CURRENT ISSUES OF THE PURCHASE OF SOCIAL SERVICES IN INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article reveals issues of social order that are relevant for modern Ukraine. It is emphasized that social ordering contributes to the development of social services. It is designed to improve the quality of such services in the community, create conditions for the activation of the public sector, and promote the effective and joint use of budget funds. The purpose of the article is to analyze the international experience of procurement of social services; description of the features of the modern process of introducing the purchase of social services by local authorities from non-state providers in different countries of the world. Based on the study of the provisions of regulatory and legal sources, the analysis of modern scientific sources of foreign researchers on the research topic, a generalization is made that social services form a general system of protection and inclusion of the European Community. The development of social order has become an effective tool of the market of social services, part of the neoliberal agenda of the countries of Western and Central Eastern Europe, one of the components of the change of the general system of public administration. It was noted that developed countries in the field of social protection followed a common trend of delegating their own powers to provide social services to non-state providers. At the same time, European countries paid attention to their own socio-cultural prerequisites and traditions. In particular, it was important for Germany to apply the principle of subsidiarity, to give greater initiative and authority to local communities to solve their own problems. For Great Britain, the competitive system of selecting a provider of social services in market conditions became a decisive factor. For the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, the acquired experience of other countries in combining both of these factors worked. The development of the individual dimension of social order took place in the Scandinavian countries, Germany, France, the Netherlands and other countries.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".