Summary in English

The Norwegian Board of Health Supervision has examined how Nav offices provide financial advice to people struggling with financial problems. The aim was to find out whether those who need help actually receive it.

Fewer breaches of legislation than in previous inspections

The inspection covered 68 Nav offices across Norway. At 44 of the offices, the County Governors identified at least one breach of legislation.

Although breaches were found at many offices, the results are better than those from previous nationwide inspections of social services in NAV. The Norwegian Board of Health Supervision believes this may be linked to training and support measures that have been offered to Nav offices over several years.

The offices included in the inspection were selected because the County Governors considered there to be a risk of service failures. The findings therefore cannot be used to draw conclusions about all Nav offices in Norway.

People in need of help are not always identified early enough

The inspection shows that people experiencing financial difficulties are not always identified at an early stage. As a result, necessary help may be delayed.

The main challenges were found in the part of the service that is meant to identify and assist people with emerging or less complex financial problems. In several offices, responsibilities were unclear, making the service vulnerable.

In cases involving families with children, several inspections found that children's needs had not been assessed thoroughly enough. When Nav considers a person's need for financial advice, it must take into the account of the family's overall situation and ensure that children's needs are properly considered.

Missing decisions weaken legal safeguards

Many of the breaches identified were related to case handling and documentation.

The inspection found that Nav offices did not always issue formal decisions on financial advice. Follow-up activities were not always recorded in the user's case file.

When a formal decision is not issued, it may be unclear what assistance has been granted. It also means that users may lose the opportunity to appeal. Poor record-keeping makes it more difficult to follow up cases and to ensure that services are being delivered as intended.