[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 250 (Thursday, December 28, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 82401-82404]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-33143]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION
Program Letter 2000-7--State Planning and Performance Measures
AGENCY: Legal Services Corporation.
ACTION: Notice of issuance of Program Letter 2000-7--State Planning and
Performance Measures.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This Notice sets forth the text of Program Letter 2000-7--
State Planning and Performance Measures. The program letter announces
three strategies to advance LSC's efforts to create comprehensive
integrated, coordinated, client-centered state justice communities in
each state:
(1) The creation of a team within LSC specifically assigned
responsibility for state planning;
(2) A period of self-evaluation by and in each state justice
community, with an evaluation report to be issued to LSC at the end of
the evaluation period; and
(3) The linking of state planning with the development of new
performance measurement tools.
This Program Letter has been sent to each LSC grant recipient and
is also posted to the LSC website at www.lsc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Randi Youells, Vice President for
Programs, Legal Services Corporation, 750 First Street, NE, Washington,
DC 20002-4250; 202/336-7269 (phone); [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Program Letter 2000-7
To: All LSC Program Directors.
From: Randi Youells, Vice President for Programs.
[[Page 82402]]
Date: December 13, 2000.
Re: State Planning and Performance Measures, (Building A Stronger
Foundation: A Framework for Planning and Evaluating Comprehensive,
Integrated and Client-Centered State Justice Communities).
Program Letters 98-1 and 98-6 launched LSC's most recent state
planning activities approximately three years ago. Pressured by funding
shortfalls and the changing needs of clients and concerned with
enhancing system efficiency, effectiveness and the ability to meet
clients' legal needs, legal services programs throughout the United
States were challenged by these two program letters to become actively
engaged in a process of reassessing their delivery practices and
policies, restructuring their legal services delivery systems and
reallocating their legal services dollars. Essentially, LSC Program
Letters 98-1 and 98-6 asked grantees to look at their roles in a new
way--to expand their horizons from what's best for the clients in my
service area to what is best for clients throughout the state. Using
this new lens, programs were asked to report on how they would
coordinate and integrate their work in seven important areas--enhancing
client access, efficiently delivering high quality legal assistance;
effectively using technology to expand access and enhance services;
promoting client self-help and preventive legal education and advice;
coordinating legal work and training staff; coordinating and
collaborating with the private bar; developing additional resources to
support legal services delivery; and designing a legal services
delivery configuration that enhanced client services, reduced barriers
and operated efficiently and effectively.
On January 28, 2000, the LSC Board of Directors approved LSC's 5-
year Strategic Direction Plan.\1\ This document commits LSC to
dramatically enhance the impact of Legal Services programs throughout
the nation by improving access to legal services among eligible persons
while enhancing the quality of the services delivered. The Plan
highlighted LSC's State Planning Initiative as the primary strategy for
expanding access to and availability of services throughout the United
States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ To download a copy, go to http://www.lsc.gov/pressr/
pr__pi.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the course of the last three years, many states have begun to
develop comprehensive and integrated legal services delivery systems
that:
(1) recognize that state justice communities must be broader than
just LSC-funded grantees to include both LSC-funded and non-LSC funded
sectors of the legal services delivery system, and
(2) provide a continuum of services that encompasses individual
representation, extended representation, advice, pro se advocacy,
preventative education, community involvement and support, and the use
of technology to expand essential services to all low-income persons
within a state.
These are exciting developments. However, it continues to be
apparent that in many states and territories, the legal services
delivery system remains a fragmented set of disconnected services. In
many states we continue to find a wide divergence in the availability
of services, client access capabilities and civil equal justice
resources. This stands in stark contrast to our expectation that the
statewide delivery system be constructed and maintained to provide for:
(a) Relative equity of client access to the civil legal services
delivery system throughout the state; (b) relative equity in the
availability of the full range of client service capacities necessary
to meet the full continuum of client legal needs regardless of where in
the state clients live; (c) relative equity in the capacity to serve
client communities in all of their diversity; and (d) relative equity
in the investment of civil equal justice resources (federal, state,
private, and in-kind/pro bono) throughout the state.
A hallmark of an integrated delivery system is its flexibility to
deploy resources in geographic or substantive areas so that quality of
services is improved, funds are increased and outcomes for clients are
expanded in areas where they are weak. In this context, then, relative
equity considers the system's various capacities throughout the state,
from region to region, and directs necessary resources to locales where
improvement of any sort is required to assure that all low-income
people in the state have similar degrees of access to the full spectrum
of equal justice services.
In this program letter we are announcing three strategies to
advance LSC's efforts to create comprehensive integrated, coordinated,
client-centered state justice communities in each state:
(1) The creation of a team within LSC specifically assigned
responsibility for state planning;
(2) A period of self-evaluation by and in each state justice
community, with an evaluation report to be issued to LSC at the end of
the evaluation period; and
(3) The linking of state planning with the development of new
performance measurement tools.
The information received from the field on the State Planning
Process and Program Letters 98-1 and 98-6 after publication of these
two documents in the Federal Register and input derived from more than
two years of on-site engagement by LSC staff and consultants in the
field were instrumental in the development of these strategies.
The Creation of a State Planning Team within LSC
LSC's Strategic Plan emphasizes that LSC's State Planning
Initiative is our primary strategy for expanding access to and
availability of services throughout the United States. To stress the
importance of this effort and to facilitate the development of state
justice communities, LSC will create a planning team to coordinate our
state planning activities. This team will be directly attached to and
supervised by the LSC Vice-President for Programs.
A Period of Self-Evaluation by and in Each State Justice Community
We are in a period of significant transition moving from an LSC-
centric legal services model to comprehensive, integrated and client-
centered state justice communities. We acknowledge that the journey is
not over and that significant effort remains to ensure that
comprehensive justice communities exist and function within every state
and territory. As we move forward with our efforts, we must remain
conscious of the need to address several questions of fundamental
relevance. These include:
(1) To what extent has a comprehensive, integrated client-centered
legal services delivery system been achieved in a particular state?
(2) To what extent have intended outcomes of a comprehensive,
integrated and client-centered legal service delivery system been
achieved including but not limited to service effectiveness/quality;
efficiency; equity in terms of client access; greater involvement by
members of the private bar in the legal lives of clients; and client-
community empowerment?
(3) Are the best organizational and human resource management
configurations and approaches being used?
We believe that the next several months are an appropriate time to
try to begin to answer these questions. We have been involved in state
planning activities for approximately three years, and LSC believes
that states need a period of introspection about where
[[Page 82403]]
they have been and where they are going. Moreover, we can all
acknowledge that self-evaluation is a worthwhile and important part of
our planning for the creation of comprehensive, integrated, client-
centered legal services delivery systems within each state. We are,
accordingly, requiring our grantees and requesting that other state
planners begin a period of evaluation of their planning efforts and
activities over the last three years using the above questions as a
framework for the evaluation report. These self-evaluations will inform
each state justice community and LSC of what has worked, what has not
worked and why, what obstacles stand in planners path, and what steps
and support might assist each state to better achieve a comprehensive,
integrated, client-centered delivery system that delivers upon the
promise of equal justice for all.
Evaluations can be performed by state planners themselves or by
outside consultants hired to perform this task. We ask that a single
evaluation report for each state be submitted to LSC on or before July
1, 2001 unless LSC has granted your state an extension of time in which
to file the report. Please submit your extension requests no later than
May 15, 2001, to Robert Gross, Senior Program Counsel for State
Planning at LSC. Reports should be no longer that 30 pages (not more
than 10 pages single-spaced for each area of inquiry) and should
contain the name and telephone number of a contact person(s).
Attachments will be accepted as long as they provide additional
information that clarifies a particular issue or area of inquiry as
identified in the body of the report. The report should assume that the
effort to create state justice communities is ongoing and that we do
not expect that you have completed your work. Self-evaluation reports
should be a candid and honest assessment of the progress that each
state has made in creating a comprehensive, integrated and client-
centered delivery system as well as of the work that remains to be
done. Reports should address the following issues in the order
presented:
To what extent has a comprehensive, integrated and client-centered
legal services delivery system been achieved in a particular state?
Areas of exploration include:
(1) What are the important issues that impact upon low income
people within your state? How is your state responding to these issues?
(2) What are the components of the delivery system?
(3) Has this system created mechanisms to assess its performance in
relationship to commonly-accepted external guides such as the ABA
Standards for Providers of Civil Legal Services to the Poor, the LSC
Performance Criteria or some other set of objective criteria? What is
the protocol for undertaking system performance review and when was a
review last undertaken?
(4) Does your statewide system work to ensure the availability of
equitable legal assistance capacities to clients--regardless of who the
clients are, where they reside or the languages they speak? How does
your system ensure that clients have equitable access to necessary
assistance including self-help, legal education, advice, brief service,
and representation in all relevant forums? Please describe what steps
you anticipate taking to ensure equitable access in the coming years.
(5) How does the legal service delivery system employ technology to
provide increased access and enhanced services to clients throughout
the state? What technological initiatives are currently underway and
how will they support the integrated statewide delivery system?
(6) How has the legal service delivery system expanded its
resources to provide critical legal services to low income clients
including hard to reach groups such as migrant farmworkers, Native
Americans, the elderly, those with physical or mental disabilities,
those confined to institutions, immigrants and the rural poor?
(7) What steps have been implemented within the legal services
delivery system and among client communities to identify and nurture
new leaders? Do the existing leaders reflect the diversity within the
state and within client communities that your delivery system serves?
Do your state's equal justice leaders reflect the gender, race, ethnic
and economic concerns of important but sometimes overlooked groups
within your state? Does the leadership provide opportunities for
innovation and experimentation; does it support creative solutions to
meet changing needs; are new ideas welcomed; are clients nurtured as
leaders? Has the leadership been given sufficient authority and
resources to implement needed changes?
(8) What do you envision will be your next steps to achieve a
client-centered integrated and comprehensive delivery system within
your state or territory? How will clients be actively involved in the
determination of these next steps?
(9) What has been the greatest obstacle to achieving a statewide,
integrated, client-centered delivery system and how was that obstacle
overcome or, alternatively, how do you plan to overcome that obstacle?
(10) Has any benefit-to-cost analysis been made in terms of
creating a comprehensive, integrated and client-centered legal services
delivery system in your state? If yes, what does your analysis show?
(11) What resources, technical assistance and support would help
you meet your goals?
To what extent have intended outcomes of a comprehensive, integrated
client-centered legal service delivery system been achieved including
but not limited to service effectiveness/quality; efficiency; equity in
terms of client access; greater involvement by members of the private
bar in the legal lives of clients, and client-community empowerment?
Areas of exploration include:
(1) In terms of the issues impacting upon low-income persons within
your state, what strategies have you designed to address these issues
and how do you plan to measure your future success in addressing your
objectives?
(2) Has the legal services delivery system expanded access and
services through coordination with providers throughout the state? Can
this be quantified?
(3) Has the quality of services provided by the legal services
delivery system improved. How?
(4) Since 1998, has there been improvement in the relative equity
of client access throughout the state for all low income clients
regardless of who they are, where in the state they reside, what
languages they speak, their race/gender/national origin, or the
existence of other access barriers? How is this equity achieved?
(5) Since 1998, has there been improvement in the relative equity
in terms of the availability of the full range of civil equal justice
delivery capacities throughout the state? What mechanisms have been
developed to ensure such relative equity is achieved and maintained?
Since 1998, has there been improvement in the relative equity in the
development and distribution of civil equal justice resources
throughout the state? Are there areas of the state that suffer from a
disproportionate lack of resources (funding as well as in-kind/pro
bono)? If so, is there a strategy to overcome such inequities?
(6) Does this legal services delivery system operate efficiently?
Are there areas of duplication?
(7) Has the system expanded the way it involves private lawyers in
the
[[Page 82404]]
delivery of essential services to low-income persons? Does the system
effectively and efficiently use the private bar to deliver essential
services to low income people?
Are the best organizational and human resource management
configurations and approaches being used?
Areas of exploration include:
(1) For calendar year 2001, what is the current configuration of
programs (LSC and non-LSC) that deliver services to low income
clients--i.e., what are the components (size, areas of responsibility,
governance) of the delivery system? What are the funding sources and
levels for each of these components of the delivery system?
(2) Since October 1998, what other configurations and/or approaches
have been seriously explored? Were any adopted? Were any rejected? Are
any changes contemplated in the coming year?
(3) Is there any identifiable duplication in capacities or services
in the state? How many duplicative systems--accounting systems, human
resources management systems, case management systems, etc.--currently
exist? Does the service delivery system now in use minimize or
eliminate duplications that existed prior to October 1, 1998?
(4) Since October 1998, what innovative service delivery systems/
mechanisms/initiatives have been adopted in the state? Have any been
explored and then rejected?
Linking State Planning with the Development of New Performance
Measurement Tools
Simultaneously with these self-evaluations, LSC will proceed to
contract with a private research firm to formally evaluate legal
services delivery systems in a selected number of states. LSC plans to
select several states that we believe are at important stages of the
planning-implementation process for an outside evaluation. If your
state is chosen, you will not have to do the self-evaluation discussed
in this program letter. Moreover, LSC will provide discretionary grants
and/or technical assistance to assist with and help defray any in-kind
program costs associated with this project.
The purpose of these evaluations will be to determine whether or
not the delivery model in use in the state has effectively implemented
the concepts and principles of a comprehensive, integrated and client-
centered legal services delivery system. LSC will study the
relationship between the structure of the delivery system and desired
outcomes as articulated by the selected states in prior planning
documents. The findings of these formal evaluations--together with the
material presented in the self-evaluations--will assist LSC and other
interested stakeholders in understanding how best to conceptualize,
design and deliver comprehensive, integrated and client-centered legal
services. We will use this information to begin to develop new
performance measurement tools.
Victor M. Fortuno,
General Counsel and Vice President for Legal Affairs.
[FR Doc. 00-33143 Filed 12-27-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7050-01-P