Welfare and Services in Finland is a panel survey that combines telephone and face-to-face interviews, postal surveys and register data. The aim of the study is to offer up-to-date, reliable and extensive research data on Finnish welfare and the use of welfare services. In 2006, the data were collected through telephone interviews. This dataset concentrates on Finnish adults. Main topics included well-being, social relationships, health, use and accessibility of health services, use of and satisfaction with social services, informal care, social security, and social trust. Well-being was charted with questions focusing on the standard of living and housing. The respondents were asked whether they were able to save money and pay their expenses, how they thought the economic circumstances of the household would develop in the near future, whether the household could afford certain things (e.g. buy new clothes rather than used ones), and how satisfied they were with different aspects of their housing and neighbourhood of residence. Social relationships were investigated with questions about satisfaction with life, leisure time and work, feelings of loneliness, contacts with friends and relatives, membership of a club or association, and voting in the previous parliamentary elections. Relating to health and health services, questions were asked about health status, limiting long-term illnesses or disabilities and their effects on daily life, stress, pregnancies, and visits to a doctor or nurse in the previous 12 months. Further questions probed where the respondents would primarily try to get a doctor's appointment during daytime, whether they had received sufficient care for health problems, what the distance to the closest health centre, doctor's office, dentist's office etc. was from their home, and whether they had had to wait unreasonably long to receive treatment (e.g. to get a doctor's appointment in a health centre). Dental health and visits to a dentist were surveyed. Views on social services were charted by asking whether the respondents trusted the skills of social services staff, whether they thought claiming a benefit would be difficult for them, whether they would be entitled to different services and benefits if needed, whether social services functioned well or needed improvement, and to what extent various services should be developed in the municipality. Use of social services was investigated with questions surveying contacts with the social services in the previous 12 months, sufficiency and quality of the aid or service received, waiting time for the aid or service, and satisfaction with the services. With regard to informal care, the respondents were asked whether they assisted an aged, disabled or sick friend or relative. Distance from their home to this person, and type and frequency of help offered were investigated. Views on social security were surveyed with questions on the level of social security in Finland, the relationship between taxation level and social security, preferable ways of providing health and social services (i.e. private or public), and the extent to which tax revenue should be used to fund services. Some statements charted trust in other people. Background variables included, among others, the size of the household and number of children in the household as well as R's gender, year of birth, marital status, economic activity, employment status, occupation, and type of employment contract. In addition, there are register variables containing information on region (NUTS3), statistical grouping of the municipality of residence, disposable income of the household, hospital district, and level of education (3-level ISCED classification).

Welfare and Services in Finland is a panel survey that combines telephone and face-to-face interviews, postal surveys and register data. The aim of the study is to offer up-to-date, reliable and extensive research data on Finnish welfare and the use of welfare services. In 2009, the survey was conducted as a telephone interview and postal survey. Questions in the telephone interview surveyed well-being, social relationships, health, use and accessibility of health services, informal care, and quality of life. Well-being was charted with questions focusing on the standard of living and housing. The respondents were asked whether they were able to save money and pay their expenses, whether the household could afford certain things (e.g. buy new clothes rather than used ones), and how satisfied they were with different aspects of their housing and neighbourhood of residence. Questions about social relationships probed feelings of loneliness, contacts with friends and relatives, and activities in a club or association. Relating to health and health services, questions were asked about health status, limiting long-term illnesses or disabilities and their impact on daily life, stress, pregnancies, and visits to a doctor or nurse in the previous 12 months. Further questions probed whether the respondents had received sufficient care for health problems, and whether they had had to wait unreasonably long to receive treatment (e.g. to get a doctor's appointment in a health centre). Dental health and visits to a dentist were surveyed as well as perceptions of the quality of public and private health services. Views on social services were charted with questions about trust in the skills of social services staff, the extent to which tax revenue should be used to fund various services, whether social services in Finland functioned well or needed improvement, and whether the respondents would be entitled to different services and benefits should they need them. Use of social services was investigated with questions surveying contacts with the social services in the previous 12 months, sufficiency of the aid or service, waiting time for the aid or service, and satisfaction with the services. Use of and satisfaction with private social services were surveyed. Questions concerning informal care studied whether the respondents assisted an aged, disabled or sick friend or relative, whether they were the primary caregiver of the person they cared for, how often they helped this person, how satisfied they were with public and private services the person they helped had received, and whether they had made an informal care agreement with the municipality. Perceptions of quality of life were charted as well as satisfaction with health, experiences of physical pain, enjoyment of life, sense of significance, ability to focus on things, sense of security or insecurity in daily life, healthiness of physical environment, ability to do things in the previous two weeks (in terms of, for instance, money and energy), ability to move, satisfaction with various things in life (e.g. neighbourhood of residence), and negative feelings. The postal survey charted health problems and insurances, health services and their funding, social security, and personal health. Relating to health problems and insurances, questions surveyed where the respondents would primarily try to get a doctor's appointment during daytime, how short-term sick leave was monitored at the workplace, insurances purchased, and days spent in hospital for treatment in the previous 12 months. Questions regarding health services and their funding studied views on whether healthcare functioned well or needed improvement, which areas of healthcare should be improved in the municipality, which services should be developed in the municipality (e.g. hospital services, dental health services), whether the government should lower taxes or increase health care funding, and how health services should primarily be funded. Views on social security were surveyed. Opinions were charted on the level of social security in Finland, the relationship between taxation level and social security, preferable ways of providing health and social services (i.e. private or public), and the extent to which tax revenue should be used to fund different services. The effects of the economic recession on the circumstances of the respondents and their friends were surveyed as well as potential financial problems caused by the service fees for health and social services. Finally, with regards to personal health, the respondents were asked about the ability to move, read, hear, breathe, sleep, eat and speak normally as well as bladder and bowel function, ability to perform everyday tasks, ability to think clearly and remember things, health problems and symptoms, mood, anxiety, energy, and effect of health on love life. Dental health and satisfaction with love life in the previous two weeks was investigated. Background variables included, among others, the household size and type of municipality of residence as well as the respondent's occupation, gender, and year of birth. In addition, there are register variables containing information on region (NUTS3), statistical grouping of the municipality of residence, hospital district, disposable income of the household, and level of education (3-level ISCED classification).

Welfare and Services in Finland is a panel survey that combines telephone and face-to-face interviews, postal surveys and register data. The aim of the study is to offer up-to-date, reliable and extensive research data on Finnish welfare and the use of welfare services. In 2004, the survey was conducted as a telephone interview and postal survey. Questions in the telephone interview charted the respondents' household, parents and childhood, economic activity and work, housing and economic circumstances, attitudes, and use of health and social services. The questions focusing on the household, parents and childhood surveyed the number of people in the household, the number of children in the household, parents' occupations, and economic circumstances in childhood home. Relating to economic activity and work, the economic activity was charted and, depending on the activity, further questions investigated, among others, spells of unemployment, type of employment contract, work schedule, job-related uncertainty, and age when retired. Concerning housing, the questions investigated the housing tenure, number of rooms, floor area, type of neighbourhood, satisfaction with various aspects of the housing, and difficulties with the home. Some questions studied the respondents' economic circumstances, for example, savings, mortgage, difficulties with housing costs and other loans, and ability to pay for food. Relating to health, questions were asked about health status, exercise habits, alcohol consumption, smoking, height and weight, limiting long-term illnesses or disabilities and their effects on daily life, stress, and visits to a doctor or nurse in the previous 12 months. Further questions probed where the respondents would primarily try to get a doctor's appointment during daytime, whether they had received sufficient care for health problems, what the distance to the closest health centre, doctor's office, dentist's office etc. was from their home, and whether they had had to wait unreasonably long to receive treatment (e.g. to get a doctor's appointment in a health centre). Dental health and visits to a dentist were surveyed. Regarding social services, the respondents were asked whether their household had received financial help from different people or actors (e.g. relatives, organisations, government/municipal authorities) in the previous 12 months, and whether their household or someone in the household had received or purchased home help services, personal care services or counselling services. The significance of the above-mentioned support/services was also charted. Attitudes were investigated with questions on who should hold the main responsibility for elderly care in Finland, whether the level of social security in Finland was too high or low, and expectations for the economic circumstances of the household and for the respondent's personal situation. Further topics covered the gap between the rich and poor in Finland and the relationship between taxation level and social security. The respondents who were aged 60 or older were asked additional questions about, for instance, how they managed with daily activities, from whom they received help, contacts with relatives and friends, and views on ageing. The postal survey charted health problems and insurances, medication, views on health services and their funding, social services, quality of life, social networks, and need for help as well as use and quality of services. The first questions surveyed satisfaction with life, preferred economic activity, trust in people and opinions on the general characteristics of people (self-seeking vs. selfless), paid employment in the previous 12 months, and opinions on the fairness of the supervisor and democracy at the workplace. The respondents were also asked which services could be cut to diminish costs, whether health services should be provided by private companies or government, from whom the respondents could ask for help and support, whether younger people would respect the respondents less or more as they got older, how the funding for elderly care could be safeguarded, and whether the elderly were discriminated against in Finland. Relating to health problems and insurances, questions surveyed the monitoring of short-term sick leave at the workplace, insurances purchased, and days spent in hospital for treatment in the previous 12 months. Questions regarding medication investigated prescription drugs, over-the-counter drugs and natural remedies used. With regard to health services, the respondents were asked whether healthcare functioned well or needed improvement, which areas of healthcare should be improved in the municipality, which services should be developed in the municipality (e.g. hospital services, dental health services), whether the government should lower taxes or increase health care funding, who should primarily be responsible for monitoring and providing healthcare services, and how the services should be funded. Views on social services were charted by asking whether the respondents thought claiming a benefit would be difficult for them, whether they would be entitled to different services and benefits if needed, whether social services functioned well or needed improvement, how social services should be improved in the municipality, and to what extent various services should be developed in the municipality. Use of social services was investigated with questions surveying contacts with the social services in the previous 12 months in order to receive aid or service, type of aid claimed and its sufficiency, reasons for potential rejection of the claim, waiting time for the service or support, and satisfaction with the services. The questions about quality of life in the postal survey examined the ability to move, read, see, hear, breathe, sleep, eat and speak normally as well as bladder and bowel function, ability to perform everyday tasks, ability to think clearly and remember things, health problems and symptoms, mood, anxiety, energy, and effect of health on love life. Social networks and participation were studied with questions charting how often the respondents were in touch with different people and which activities they had done in the previous two weeks (e.g. participated in the activities of an organisation or association, tutored or mentored other people). Relating to need for care and assistance as well as the use and perceived quality of services, the questions presented charted services claimed/purchased in the previous 12 months, the most important services, financial problems caused by service fees, care or aid given by the respondent, and experiences of great personal significance in the previous two years. Finally, perceptions of quality of life were surveyed as well as satisfaction with health, ability to focus on things, sense of security or insecurity in daily life, healthiness of physical environment, ability to do things (in terms of, for instance, money and energy), ability to move, satisfaction with various things in life (e.g. relationships), negative feelings, and feelings of loneliness. Background variables included the size of the household, occupations of parents, R's gender, year of birth, and type of municipality. In addition, there are register variables containing information on region (NUTS3), statistical grouping of the municipality of residence, disposable income of the household, and level of education (three-level ISCED classification).

Welfare and Services in Finland is a panel survey that combines telephone and face-to-face interviews, postal surveys and register data. The aim of the study is to offer up-to-date, reliable and extensive research data on Finnish welfare and the use of welfare services. In 2013, the survey was conducted through telephone interviews. Main topics included well-being, financial circumstances, housing, inclusion and participation, health, use of and satisfaction with social services, informal care, quality of life, attitudes, and social trust. Well-being was charted with questions focusing on the standard of living and housing. The respondents were asked, among others, whether they were able to pay their housing costs and other expenses, whether they had mortgage and other loans, whether the household could afford certain things (e.g. buy new clothes rather than used ones), whether the household had received financial aid from others, and how satisfied they were with different aspects of their neighbourhood of residence. Relating to inclusion and participation, the questions presented charted feelings of loneliness, participation in the activities of a club or association and voting in the previous parliamentary elections. Relating to health and health services, questions were asked about health status, limiting long-term illnesses or disabilities and their impact on daily life, stress, pregnancies, and visits to a doctor or nurse in the previous 12 months. Further questions probed whether certain things (e.g. lack of money) had prevented the respondents from receiving treatment, whether they had had to wait unreasonably long for treatment (e.g. to get a doctor's appointment in a health centre), and whether they had refrained from buying medicine for lack of money. Perceptions of the quality of public and private health services used were surveyed. Use of social services was investigated with questions surveying contacts with the social services in the previous 12 months, sufficiency of the service, opinions on the fee and waiting time for the service. Further questions probed whether certain things (e.g. lack of money, distance to services) had prevented the respondents from receiving the service, whether they had ever applied for social assistance and when, whether the social assistance received had been sufficient, and whether they had had to wait unreasonably long to receive the assistance. Use of and satisfaction with private social services were surveyed. Questions concerning informal care studied whether the respondents assisted an aged, disabled or sick friend or relative, whether they were the primary caregiver of the person they cared for, how often they helped this person, how satisfied they were with public and private services the person they helped had received, and whether they had made an informal care agreement with the municipality. Perceptions of quality of life were charted as well as satisfaction with health, ability to do things in the previous two weeks (in terms of money and energy), and satisfaction with various things in life (e.g. neighbourhood of residence). Attitudes were investigated by asking the respondents whether they thought there was discrimination against certain groups in Finland, who should hold the main responsibility for elderly care in Finland, whether the elderly should spend more of their own savings on their treatment, whether the level of social security in Finland was too high or low, and what their expectations for the financial circumstances of the household and their personal situation were. Further topics covered, among others, the gap between the rich and poor in Finland and the relationship between taxation level and social security. Finally, trust in other people and the public administration was charted as well as satisfaction with own life, leisure time and work. Background variables included, among others, the size of the household and number of children in the household as well as the respondent's gender, level of education, age, marital status, economic activity, occupational status, type of employment contract, region (NUTS3), major region (NUTS2), disposable income of the household, and hospital district.