In recent years, many municipalities in Sweden are using a standardised method – the ‘Individual’s Needs in Focus’ (IBIC) for investigating needs of social support, as recommended by the National Board of Health and Welfare. The model is based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), with a so called ‘biopsychosocial’ approach and predefined categories and classifications. The article takes a critical perspective on standardised methods in social work, specifically examining language, content, and structure in the documentation of the IBIC. We problematise how well the IBIC’s documentation fit social work in general and investigations concerning individuals with psychiatric disabilities requiring support in daily living in particular. A total of 80 investigations from four municipalities were examined in regard to language, content, and structure in relation to the context of social work. The study identified three main linguistic trends: biomedical, task-oriented, and bureaucratic language. However, none of these trends were anchored in the nomenclature of social work