통합사례관리 관련 법률·조례의 규범적 분석

Abstract

This study aims to explore difference between integrated case management and case management from a legal perspective. Although these two terms share a certain degree of continuity and similarity, this study espouses a critical approach to investigate the claim that integrated case management lacks unique characteristics compared to conventional case management. The objective is to shed light on specific characteristics of integrated case management and discern its identity. In view of this, this study delves into normative characteristics of integrated case management by analyzing terminologies proposed in national acts and local government ordinances that have governed integrated case management since 2014.
 Findings of this study indicate that integrated case management is both a legal term and an institutionalized domain. Accordingly, its conceptualization and purposes have been clearly outlined. As an institutional entity, integrated case management serves a legally binding role in the public domain, encompassing the following matters: responsible parties, their specific responsibilities, role of professionals such as integrated case managers in supporting beneficiaries, support approaches, and budgets. Thus, it is evident that integrated case management legitimately holds its own significance, going beyond the view that it is merely a variant of conventional case management or vice versa.