LSC and grantee staff have recognized for some time that data obtained through the existing case service reporting system does not provide a complete picture of the work programs do for clients; nor does it provide a meaningful picture of the impact which federal funding has on the delivery of legal services to eligible clients. In particular, the existing system has three principal shortcomings.

           First, the existing system does not capture information about services, such as community legal education, which do not meet LSC’s definition of a case, and therefore cannot be reported within the existing system. Because the existing system does not capture these types of services, it tends to under-report the true volume of work which programs do for clients.

           Second, the existing system captures information only about instances in which programs are able to provide assistance. It does capture information about the extent to which programs are unable to meet the demand for their services. For example, the existing system does not capture information about how many potential clients programs must turn away because of limited resources.

           Third, the existing system does not capture information about the results of programs’ work, such as benefits to clients. This third shortcoming is especially noteworthy given the Corporation’s decision to adhere to the Government Performance and Results Act, which shifts emphasis in performance measurement from "outputs", such as counting cases, to "outcomes", such as benefits to clients.

           Recognizing these shortcomings in the existing system, LSC staff decided to conduct a survey of LSC grantee programs in order to take stock of existing practices for tracking information (other than counting cases). Many programs, for example, have other sources of funding which require measurement of outcomes. Similarly, some programs keep track of eligible applicants who are turned away, or of numbers of people attending community legal education and outreach events. Knowledge of existing practices in these areas would be very helpful to future discussions at LSC about the development of a new information system, as well as help to ensure that any steps taken by LSC would be consistent with steps taken by other funding sources.

           LSC distributed an Information Survey to the field on July 26, 1999, and received 183 responses approximately two months later. The number of programs responding represents a little over 70 percent of the total number of programs receiving funding from LSC in 1999.

           The Information Survey specifically asked programs to provide information about their current practices, including the tracking of information about:

           Where available, the Information Survey also asked programs to provide actual data in these areas for the first six months of the current calendar year (January – June, 1999).

           Of the 183 programs responding to the survey, 116 (or nearly 2 out of 3) indicated that they have recently conducted or participated in an assessment of legal needs in their service area. The vast majority of these assessments occurred in the past three years, and nearly half (52) of the assessments surveyed persons living in poverty who were not program clients.

           Program estimates of the amount of unmet legal needs in their service areas varied widely, from 20 percent or less in a dozen service areas, to 90 percent or more in twenty service areas. Most frequently, the estimates of unmet legal needs ranged between 75 percent and 85 percent of total legal needs.

           Of the 183 programs responding to the survey, 38 (approximately 1 out of 5 programs) indicated that they are able to provide some form of assistance (either legal or non-legal) to all eligible applicants who seek it. However, as discussed later in this report, in many instances the assistance received by clients is not sufficient to achieve resolution of their legal problems.

           The vast majority of programs (146, or 4 out of 5) indicated that they are unable, because of resource limitations, to assist every eligible applicant seeking assistance with a legal problem within program priorities. Of these 146 programs, 48 indicated that they keep track of eligible applicants turned away, either through paper records or through the entry of information into a computer database. These programs reported having turned away from fewer than 100 to several thousand eligible applicants who sought assistance within program priorities in the first six months of 1999.

           The Information Survey also sought to determine whether programs had set priorities which excluded certain types of legal problems, or whether programs’ case acceptance practices tended to exclude certain types of legal problems on a regular basis. Of the 183 programs responding to the survey, 159 (or nearly 9 out of 10) reported that they excluded one or more common types of legal problems, either through the setting of priorities, or through their case acceptance practices.

           The most common types of legal problems excluded by these programs are (with the numbers of programs excluding these types of legal problems):

           With the recent emphasis on providing brief counsel and advice through centralized intake systems and other innovative techniques, many programs have increased the number of clients they serve. However, not all clients are receiving a level of assistance which is likely to be sufficient to achieve resolution of their legal problems.

           Of the 183 programs responding to the Information Survey, 132 (or nearly 3 out of 4) indicated that they are able to provide only "non-legal" assistance to some clients, where "non-legal" assistance is the provision of information or a referral without counsel and advice or another form of legal assistance from an attorney or paralegal. These programs indicated that the number of persons receiving only "non-legal" assistance generally ranged between 33% and 75% of eligible applicants.

           In addition, 164 of the 183 programs responding to the Information Survey indicated that a large percentage of their clients are receiving only limited assistance, when their legal problems would really require a greater amount of assistance to achieve resolution.⁽¹⁾   These programs indicated that the number of clients receiving limited assistance (when their legal problem required more to achieve resolution) generally ranged from between 20% and 50% of the total number of clients receiving limited service.

           Because the existing CSR system does not capture information about services not meeting LSC’s definition of a case, the Information Survey sought to identify other types of services which would be suitable for measurement. Information about these types of services would serve to illuminate subsequent discussions about which of these types of services, if any, a new information system should endeavor to capture data.

           Of the 183 programs responding to the survey, all indicated that they provide services other than case representation to clients. The types of services include (with the numbers of programs providing the services):

           The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) requires federal agencies to measure outcomes resulting from their activities. Having opted to adhere to GPRA, LSC must now consider moving from measuring "outputs" (such as cases) to measuring "outcomes" (such as benefits for clients). Because many LSC grantees receive funding from other funding sources which require outcome measurement, many grantees have already moved in the direction which GPRA contemplates.

           Of the 183 programs responding to the Information Survey, 107 (or nearly 6 out of 10) indicated that they currently receive funding from another source which requires measurement of outcomes. The United Way was mentioned by 48 programs, IOLTA sources were mentioned by 32 programs, and Federal sources other then LSC were mentioned by 30 programs as requiring information about case outcomes.

           In addition to outcome measurement required by other funding sources, the Information Survey asked programs to indicate to what extent they consider client satisfaction. Of the 183 programs responding, 141 (or 3 out of 4) indicated that they inquire about client satisfaction on at least a periodic or sample basis. Of these programs, 41 indicated that they inquire about client satisfaction in all cases, and the remainder do so for a subset of their cases.

           The responses to the Information Survey indicate that many LSC programs currently possess data on unmet legal needs, and a majority of programs are already collecting and maintaining at least some information about case outcomes (or benefits to clients). Also, nearly all programs can readily describe the types of services they provide other than cases, although relatively few programs keep track of these services in a systemic fashion.

           Given LSC’s determination to adhere to the Government Performance and Results Act, and the consequent need to be able to report data other than numbers of cases closed, the next steps are to evaluate the relative benefits and costs of collecting, on a regular basis, information about unmet legal needs, services provided to clients other than through cases, and case outcomes (or benefits to clients).