The aim of the study was to gain a deeper understanding of the administrative officials work with assessments in home studies of adoption. To answer the purpose, we chose to focus on the guidelines for administrative official’s assessments in home studies of adoption and what assessment areas that is fundamental to the administrative official’s assessments. The study is structured on the basis of a qualitative approach where we have used semi-structured interviews. We interviewed seven administrative officials in the social services which conducted home studies of adoption. The interviews were conducted in different municipalities in order to demonstrate that the result does not depend on local circumstances. We can however say that administrative officials in the various municipalities had close cooperation among themselves, which resulted in that the local factor could have some impact on the result. We have analysed the results based on theories of discretion and the street-level bureaucracy. We have in this study concluded that all administrative officials used the same guidelines and almost all of the administrative officials used the same investigation method. Even though all the administrative officials emanated from the same guidelines and though almost all of the seven administrative officials also used the same investigating method, we discovered in the results and analysis section that the implementation in home studies of adoption may differ between administrative officials in the various municipalities. We have interpreted this result as a consequence based on how each administrative official uses their discretion. Furthermore we found that the administrative officials did not think that there was one assessment area that was more important. There are a number of areas that are important to consider which depends on the applicant's background.

No description available.

The Transtheoretical Model of Behavior Change was used to assess change in investing behavior among Investing For Your Future home-study course participants. The goal of Investing For Your Future is to help people improve their personal finance behaviors leading to financial security in later life. On average, after course participation fourteen of the fifteen investing behaviors were identified in the desired stages of established behavior. The study was based on Prochaska's Transtheoretical Model of Change (1979), including five different stages of behavior. This study investigated at what stage of change course participants are in for certain investing behaviors since completing Investing For Your Future (O'Neill et al., 2000). The stages of behavior are: precontemplation, contemplation, preparation, action and maintenance. The desired stage was either the action or maintenance stage, which indicated that the investing behavior has been established. A person in the precontemplation stage is not thinking of future needs, not taking any actions to prepare for investing. Someone in the contemplation stage has set investing goals, but is not otherwise preparing to do the investing behavior. Someone in the preparation stage has both set goals and actively sought after information about the investing behavior. An individual in the action stage has not only done the preparatory actions, but has also engaged in the investing behavior. Finally, an individual in the maintenance stage has met the investing behavior action over an ongoing period of time. The quantitative survey design of this study was adapted from Dillman's Mail and Internet Surveys (2002). A survey questionnaire was created online using multiple choice and open-ended questions and was sent to the sample as a link in an email. The population consisted of Investing For Your Future (O'Neill et al., 2000) online course participants from April 1, 2001 through April 11, 2005. The initial sample consisted of 1,123, however at least 415 members of the sample never received the survey, reducing the sample to 708 people. Upon sending out the email, many error reports were received stating that the recipient did not receive the email. Response rates for the survey were very low, and can be attributed to multiple problems. / Master of Science