在身心障礙權益保障法修法後，政府期許國內慢飛兒庇護工場轉換其角色，由社會福利機構轉換成企業經營者，但由於庇護工場之成立宗旨以實現使命、服務為優先，在市場機制下難敵一般企業之威脅，也因此面臨經營危機。而近年來社會價值的揭露已經是主流現象，加上社會責任投資(Social Responsible Investment)市場的發展及擴大，使得社會價值的衡量及評定日漸成為社會矚目的議題。然而目前台灣尚未發展出一套社會價值衡量的機制，導致政府在裁定庇護工場補助計畫經費時，只能依據庇護工場的產能狀況（經濟層面）進行評估。由此可知，嚴謹的社會價值彰顯方法學是慢飛兒庇護工場需相當關注的課題。本研究將針對國內慢飛兒庇護工場進行實務性個案分析，以社會投資報酬率(Social Return on Investment, 簡稱SROI)的社會價值衡量方法學，來解釋慢飛兒庇護工場產生的社會價值。透過利害關係人參與，可以了解到庇護工場的活動（職訓、輔導課程），造成各個利害關係人於各面向的改變（成果），而研究結果說明在庇護工場的活動中，每投入1塊錢可以對各利害關係人創造2.06塊錢的社會價值，因此可以得知慢飛兒庇護工場除了具有經濟價值外，也確實帶來更多正向的社會價值。本研究對實務之貢獻為補足一般財務報表不足之處，幫助個案在政府評鑑或是需對利害關係人報告之狀況時，能擁有更具說服力的對話機制。而本研究於學術上的貢獻則在於分析過程中的指標選定、利害關係人議和及價值計算方式等，期望能為後續國內庇護工場或身心障礙相關職訓機構之社會價值衡量研究提供參考依據。;After the amendment of People with Disabilities Rights Protection Act, the government expects sheltered workshops to change their role from social welfare institutions to business operators. However, it is difficult to resist the threat of general enterprises for sheltered workshops under the market mechanism. In recent years, the disclosure of social values has become a mainstream phenomenon. In addition, with the expansion of Social Responsible Investment market, social value measurement gains increasing awareness. Nevertheless, Taiwan has not developed a methodology for measuring social value, which leads the government to evaluate the capacity of the sheltered workshops when deciding on the subsidy. This study conducts a practical case analysis of a sheltered workshop, using Social Return on Investment methodology to explain the social value it creates. Through the participation of stakeholders, we can learn about the activities (training and courses) leads to changes (outcomes) of various stakeholders. The research result shows that, the sheltered workshop creates 2.06 yuan social value for stakeholders through investing 1 yuan in the activities, which means it not only creates economic value, but brings positive social value. The practical contribution of this research is to make up for the inadequacies of traditional financial statements, and provide convincing evidence when discussing social value with authorities or stakeholders. The academic contribution lies in the selection of indicators, the ways of stakeholders’ participation and value calculation methods, which provide reference for future research.
