State Justice Communities: Where Do We Go From Here? (pdf, 183 Kb)

For the decade between 1995 and 2005, the civil legal aid community and its supporters were heavily engaged in every state in both the process and substance of developing comprehensive, integrated state justice communities aimed at maximizing the capacities of the civil justice system to meet the needs of low-income clients. Many of the initiatives directed toward the development and enhancement of these systems were driven by the state planning process instituted by LSC in 1995.

History
LSC's Role
Ongoing Efforts

History

State-based planning and cooperation by no means began in 1995. However, the current era of the state planning process was initiated in 1995, by LSC President Alexander Forger in response to the severe funding cutbacks and large numbers of new, onerous restrictions placed upon LSC recipients by the 104th Congress. The terms of the process were outlined in Program Letter 95-1 issued in July 1995. That directive stressed the need to approach planning from a state perspective, to involve a broad range of stakeholders, to look at consolidation of programs if appropriate, heighten the involvement of the private bar, maximize the use of technology, leverage other sources of funding and address a wide range of other activities. Most states began serious statewide planning efforts shortly thereafter pursuant to Program Letter 95-1.

NLADA and the Project Advisory Group (PAG), recognizing the significant threat to federal funding and the dramatic changes in programs affecting the poor at the national level, provided a series of recommendations to their members as part of these early planning processes to help guide planners in moving forward. By mid 1998, LSC, NLADA and CLASP, and much of the provider community were engaged in thoughtful conversations around a developing vision of a state-based civil justice system that greatly reduced the isolation of LSC-funded programs, enhanced the political support in states for increasing resources, improved the use of technology in the delivery of legal services, increased the involvement of pro bono attorneys and facilitated greater cooperation in some states among programs regarding their legal advocacy initiatives.

Back to Top

LSC's Role

John McKay, who had been an active player in the Washington state planning process beginning in 1995, came into the presidency of LSC clearly focused on making "state planning" the centerpiece of his administration. Program Letter 98-06, issued in July 1998, called for a detailed state planning process for all LSC grantees. It mandated that a number of state planning considerations be addressed in response to seven questions related to the development of a comprehensive, integrated system in each state as a critical component part of its competition for grants process.

Progress toward a shared vision of a civil delivery system began to diverge dramatically in many states beginning with the 1998 LSC state planning initiative. LSC began in late 1998, particularly in reconfiguring the Bay Area of California even though the state plan did not seek such a change, to stress the reconfiguration of its service areas as a central component of its planning process. During the next several years, the landscape of LSC program configuration underwent enormous change. From 1995 until 1998, the number of LSC basic field and Native American programs shrunk from 288 to 261, with 27 programs being merged. The next several years saw a greatly accelerated pace of service area consolidations and program mergers – going from 261 to the current total of 138 programs serving the states and territories of the United States.

It is undeniable that such large scale organizational change siphoned much of the energy and support in many states from the other component parts of the vision of a state-based delivery system. It proved very hard, particularly for leaders of staff provider programs, to think about much else other than the myriad challenges attendant to achieving a business consolidation and running much larger programs.

Back to Top

Ongoing Efforts

Most programs have now moved significantly down the road toward effectuating mergers and many states have had experience with what works and what does not in implementing a state-based system.

The current administration at LSC, under the leadership of Helaine Barnett, has focused on quality in the provision of legal services as its priority agenda item. Barnett has stressed that the focus on configuration is no longer an LSC priority, but that it still supports the other goals and shares the vision of a state-based system that underscored the decade-long planning process.

If NLADA can be of assistance in your state, contact Don Saunders, Director of Civil Legal Services at d.saunders@nlada.org.

Back to Top

Documents linked from this page are in the PDF format and require the free Adobe Acrobat Reader in order to view or print them. Click to download the Acrobat Reader software.