Legal Services Corporation Strategic Directions 2002-2005 2002
Progress Report for Programs
Introduction
In my capacity as Vice-President for Programs, I am pleased and
proud to provide to the LSC Board of Directors this third progress
report documenting the work of the Programs staff at LSC - OPP, OIM
and its consultants, and the staff of the Vice President for
Programs (and her consultants)-- in addressing the challenges
placed before us in January 2000 by the LSC Board of Directors. In
January 2000, the LSC Board of Directors adopted a strategic
planning document entitled Strategic Directions 2000-2005. This
document established twin goals to be attained by the national
legal services community by 2004: to dramatically increase the
provision of legal services to eligible persons; and to ensure that
eligible clients are receiving appropriate and high-quality legal
assistance. Strategic Directions 2000-2005 also identified
anticipated outcomes, including: increased numbers of clients
receiving legal services appropriate to the legal issues they
encounter; expanded relevancy of the delivery system to the most
pressing needs of low-income clients, with clients themselves
taking a leading role in this effort; an expanded range and
improvement in the quality of services provided by legal services
programs; and finally, greater consistency in the quality of legal
services programs. State planning is identified in this Board
document as LSC's key strategy to achieve the goals stated
above.
Because state planning was identified as the Board's prime
strategy for fulfilling the mandate of Strategic Directions
2000-2005, a brief review of LSC's state planning initiative is
probably in order. LSC's State Planning Initiative began in 1995
primarily in response to the programmatic changes and budget cuts
that were threatening the very survival of legal services delivery
across the nation. State planning was built on the understanding
that states and territories serve as the relevant geographic areas
of a planning focus for developing strategies to meet the civil
equal justice needs of poor and vulnerable people. Several years
later, in 1998, state planning became a key LSC strategy to achieve
access and to improve the quality of services. LSC specifically
announced its intent to put resources into the creation of
comprehensive, coordinated, and integrated state legal services
delivery systems in Program Letters 98-1 and 98-6. These program
letters declared that LSC was no longer limiting its focus on
outcomes for clients within and by individual programs, but rather
it believed that quality legal services could be delivered only in
a statewide context. It challenged each state to examine its
organizational structures, its use of technology, intake systems,
resource development, and private bar involvement through a
statewide lens.
In late 2000 - eleven months after the adoption of Strategic
Directions 2000-2005 - LSC issued its fourth program letter on
state planning that set forth expectations for each justice
community. These expectations, for purposes of brevity, can be
summarized as follows: a delivery system in which eligible clients
in every state are afforded an equal opportunity to avail
themselves and ultimately to attain high-quality civil legal
assistance.
The LSC Programs staff have worked assiduously these past
several years to help create a world-class national legal services
delivery system in which eligible clients in every state are
afforded an equal opportunity to avail themselves and ultimately to
attain high-quality civil legal assistance. However, as we moved to
address the Board's mandate, we quickly realized that the creation
of a world-class delivery system involved more than "state
planning," per se. After all, we do not pursue state planning
because we are "planners" by education or trade-most of us, indeed,
are first and foremost legal services attorneys and advocates. And
we do not pursue state planning because we love planning. We don't
really love planning-at least most of us do not. We love legal
services and are committed to making legal services better. And
frankly, we do not pursue state planning because we want our
"naysayers" to believe that LSC has reformed itself. We pursue
state planning because we believe that our low-income clients
deserve the highest quality service that can be made available to
them despite our limited funding. Accordingly, in our quest to
create world-class justice communities in each state and territory
in this great country, we began to focus on other initiatives that
were, to us, just as important as state planning to the creation of
a delivery system in which eligible clients in every state are
afforded an equal opportunity to avail themselves and ultimately to
attain high-quality civil legal assistance. often refer to these
initiatives as state planning's companion initiatives, and these
initiatives - competition, the quality initiative, the diversity
initiative, technology initiative grants, the matters initiative,
our efforts to enhance services for self-represented litigants, the
Legal Resource Library, to name just a few - have become as
important to the creation of a world-class delivery system as state
planning has proved itself to be. These, companion initiatives and
the hardworking and talented staff who carry out these initiatives,
work hand-in-glove with the equally well-qualified state planning
team to promote the development of high quality, world-class
delivery systems.
In January 2000, we issued our first progress report to the LSC
Board of Directors describing our efforts to help build premier
justice communities throughout our country. We issued our second
report in January 2001. In this third report, we have decided to
present our work to you in a fashion slightly different from the
format we have used in the past two reports. Because we have
learned over the years that premier delivery systems have two
primary legs upon which they ultimately stand or fall - healthy and
vibrant LSC-funded programs and healthy and vibrant state justice
communities to which all LSC- funded programs belong - we will
present our work in this third report in terms of our activities to
promote healthy programs and healthy state justice communities. We
believe this format will provide the LSC Board of Directors a
complete and true picture of the work we pursued in 2002 to build
legal services delivery system in which no eligible client is
turned away, and in which every eligible client is provided high
quality legal services.
We thank the LSC Board of Directors for giving us this
opportunity to present our work. More importantly, we thank the LSC
Board of Directors for giving us the opportunity to improve a legal
services delivery system that is so valuable to our clients, so
essential to a democratic way of life, and so very important to all
of us. The Legal Services Corporation exists to help our clients
address their legal wrongs and promote their legal rights. To the
extent that we have been given the opportunity to participate fully
in addressing this important and primary mission of LSC, we have
been truly fortunate.
I. Structural Changes in the Delivery System
Since 1998, LSC has initiated and overseen significant
structural changes in the number and configuration of LSC-funded
programs in order to develop more powerful and effective state
delivery systems. The Office of Program Performance (OPP) staff
have assisted LSC grantees and state justice communities with this
change process in a number of ways, including the provision of
significant technical assistance to help with planning and
implementation. In 2002, LSC made $60,000 available to help six
states develop effective plans and $130,000 to assist nine states
institute new delivery structures. Significant staff resources also
have been devoted to on-site visits and to sharing information and
best practices, targeting programs undergoing consolidation.
Planning for Change
•
Technical Assistance for Planning. In 2002, LSC gave
technical assistance to Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Missouri,
Montana, and New York, enabling these six states to obtain
important consulting and facilitative assistance with configuration
and overall planning.
•
Configuration Changes. Nine states completed
configuration planning in 2002 and submitted proposals for
significant structural change, with completion dates in 2003 and
2004. Each of these states received LSC planning assistance funds.
Configuration planning commenced in another six states.
Changes Effective in 2003
•
Iowa. Iowa will become one statewide service area. The
Legal Services Corporation of Iowa, which serves 98 of Iowa's 99
counties, has absorbed the assets of the single county Polk County
program and changed its name to Iowa Legal Aid, reflecting its
expanded service area.
•
Michigan. After years of effort, 10 basic field service
areas have been consolidated into five. The new configuration
improves opportunities to increase resources and access and achieve
greater equity in client service.
•
New Jersey. The state's 14 service areas have been
consolidated into a much more manageable six. One of our most
highly integrated and comprehensive delivery systems, New Jersey is
now poised to deliver even better services to low-income
persons.
•
North Dakota. Two separate Native American service areas
and two Basic Field service areas have been combined into one
Native American area and one Basic Field area, and a grant for both
made to a single program. This will yield more geographically
equitable service, especially for Native American
clients.
Changes Effective in 2004
•
Florida. Twelve LSC-funded service areas have been
combined into seven regions. Under Florida's plan, which was
accepted by LSC this summer, the LSC-funded programs will continue
to anchor the delivery system and provide the lion's share of basic
legal services to low-income residents.
•
New York. The New York plan, also accepted by LSC this
summer, reduces the state's 14 service areas to seven. By combining
many of the smaller service areas, the new configuration
establishes a sturdier platform for client services and the future
growth of New York's equal justice system.
•
Alabama. Alabama has just submitted its plan to
consolidate three service areas into a statewide program. Planners
believe this will improve coordination of resources with LSC and
non-LSC programs, and assure uniform delivery of services to
clients throughout the state.
•
Missouri. Missouri's Legal Services Commission, with
appointees from the state Supreme Court and Missouri Bar,
recommended consolidation of the state's LSC service areas into one
LSC-funded program, beginning in 2004.
•
Mississippi. After a year of planning, Mississippi has
committed to producing a reconfiguration proposal by January 15,
2003.
Future Changes
• Massachusetts, Minnesota, Ohio, Oregon, Puerto Rico, and South
Dakota. These five states and one territory received notices of
configuration concern from LSC in 2002. Nearly all have experienced
structural changes in their delivery systems since 1995. Now each
will embark on a review of the efficacy of current configuration
patterns, and report to LSC on their studies in 2003.
Implementing Change
•
Assistance to Merging Programs. LSC staff give
substantial assistance to merging programs. In 2002, programs
merged or prepared for merger in Iowa, Louisiana, New Jersey, North
Dakota, Wisconsin, Texas, and New Mexico. Our efforts with these
programs varied depending on need. We wrote checklists of merger
issues to consider during the merger process and shared model
documents developed by other programs. When asked, LSC made
available information on consultants with special expertise in
merging non-profit entities. We referred programs to peers that had
successfully addressed similar merger challenges. Over and above
assisting with the technical aspects of merger, we helped programs
resolve issues that interfered with
creating and maintaining a comprehensive integrated delivery
system in the reconfigured service area.
•
Special grant conditions for programs that merged in
2002. Our special grant conditions required periodic submission of
written progress reports on achieving a comprehensive integrated
delivery system. Programs in California, Illinois, Kentucky,
Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, North and South Carolina, South
Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia received special grant
conditions. In many instances, LSC staff responded to their reports
with written feedback.
•
Technical Assistance to Assist with Consolidations. In
2002, LSC gave $130,000 in merger technical assistance to nine
states: Arkansas, Iowa, Louisiana, New Mexico, North Carolina,
South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and West Virginia. This money
underwrote assistance for technology; leadership and team building;
labor relations, including salaries, benefits, pensions and revised
personnel policies; fund balances; due diligence and other
merger-related legal work; office space and insurance; planning
committee efforts; changes in intake, hotlines and case management
systems; and other consolidation issues. In two states, our funds
helped leverage new resources.
II. Quality Improvement
At the core of powerful and effective delivery systems are high
quality legal services programs. OPP staff work with grantees to
enhance the quality of their work through ongoing contact, through
LSC's Library Resource Initiative (see section IV), and through
program visits. Program visits allow staff to monitor program
developments, to learn about problems, and to develop new
strategies for expanding access and enhancing quality.
On-site reviews take a number of forms. Technical assistance
visits are conducted after LSC receives a request from a program
for assistance in a particular area such as intake systems, legal
work management and supervision, or technology. Program inquiry
visits are designed to gather information and to give LSC
additional knowledge about programs that have not been visited
recently. Program inquiry visits also occur when LSC staff believe
that certain challenges facing the program need LSC's attention.
TIG visits are made to Technology Initiative Grant (TIG)
recipients. (In 2002, we visited programs that received TIG funding
in 2000 and 2001 to review technology progress under the grant.)
Finally, post-reconfiguration visits occur two years after a
service area has been reconfigured to assess how well the program
is serving the new service area and the extent to which the
restructured organization is operating cohesively.
OPP conducted 14 on-site visits in 2002. All fourteen visits
lasted several days (one required 10 business days due to the size
and location of the program), and involved two to five persons.
Consultants sometimes served as team members, and often OPP
technology staff joined teams to lend their special expertise.
•
Program-inquiry Visits. Occurred in Oklahoma, New York,
Wisconsin, Delaware, and Wyoming. In addition, program-inquiry
visits conducted in combination with state planning visits took
place in the District of Columbia, Alaska, Kansas, and
Hawaii.
•
Post-reconfiguration Visits. Occurred in California,
Colorado, and Arizona.
•
Technical Assistance Visits. We responded to requests
from programs in Arkansas and Maryland for technical assistance
visits.
•
TIG Visits. In addition to the 14 on-site program quality
reviews, OPP technology staff visited our 2000 and 2001 Technology
Initiative Grant (TIG) recipients in Indiana, South Carolina,
Pennsylvania, Mississippi, Illinois, and Tennessee.
III. Diversity, Leadership and Inclusion
Early in 2002, LSC invited a small group of national leaders
with a deep interest in promoting multicultural diversity to advise
LSC on how best to help grantees reach their diversity goals. The
advisory committee's preeminent project was to help create and
produce a training tool on leadership and diversity for program
boards and managers. This resource was completed in November 2002.
In 2002, LSC acted on several other items listed in its Action
Agenda on Diversity, a summary of ideas and suggestions raised in
LSC's 2001 national conversations on diversity.
• Board Training Module on Leadership and Diversity
This resource is intended to assist programs with diversity
initiatives and guide grantee board and management discussions on
the importance of diversity in providing high-quality and
appropriate services to clients. It can be used in conjunction with
regular board trainings or as a stand-alone device. Leadership and
Diversity: The Link That Promotes Effective Delivery of Legal
Services was tested with good results at two sites - a statewide
program in the northeast and a large southwestern program. Early in
2003, the module will be given to every LSC-funded program. We
anticipate that the module will increase commitment to building a
multi-culturally competent staff and services that reflect the
diverse backgrounds of client communities by engaging boards in
candid conversations and exercises on fostering inclusion,
cultivating new leadership, and expanding diversity parameters in
their programs. Program staff research, (explained below in
Collecting Diversity Data), indicates that many program boards and
managers need to reemphasize diversity in staff recruitment,
promotion, and strategies to reach overlooked client groups.
• Education and Outreach
Southeast Project Directors Association. LSC organized a
well-received panel at the SEPDA Conference to showcase how well
two state communities of justice and two programs used
reconfiguration activities to expand diversity within staff and
volunteer ranks, and for instituting programmatic measures that
will generate a new cadre of leaders in the legal services
community.
Virginia Annual Legal Aid Conference. At this statewide training
event, we joined a panel that addressed how legal services programs
and equal justice communities can effectively recruit and retain a
diverse work force, among other critical diversity activities.
Later in 2002, building on this panel, the Virginia State Planning
Assembly began creating an action plan of goals for obtaining
diverse staff and boards, growing a diverse corps of leaders and
deeper engagement with the client community.
Other Public Forums. Vice President for Programs Randi Youells
repeatedly highlighted diversity's essential role in a healthy and
effective legal services system in talks she gave throughout the
year to program staff, civil justice leaders, and state justice
communities. In this way, the LSC diversity message was delivered
locally in states like Arizona and Montana, and nationally through
articles in the MIE Journal and NLADA Update. She promoted
diversity in speeches she was invited to give to partner
organizations - the combined Conference of State Court Judges and
Conference of State Court Administrators, the International Legal
Aid Group and through the Ontario (Canada) Legal Aid Speakers
Series. Our commitment to a nuanced approach to diversity was
apparent in each meeting of the LSC Board Provisions Committee as
staff regularly reported on activities in this area, and presenters
invited from our programs reflected the importance of inclusion in
the topics they addressed and in the communities they
represented.
• Leadership Mentoring Efforts
Responding to a concern raised at LSC's 2002 conference for
directors of statewide programs, we designed a pilot mentoring
project for new statewide program executive directors. In its
initial phase, the project matched two new statewide program
directors with an experienced one. The three convened at each
other's programs and over the telephone to explore topics such as
executive leadership, managing change, and state planning in states
with one LSC grantee.
• Collecting Diversity Data
Through the Competition Process. Through its competitive grant
process, LSC obtains and reviews substantial data on an applicant's
capacity to respond to a diverse client community. Using this
information, LSC can learn how each applicant proposes to diminish
client access barriers including cultural, geographic, and language
barriers; how the applicant will engage clients with access
barriers; the racial, ethnic and gender distribution of the
applicant's staff; strategies used to recruit, retain, and promote
diverse staff; training events that address diversity; and how the
organization is building leadership that is diverse.
Using Case Service Reports. CSR's, which grantees are required
to submit annually to LSC, contain data on program staff as well as
on cases closed during a calendar year. Early in 2002, we reported
on our examination of 1996-2000 data on gender and race of
executive directors of LSC-funded programs. We discovered that
reconfiguration, within the confines of state planning, did not
diminish the percent of minorities and women in leadership
positions in our programs. We saw that, despite vigorous efforts to
increase diversity in state justice communities and particularly in
leadership positions, the ethnic profiles of our executive
directors remained virtually unchanged, and the number of women
directors was significantly lower than their percentage in the
attorney workforce. Later in 2002, we were able to study the 2001
data. These indicated that the number of directors of color rose
from 16 percent to 21 percent of the director population.
Unfortunately, the data also showed that the number of women
directors continues to lag behind their increasing presence in our
grantees' attorney ranks.
IV. Identifying and Sharing Best Practices
Legal services programs often pioneer creative responses to the
challenge of high quality, effective services for clients. At LSC,
we are frequently impressed with the range of novel approaches that
practitioners have devised.
In October 2002, we launched the LSC Resource Library Initiative
(LRI), a website committed to ensuring that LSC programs are aware
of and have access to innovations in civil legal services work. The
project is dedicated to raising the standard of practice in legal
services programs by encouraging the cross-fertilization of
innovative practices through facilitating the voluntary exchange of
exemplary practices. LRI showcases a variety of original and
effective activities ranging from how to conduct a comprehensive
strategic planning process to new ideas for serving hard-to-reach
populations. Ten weeks after OPP launched LRI, site activity
reports showed that users had viewed approximately 15,500 pages.
LRI is available online at www.lri.lsc.gov.
V. Managing Information to Improve Grants Administration and
Program Quality
LSC's Office of Information Management (OIM) along with OPP
recently launched the Electronic Grants Award Letter (EGAL) system.
This initiative permits LSC to distribute grant award letters
electronically from a secure website. EGAL's benefits include an
electronic archive of competitive grant contracts, immediate access
to digital grant award documents, reduction in administrative cost,
and faster and more efficient transmittal of information to
grantees. Similarly, OIM revised the electronic Grant Renewal
Application to accommodate new information sought by LSC and to
ensure greater ease for users.
During 2002, OIM obtained the 2000 Census figures, at state and
county levels, and devoted substantial time to calculating poverty
population for each of our grantees' service areas under these new
figures. This information was supplied to all grantees and will be
the basis of our grant awards for the next decade.
LSC is committed to providing the United States Congress and the
public with the most accurate information possible. Closed case
statistics form a major component of the program activity data
collected by LSC, and are a critical measure of the impact of
federal funding on the legal problems of people living in poverty.
Therefore, it is essential to assure the accuracy of the CSR data.
Each year, OIM staff assists our grantees in verifying the
reporting of CSR data through the annual self-inspection
process.
The purpose of the self-inspection process is to give our
grantees a means to ensure that their CSR data meet LSC standards
for accuracy. In January of each year, LSC distributes a Case
Review Form. The Form contains a list of questions that identify
key requirements that need to be met in order to report a case to
LSC. Grantees statistically "sample" the cases closed in the
previous year to determine if the "sampled" cases generally meet
the requirements for reporting cases to LSC. If ten percent or more
of the cases sampled in the self-inspection process have problems,
then LSC assumes that there are overall problems within the
grantee's case closing records, which may affect the accuracy of
the CSR data. In the event that the selfinspection process does
reveal problems, grantees are asked to consult with LSC to
determine the appropriate corrective action. All grantees are
required to submit their Self-Inspection Certification and Summary
Forms to LSC in March of each year for the previous year. The
information is turned over to LSC's Office of Compliance and
Enforcement, which is responsible for monitoring the accuracy of
the CSR system and CSR data.
VI. Technology
Strategic Directions 2000-2005 identifies technology as a
primary strategy for enhancing client access to services. We have
observed that many more clients receive some assistance when
technologically sophisticated intake systems are installed.
Computerized and web-based self-help programs make high quality
information available to those who would be denied aid because of
resource limitations and case acceptance criteria. Technology
innovations can improve full representation through quicker legal
research and information gathering capacities. Finally, stronger
technology systems allow a program's staff to experience more
effective supervision and coordination.
The Technology Initiative Grant Program (TIG) is LSC's most
powerful tool to help programs ramp up existing technology systems.
In 2002, 55 TIG awards were granted. The improvements and projects
they funded are discussed below (see Section VII. Training, Section
IX. Pro Se Enhancement, Section XI. Pro Bono Enhancement, and
Section XII. Intake Enhancement).
The Technology Initiatives Grant Program
LSC received 98 grant applications for the 2002 TIG funding.
Screening them required seven review sessions with outside panels,
internal review sessions, and special sessions with OPP staff to
analyze how the applications affected program quality and state
planning concerns. Staff recommendations went first to Vice
President Randi Youells and then to President Erlenborn for final
funding decisions.
LSC's 55 TIG grants totaled $4.4 million. They foster our
objective of improving access to justice for clients. For example,
the grants will allow:
•
Alaska to install computers in six courthouses with
access to legal information and self-help materials on the
statewide legal services website.
•
Guam to put 21 computers in the village mayors' offices,
with access to legal information and self-help materials that are
mounted on a new statewide website.
•
Maryland to create a web-based pro se litigant support
system for some of the 24 court-funded assisted pro se programs.
Users will be able to view their own personal web pages as
"personal case account managers," and resource their files. In
development is information about a panel of attorneys to provide
"unbundled" services and mediators who offer free services to pro
se litigants.
•
Orange County, California to expand the I-CAN!
(Interactive Community Assistance Network) services to include an
Earned Income Credit module. Low-income workers will be able to
complete the Schedule EIC and related tax forms, and file them
electronically. The Internal Revenue Service is a partner in this
project.
•
Washington State to support their joint courts/legal
services planning for the effective utilization of technology
resources for self represented litigants
Expanding on earlier grants for statewide websites, LSC made 12
new awards, bringing the total number of states that are building
and maintaining statewide websites to more than 40. These sites
enable a state's residents to benefit from centrally maintained and
up-to-date resources for legal information and self-help
materials.
VII. Training
Many areas of poverty law are highly specialized. To ensure top
quality representation, legal workers need ongoing training in new
and complex areas of law. Low levels of funding and the absence of
state, regional and national poverty training materials and
teachers can diminish opportunities for staff education on
substantive poverty law issues. Through the competition process,
our work with state justice communities and with TIG funding, LSC
helps grantees meet critical training needs. In 2002, we designed
several new approaches.
New Lawyer Training Project
Pursuant to a contract with the National Center on Poverty Law,
NCPL held training events at nine sites nationally on conducting
poverty law research via the Internet and other webbased tools. The
training was structured to allow participants to subsequently train
colleagues who did not attend the sessions. These events were so
popular that NCPL replicated them at new sites, not funded under
the LSC contract.
The LSC contract required NCPL to produce a 250-page Poverty Law
Manual that introduces advocates to the fundamentals of poverty
law. A hard copy of this manual was distributed to all new legal
services attorneys in the country. It is available electronically
at NCPL's website.
Technology Grants Focused On Training
Two 2002 TIG awards focus on training. In one, Legal Services
Law Line of Vermont, Inc. will make nationally available on-line
the core curriculum of the Legal Services Training Consortium of
New England, and provide a platform for other legal services
organizations to obtain distance learning opportunities, allowing
advocates to get skills training without the usual financial and
travel costs. In the second, Legal Aid Society of Orange County
will create a national technology training and curriculum project
to build capacity across many audiences within the legal services
community. This will extend the implementation of model technology
innovations that improve justice for low-income clients.
Technology Technical Assistance Days of Service
OPP staff offer hands-on technology training by building on
national legal services events. One example is our "Day of
Service." This project is supported by our TIG funds and is
organized by the National Technology Assistance Project (NTAP). A
Day of Service occurs on the day before the opening of a national
conference. The technology staffs of all the programs attending the
conference (including OPP staff) convene the day before the
conference begins to lend technical expertise to the legal services
program in the host city. Days of Service have benefited Legal Aid
Society of Cleveland (in conjunction with the ABA/NLADA Equal
Justice Conference), Legal Action of Wisconsin (prior to the NLADA
Annual Meeting), and Greater Orlando Area Legal Services (in
conjunction with the Nonprofit Technology Enterprise Network
(N-TEN) Conference).
Another innovative project that is held on conjunction with
national legal services meetings is our Cyber Café. In 2002, we
hosted a Cyber Café at both the NLADA Annual Meeting and at the
Equal Justice Conference to give Internet access to conference
participants, allowing them to check their email. Our Cyber Café
also allows technology staff from around the country to demonstrate
new software and discuss technology resources with conferees.
VIII. Measurement and Evaluation
It is crucial to the strategic planning process to measure the
volume of our grantees' work and to evaluate the success of their
approaches. To this end, OPP has built systems for determining the
effectiveness of our strategic initiatives. Described below are
measures we have been refining over the past year to capture
information on the effects of state planning, the amount and type
of service that programs give, client outcomes, program delivery
systems, and the impact on services of our technology grants.
State Justice Communities Planning Initiative Evaluation
Instrument
In order to insure the highest quality and maximum level of
services to potentially eligible clients in each state, and so that
the goal of meeting those needs will be realized, LSC has developed
the State Justice Communities Planning Initiative Evaluation
Instrument. A design team of 14 representatives from the legal
services community - including providers, clients, courts and other
stakeholder entities - worked assiduously over the year to produce
a tool that will be tested in 2003, revised pursuant to that
process, and ultimately used nationally. The instrument is designed
to assess the health and vibrancy of each state justice
community/state legal services delivery system, establish
benchmarks against which further progress can be measured, and
begin to gather data to allow comparisons of state justice
communities.
State Planning Self Evaluation Process
Pending implementation of the State Planning Evaluation
Instrument, LSC responded to and engaged state justice communities
around the self-evaluations reports they sent in pursuant to
Program Letter 2000-07. Our feedback focus is on the relationship
between the structure of a delivery system and its capacity to
provide client access to a full range of services no matter where
in the state the client resides, while at the same time
anticipating and providing for clients' emerging legal needs and
aspirations.
Analyses of Case Closing Data
Program staff from the Office of Information Management reviewed
Case Service Reports (CSR) for 1991 through 2000 to discern trends
in the types and numbers of cases closed by grantees. Their
analysis revealed that most programs experienced declines in cases
closed during periods of dramatic funding reductions and before
they (with and without LSC assistance) aggressively sought other
forms of funding (e.g., mid-1990's). In spite of a diminution in
cases closed, however, programs showed remarkable stability in the
kinds of cases they reported. The data indicate correlations
between the number of brief service and/or counsel and advice cases
closed and the institution of telephone intake systems. They also
show that the percentage of extended service cases also grew,
demonstrating that LSC grantees continue to vigorously represent
clients in the more traditional forums of administrative hearings,
mediations, and trial and appellate courts even as they institute
innovative full-service intake systems. Our study, reported
nationally by Randi Youells at the Conference of State Court Judges
and Conference of State Court Administrators, also vividly
illustrated what we do not know about our grantees' work - the
difference it makes in clients' lives and how it has benefited the
community.
Measurement of Services Programs Provide in Addition to
Cases
Some low-income persons who seek assistance at LSC programs need
only legal information, guidance with self-representation or a
referral to an organization more appropriate to their needs. LSC
has stressed the merit of these limited services though several
strategies, including technology grants to support statewide
websites, LRI to share innovative practices, and state planning
requirements that touch on pro se assistance, community legal
education and similar services.
The matters reports allow OPP, for the first time, to learn
about the type and volume of grantee work that does not constitute
"cases." These activities include community legal education, some
forms of pro se assistance, referrals, outreach, indirect services
including training to non-legal advocates who help low income
people, and other services, including mediation and alternative
dispute resolution.
Although we collected data on matters work undertaken during the
last six months of 2001, we were not able to analyze and report on
them to the LSC Board and on our website until 2002. More than two
million people received significant matters services from grantees
in the second half of 2001. All but one of the programs provided
community legal education, 89 percent engaged in outreach
activities, and 75 percent disseminated pro se information.
Grantees reported providing referral information to more than
530,000 people. The importance of matters services to the
low-income community is demonstrated in our report, which also
includes summaries of innovative approaches that have allowed
grantees to offer clients services that do not fall into the
"cases" category, but are nonetheless significant.
The matters report is at
http://www.lsc.gov/Websitedocs/MR080802.pdf.
Measurement of Outcomes
Development of an outcome measures reporting system to
supplement or replace LSC's CSR system is underway. In 2002, LSC
posted a Request for Information in the Federal Register, as the
first step to issuing a Request for Proposals to develop an outcome
measurement system. In late 2002, LSC hired an experienced
consultant to study and report on existing systems in the legal
services community and make recommendations on approaches LSC could
adopt.
Measurement of Quality through Quality Review Visits
LSC expanded its on-site program reviews to include internal
protocols for visiting recently merged programs and for evaluating
a program's closed case statistics. The purpose of the former is to
learn whether all elements of a newly merged program are
functioning cohesively, and to identify areas where technical
assistance may help achieve a unified operation. Protocols on
closed cases will ensure the consistent application of our analysis
factors. Both new protocols will be used by staff and consultants
who review programs and in their reports and recommendations based
on the reviews.
Measurement of Quality through the Grant Application
Process
Through the competitive grants process, LSC evaluates an
applicant's capacity to provide effective and efficient high
quality legal representation to eligible clients. Assessments also
are made of an applicant's participation in an integrated delivery
system that seeks to make the most efficient use of all resources,
strives for innovations in delivery mechanisms and creatively
involves the private bar. Criteria and standards used to measure
the strength of a legal services delivery network are derived from
the LSC Act and regulations, LSC Performance Criteria, American Bar
Association (ABA) Standards for Programs Providing Civil Pro Bono
Legal Services to Persons of Limited Means, and ABA Standards for
Providers of Civil Legal Services to the Poor.
Recently, LSC examined its competitive grants process, through a
series of discussions, and surveys and interviews with consultants,
LSC grantees and staff, to determine its effectiveness in measuring
an applicant's capacity to provide high quality, client-centered
legal services. The results demonstrated that our process is a
useful and effective tool for assessing the quality of legal
services delivery. Suggestions on how to improve the current
process were implemented and, as a result, LSC will be sending
feedback letters to applicants that filed grant proposals for 2003
funding to begin a dialogue about the applicant's delivery system
based on the grant application. Additionally, our Request for
Proposals now encourages applicants to describe the quality of
their delivery approach, the unique features of their service area
and any model projects.
The Evaluation of Technology Projects
TIG funds support the Technology Evaluation Project, an
initiative of the Legal Aid Society of Cincinnati. The Project
creates evaluation instruments for statewide websites, also
supported by TIG awards. Created over the course of the year, the
tools were distributed to programs for comment at the end of 2002.
User feedback is expected early in 2003, after which the tools will
be modified if necessary and distributed. When perfected, the tools
will allow programs to evaluate their technology projects during
implementation phases to both assure successful completion and,
ultimately, to determine whether their goals were achieved.
IX. Pro Se Enhancement
One of the best ways to help the approximately 80 percent of
low-income persons who need legal assistance but must do without,
is to arm self-represented litigants with quality information and
assistance. LSC does this in two ways. One is by giving self-help
assistance directly through our programs (such as with the I-CAN
system and the statewide websites) and the second is by enhancing
existing efforts on behalf of pro se clients.
TIG Pro Se Efforts
This year, TIG made 40 grants that directly touch on pro se.
Eighteen were website renewal grants to statewide websites begun in
previous years. Thirteen were for new statewide websites. An
additional nine were for other pro se projects. One put self-help
computers in each of Guam's 21 mayors' community offices; another
put self-help stations in six remote courthouses in Alaska. A
third, made to Atlanta Legal Aid (partnering with Georgia Legal
Services), built on earlier efforts by AARP and created Self Help
Offices (SHO) for an urban setting (Atlanta) and a rural setting (a
mobile office that will move from community to community).
TIG staff presented the TIG-funded I-CAN project from Orange
County, California to the Virginia Court System. We also organized
a conference on document assembly software in New York City. At
that event, legal services personnel, court personnel, and other
technology experts saw demonstrations by four companies on their
products, and assessed their utility for preparing pro se
documents. After weighing the options, we arranged for a donation
from Lexis of their HotDocs document assembly software for each
state, which will greatly enhance the availability of legal forms
that lay people can easily fill out online.
Recognizing that self-represented litigants are a challenge for
court systems, LSC has collaborated with the National Center for
State Courts, the State Justice Institute, the American Judicature
Society, Pro Bono Net, and Zorza Associates to create a website
resource center for professionals involved in self-help projects.
This is one of several endeavors by an ad hoc pro se group that has
continued to work jointly on enhancements for pro se since it was
first organized, in 2000 at LSC's charter TIG Conference. In June,
at the Annual Conference of Chief Justices-Conference of State
Court Administrators, LSC held two sessions on successful self help
initiatives, and met informally with judges and administrators to
examine potential and existing pro se partnerships between civil
court systems and legal services programs.
X. Resource Development
Substantial new resources are essential to increased access to
and availability of services to low-income persons. Level LSC
funding, census-related cuts in many program budgets, downturns in
IOLTA and state government revenues made this past year one where
LSC support for resource development was essential to the vitality
of programs and state justice communities.
In 2002, LSC continued to offer technical assistance to lower
funded states to increase resources. For example, our funds made it
possible for Louisiana to adopt a multi-year development plan, and
allowed West Virginia to launch a three-year private bar campaign
that secured almost $300,000 in contributions and pledges prior to
kickoff, with the expectation of reaching its goal of $1.2 million.
Collaborative efforts also are yielding gains in other states.
•
Pennsylvania civil justice community stakeholders joined
to bring about passage of a filing fee surcharge law that will
ultimately give about $7.6 million of annual funding for civil
legal aid.
•
Delaware state planners collaborated on an endowment fund
that will provide longterm support for legal services. It was made
possible by Delaware's Combined Campaign for Justice, a coordinated
fundraising effort by the state planning committee sponsored by the
Delaware State Bar Association and other justice community
stakeholders.
•
In Virginia, state planners were able to increase filing
fee funding by 50 percent and, through the statewide funding
planning team, created a statewide funding action plan adopted by
the Virginia Statewide Planning Assembly.
XI. Pro Bono Enhancement
One of the most powerful ways to expand client services and
support for providers is to engage the private bar in poverty law
activities. Historically two barriers have interfered with broad
participation in pro bono projects. One is that few lawyers are
experienced in poverty law and most are reluctant - without support
and assistance - to handle such cases. Second, many private
practitioners are unwilling to take a case when the effort it will
require is not clearly set forth at the outset. Fortunately, many
of these lawyers are willing and able to help in other ways.
Websites
Early indications are that pro bono websites have the potential
to address the expertise gap. As currently utilized, a pro bono
website has two chief functions. One is to list cases and projects
that will benefit from private attorney involvement. The second is
to provide resources relevant to the cases and projects listed on
the website by making available materials (such as forms and
briefing information) relevant to the cases listed on the website
and electronic access to experts who will assist the pro bono
attorney. The first function acts as a forum for finding volunteers
for such activities as consulting on cases, handling economic
development transactions or working on intake systems. The second
website function supports volunteers who are uncomfortable in a new
area of law and need guidance and direction.
Special Communities
LSC administers the grant for the Veterans Consortium Pro Bono
Program to make available high quality free legal assistance to
litigants before the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims who
cannot afford the cost of representation. This year through the
competitive grants process, LSC awarded a four-year grant to the
Veterans Pro Bono Consortium, a national organization that assists
veterans with their appeals process by linking them with pro bono
attorneys.
TIG Initiatives
In each of the statewide websites supported by TIG funds, there
is or soon will be a section committed to pro bono attorneys. The
section is modeled after ProBono.Net in New York City, a popular
resource that contains substantial information on areas of law
relevant to pro bono projects, a calendar for CLE events and forms
through which volunteers can pose questions to experts, among other
tools. Pro bono attorneys are a valuable asset for low-income
people who have legal problems. We want to sustain and grow private
attorney engagement by giving volunteers the necessary tools and
support. And website pro bono sections are essential to doing
so.
XII. Intake Enhancement
Efficient intake systems not only screen clients for eligibility
but also give advice, brief service and referral assistance to
those who cannot be fully represented. Used well, intake systems
offer the promise of increasing assistance to many who are not
currently served. LSC staff were struck by the many innovative
systems used across the country. In 2002, we took the steps to
encourage their growth and improvement through a program letter
outlining what we believe to be model intake practices. We also
added review of and feedback on intake systems to all of our
quality review visits, and, through our technology grants, we made
it possible for programs to improve their own systems using the
experiences of peers.
LSC's Program Letter on Intake
Our Program Letter on the characteristics of a telephone intake,
advice and referral system sets out the attributes of a superb
system for grantees to both inform the field and create a set of
standards LSC can use during on-site visits and for evaluating
grant applications. Intrinsic to the development of the Program
Letter, was the input we solicited on exemplary systems from
individuals and organizations with special knowledge or experience
about the topic.
Intake as a Critical Component of Quality Review Visits
Intake systems are examined during our on-site program quality
visits. In 2002, recommendations and requirements issued in the
wake of our visits led several programs to substantially modify
their intake procedures. One program was told to restructure its
capacity for telephone advice and brief service so that clients
would not have to personally come to the office for an intake
interview. We strongly encouraged another program to adopt
program-wide intake protocols that would make case handling
consistent among all offices.
TIG Grants Enhancing Intake
Before a low-income person can receive appropriate legal
assistance, that individual has to gain access to legal services
system. LSC promotes the use of technology to remove barriers to
access by establishing seamless intake systems that cover an entire
state. Several 2002 TIG awards, now well underway, targeted intake
systems. In Virginia, callers to the statewide toll free number now
are not only routed to an intake worker in the program serving
their area, but can hear informative recordings on relevant legal
topics twenty-four hours a day, in English and Spanish.
Building on last year's grant, the TIG 2002 award to Potomac
Legal Aid Society (PLAS) allows the program to reach the area's
underserved Asian American community. The ASP database program will
enable the Asian Pacific American Legal Resource Center (APALRC) to
conduct client intake at their offices of mono-lingual Asian
American clients, and then transfer eligibility and case data over
the Internet to PLAS if the client needs brief legal advice, or to
LSNV for extended representation. Interpreters will be provided by
APALRC.
A TIG award to the Northwest Justice Project (Washington)
streamlines case referral from CLEAR (the state's telephone intake
program) to the state's other legal services providers. Instead of
printing out intake forms and faxing them to the other providers,
who then must manually enter the data into their systems, intake
information will be transferred electronically from one system to
the other. The result is an extraordinary savings in staff time and
has become a model for other intake systems.
XIII. Promoting the Development of Effective Legal
Services
In 2002, LSC also relied on a broader national platform and
collaborations with national partners to underline the centrality
of new and more effective strategies to expand access and
availability of legal services.
•
LSC Vice President for Programs Randi Youells tirelessly
promoted our message of vigorous and effective justice communities
that serve clients across a given state no matter what cultural,
geographic or linguistic barriers interfere with their access. She
traveled to meetings with local, regional and state grantees,
participated in access to justice conferences and responded to
international invitations to address legal aid groups. Highpoints
of her peripatetic proselytizing in 2002 were:
o Access to Justice Conference in Montana
o Community Legal Services 50th Year Anniversary
(Arizona)
o Southeast Project Directors Association Conference (New
Orleans)
o NLADA Mid-Year and Annual Meetings
o Native American LSC-Funded Programs Meeting
(Milwaukee)
o Bay Area Legal Services (Tampa)
o Puerto Rico Access to Justice Meeting
o Conference of State Court Justice and State Court
Administrators (Maine)
o Ontario Legal Aid Speakers Series (Canada)
o International Legal Aid Group (Tokyo)
o Bellow-Sacks Symposium on Self-Represented Litigants
(Boston)
o TIG Conference (Chicago)
o Access to Justice Meeting (New York City)
•
LSC held a conference on building state justice
communities for executive directors of state and territory-wide
recipient programs. Our goal was to focus executive directors on
the fundamentals of planning for client-centered, comprehensive,
integrated statewide justice communities. We convened the executive
leadership from newly created statewide LSC-funded programs and the
experienced leadership of the more historical statewide programs to
share observations on challenges and opportunities created by state
planning. Thirty-one program representatives attended, and every
statewide LSC-funded program but one was represented. Also
represented were our grantees in Puerto Rico, Guam and Virgin
Islands programs.
•
LSC held its Rural Issues and Delivery Symposium in
Nebraska last fall. LSC Vice President for Programs Randi Youells
and LSC Board Member Maria Luisa Mercado opened the three-day
symposium by challenging conferees to help LSC develop practices
and policies that guarantee high quality legal services to rural
people - whether they are California farm workers, small farmers in
the Midwest, migrant workers in the South, or Native Americans on
reservations in the Southwest.
Conferees' answers to four questions (how to build
collaborative relationships in rural environments; how to balance
resources between urban and rural communities; how to achieve
world-class delivery systems for rural clients; and how to expand
resources for rural delivery) led to a list of broad
recommendations for LSC and the legal services community, with
particular emphasis on the development of a national voice for
rural legal services.
•
LSC joined AARP and Management Information Exchange (MIE)
to host "Innovations in Civil Legal Services," a workshop at the
NLADA Annual Conference in Milwaukee to showcase best practices in
the effective delivery of civil legal services to low-income
people. We highlighted qualitative improvements in current
structures along with innovative approaches to reaching
hard-to-reach groups traditionally overlooked by providers. These
exemplary practices also were posted on the LSC Resource Library
Initiative website (LRI), ensuring easy and public access to
information about them.
•
Among the TIG staff presentations at the 2002 Equal
Justice Conference was the session highlighting several TIG
projects in final implementation stage. Two projects were
presented: the Ohio Statewide Website (www.ohiolegalservices.org)
that became the national Kaivo template, and the Ohio Domestic
Violence Resource Center (www.ohiodvresources.org), a website
containing document creation software and replete with information
specific to victims of domestic violence. The presentation also
covered Hawaii's use of videoconferencing to serve clients, New
Jersey's voice over IP (VOIP) technology, and Iowa's computer guide
for lowincome residents.
•
TIG staff responded to a request from Jeanne Charn,
Director of the Hale and Dorr Legal Services Center at Harvard Law
School, to advise the Center on their current technology systems.
The daylong meeting at Harvard looked at case management and
quality assessment issues, and concluded with hopes for future
partnerships between the Center and LSC.
•
Over and above the activities described above, TIG staff
made presentations at:
o Harvard Law School - Bellows-Sacks Legal
Clinic
o ABA National Conference of Bar Presidents
o ABA Techshow
o Chinese Legal Aid Delegation sponsored by the National
Committee on United States-China Relations
•
LSC convened a June summit in St. Louis seeking feedback
about the TIG program and on broader technology issues. Invited was
a representative sample of program grantees and technology experts.
We wanted to learn about the TIG program's effectiveness to date,
areas for improvement, and ways we could encourage grantees to
improve client services through emerging technologies.
Deliberations ranged widely and many topics were aired. The report,
summarizing the discussions of major issues and how LSC is
responding to participants' recommendations, will issue in
2003.
XIV. Legal Work Management and Supervision
One of best ways to obtain uniformly high quality services is to
ensure that grantees' legal work management and supervision is
rigorous and effective. Below, we describe our efforts during
on-site visits and in the competition process to achieve this goal.
We also show how the advocate component of statewide websites
promotes effective representation by sharing legal resources and
expertise - generally a function of legal work supervisors.
Legal Work Management Reviews in Quality Visits
Legal work management and supervision systems are always on the
table when LSC staff conduct an on-site program quality review. In
2002, our reviews resulted in LSC recommending modifications in
several programs' legal work management and supervision systems.
When LSC staff found that one program lacked an effective way to
monitor the quality of its advocates' written legal work, we gave
specific directions on how the program could establish a system to
ensure high quality written legal work. In another situation, we
noted that a program lacked an effective method to monitor the
professional growth of new and inexperienced staff. Again, we made
specific suggestions on approaches to mentoring these
individuals.
Legal Work Management in the Competition Process
Through the competitive grants process, LSC obtains and reviews
a substantial amount of data on an applicant's plans and systems
for legal work management and supervision, including:
•
how cases are assigned and supervised;
•
mechanisms to assure that cases and matters are handled
in a timely manner;
•
mechanisms to assure that clients are kept informed and
participate in decisions about their cases;
•
mechanisms to assure that case handlers are aware of and
comply with the applicant's priorities, the LSC Act and LSC
appropriations acts and regulatory requirements;
•
plans to ensure the availability of specialized expertise
and legal research materials including practice manuals and related
materials about substantive poverty law issues; and
•
timely information about key judicial, administrative and
legislative developments at state and federal levels affecting
eligible clients, and appropriate legal strategies to respond to
those developments.
Legal Work Management through Technology
The TIG program has directed that a portion of the statewide
websites be geared to advocates and their support. The advocate
component of the website allows individual lawyers easy access to
pro bono and legal services organizations and the support and
training needed to represent clients effectively. The advocate
component of the website is organized geographically (generally by
state or city), by local practice areas and by national practice
areas. Each practice area is defined by a substantive area of law
(e.g., family law, immigration law, etc.). A leading pro bono or
legal services organization "hosts" each geographic and practice
area. Organizations are able to use the site's extensive resources
to promote and recruit volunteers; they also are invited to
contribute content to the site.
Password-protected practice areas that are organized by legal
topics allow users to share information online. The advocate's
tools include online libraries of training materials, model
pleadings and links, a current news page, a training and events
calendar, postings of new cases for volunteers, and member-driven
listservs. Both the news and calendar pages allow all users to
submit their own articles and events. Administrative tools permit
host organizations to revise content without a webmaster or
significant technical staff.
XV. State Planning Body Development
Since its initial call for state planning in 1995, LSC has urged
the broadest possible participation of equal justice community
stakeholders to create and empower a permanent statewide body that
coordinates civil equal justice related efforts, promotes the
expansion of civil equal justice initiatives, and ensures
accountability of all partners to a single, galvanizing vision. In
2002, LSC continued to provide technical assistance and pursue
activities to help create or strengthen state planning bodies. We
also witnessed the fruition of prior efforts.
•
The Colorado Legal Services Planning Group, in
partnership with the leadership of the Colorado Bar Association and
the Colorado Supreme Court, set up a statewide Access to Justice
Commission-a formal and permanent planning entity within the legal
community.
•
LSC underwrote professional facilitation of a kick-off
retreat for Montana's designated state planning body that led to
the state's first access to justice conference in September. LSC
Vice President for Programs Randi Youells was the keynote
speaker.
•
The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico
announced the creation of an Access to Justice Commission during
LSC's 2002 state planning visit. This fall, the Commission was
formally created and members appointed. The Puerto Rico Bar
Association will staff the Commission.
•
In spring 2002, the State Bar of Georgia Access to
Justice Committee launched a state planning effort to strengthen
the delivery of civil legal services for the poor. Strategies for
achieving their vision include securing more funding for providers,
establishing and maintaining programs that meet a range of legal
needs, expanding coordination among stakeholders, and fostering
public support for the concept of equal access to justice. Action
groups will report on ways to improve Georgia's civil legal
services system.
•
Massachusetts completed a comprehensive statewide client
needs assessment, a critical element in their re-energized state
planning process.
•
In Arkansas, LSC technical assistance funds are allowing
the two LSC programs and the Arkansas Bar Association to put in
place a permanent access to justice group.
•
In Alabama and New York, LSC technical assistance funds
have resulted in configuration plans drawn by an expanded community
of stakeholders deeply engaged in building permanent and effective
state planning bodies.
•
In Mississippi, our funds supported the hiring of a
professional facilitator.
The effective use of technology to assist clients and improve
legal skills does not just happen, it has to be planned. The TIG
program specifically addresses the development of state technology
plans by providing, through TIG grants, technical personnel needed
to assist programs in using technology to deliver services to
clients as effectively as possible. In general, our grants support
technical personnel directed to deliver a statewide technology
plan. Specific grants awarded in 2002 went to North Dakota and
Louisiana for technology staff dedicated to helping state planning
bodies prepare statewide technology plans. In addition, TIG staff
assist our grantees' staff, when asked; one common request is to
review resumes of applicants for technology positions to be sure
they have the requisite credentials.
XVI. National Collaborations
As the linchpin member of the national civil justice community,
LSC regularly joins with its national partners to promote equal
access. During 2002, we worked with national colleagues on specific
activities.
American Bar Association
LSC is very concerned about the law school debt burden that
graduates carry. A recent study found that the students' median law
school debt is more than $84,000 - an amount that does not include
the additional undergraduate debt burden that many students bear.
This debt burden, coupled with the famously low salaries in the
legal services community, dramatically reduces the ability of our
grantees to attract and retain high quality new lawyers. LSC has
joined with the ABA Commission on Loan Repayment and Forgiveness to
study this problem and to recommend solutions.
National Center on Poverty Law
LSC has partnered with the National Center on Poverty Law to
provide training to the field on how to use the Internet and other
tools to facilitate poverty law research. In addition, we supported
the creation of a 250-page Poverty Law Manual that introduces
advocates to the fundamentals of poverty law.
National Legal Aid and Defender Association
LSC's work with NLADA continues on many fronts. Collaborative
efforts enriched LSC's Resource Library Initiative website.
Together we have advocated on behalf of LSC grantees at other
federal agencies on issues arising out of other federal grants that
the grantees receive.
AARP and the Management Information Exchange
The October launch of LRI was the result of our cooperative
endeavors with a host of national organizations - NLADA, AARP Legal
Counsel for the Elderly, and MIE. Our productive relationships with
these entities led to additional opportunities for information
gathering and sharing. For example, as a direct result of our LRI
work, we were asked to cosponsor (with AARP and MIE) the
"Innovations in Civil Legal Services" workshop at the NLADA Annual
Conference, described in detail above in Promoting the Development
of Effective Legal Services.
Legal Services Technology Funders Group
LSC works cooperatively with several national organizations that
make technology grants
- the Open Society Institute, the National Center for State
Courts, and the State Justice Institute. Our joint goal is to
coordinate funding efforts to improve the delivery of legal
services through the use of technology. In 2002, our activities
with the National Center for State Courts led to the award of a TIG
grant to our grantee in Maryland to implement a project on pro se
resources first conceptualized by the National Center for State
Courts.
Conclusion
The past year saw the creation of many projects, the maturation
of several young initiatives and the opportunity to take existing
efforts to new levels. It has been a very productive twelve months,
not without its stresses and disappointments. Overall, the Programs
staff is pleased with the progress we have made and believe that
our work has led to significant improvements in the opportunities
for poor people in our country to access legal services. We are
also convinced that our endeavors have strengthened existing legal
services delivery systems so that clients now receive legal
assistance more appropriate to their current needs and future
hopes.
Many years ago, Reginald Heber Smith famously noted that the
reason poverty organizations have not "more completely answered the
demand of the poor for legal assistance is that they are grossly
under financed." That is as true today as it was in 1919.
Nonetheless, we believe that our technical assistance funds, TIG
awards, LRI resources, our partnerships with national organizations
and the many other methods by which LSC extends the resources
allocated by Congress to our grantees has ameliorated somewhat the
woefully underfunded situation of legal services programs.
