disabled persons or otherwise vulnerable children and adults, and adults with impaired decision-making capacity who are in need of intervention but are not capable of safeguarding their own interests Allocate lower priority to risk areas that have recently been examined, where other actors already collaborate or where a larger analysis has recently been conducted.

7. The results Area 1: Collaboration and the health and social care chain Area 2: Qualification and staff-related issues Area 3: Information security (health care) Area 2: The exercise of authority (social services)

8. Tough bits and what happens in the near future Our own statistics need improvement How to gather informaton from the inspectors? How to evaluate information from service users? Work with the quantitative data available Regional variation when inspecting within a theme Development of new inspection methods for old problems