Fostering cooperation between Indiana legal service providers

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court has formed a new commission to address the problem of Indiana residents who cannot afford legal services. But rather than giving attention to the clients, this group will focus on the nonprofit agencies that provide the assistance.

A group of 20 legal professionals from across the state worked on the proposal for the creation of the Indiana Commission to Expand Access to Civil Legal Services during the summer of 2012 and submitted a recommendation to Chief Justice Brent Dickson, who signed the order in September 2013.

access factboxMembers of the workgroup were quick to emphasize the purpose of the commission is not to mandate directives or meddle in agency operations. The broad goal is to enhance and expand cooperation between the many legal aid organizations in the state.

Yet, the introduction of another group does bring concerns of having too many state-level groups addressing the problem of access to justice. There’s already the Pro Bono Commission that focuses on getting private attorneys to volunteer to help indigent clients, as well as the Indiana Supreme Court Committee on Unrepresented Litigants which tackles the increasing number of people who go to court without attorneys.

Chuck Dunlap, executive director of the Indiana Bar Foundation and member of the access workgroup, said the question was raised of whether another commission was needed.

Looking at legal services across the state, the workgroup did see a distinct role for the new state body. At present, each organization and committee is working in its own geographical area providing services, but no group is taking a broad view to find ways for the agencies to collaborate, share ideas and improve efficiencies, Dunlap said.

Clark Circuit Judge Dan Moore said the existing organizations wanted to help with coordinating the agencies, but it was too much work to do in addition to fulfilling their own responsibilities. The new commission is needed because right now, “everybody is rowing their own boat,” Moore said, and they should be at the same table talking.

Moore, who also served on the workgroup, believes the commission can not only get the different legal services to collaborate but will also be able to make appeals to foundations and the Legislature for additional funding.

“This is a brilliant move by the Indiana Supreme Court to create this commission,” Moore said.

Vanderburgh County

As an example of cooperation within the legal aid community, Dunlap pointed to Evansville.

In Vanderburgh County, the Volunteer Lawyer Program of Southwestern Indiana, the locally funded Legal Aid Society of Evansville, and Indiana Legal Services Inc. have been collaborating and coordinating their efforts for many years.

A key part of the cooperation is having the Legal Aid Society and ILS handle all client intake. This prevents the different providers from burning valuable time getting the same information and keeps the clients from getting frustrated by having to explain their problem over and over.

Scott Wylie, president of the Evansville Bar Association, estimated he could spend five hours each week doing as few as 10 initial client interviews to determine needs and assist with placement.

Once the intakes have been completed, the three service providers choose the cases they have the resources to handle.

He acknowledged the organizations do not always agree and can get passionate, but they continue to work as a team because they respect each other.

Wylie hopes the new commission will be able to help replicate this model of cooperation among legal service providers in other counties. By viewing the system as a whole rather than in single pieces that the service agencies see, the commission will be positioned to foster coordination and new ideas for better ways to integrate the different providers.

“In a system that must be rationed, we must be as efficient as possible so we can meet the needs of each and every client,” Wylie said.

Getting the different providers to work together has always been a goal, said Norman Metzger, executive director of Indiana Legal Services Inc. However, with no structured means of enabling that cooperation, the goal has never been accomplished.

Turf wars can break out between the agencies if they feel resources are being taken from them and given to someone else. Metzger recalled a legal needs report issued in 2008 was immediately interpreted as an attempt to undercut the Pro Bono Commission.

To avoid interagency battles, Metzger said the access commission will have to address the concerns by making everyone feel secure and offering assurances that nobody will be put out of business. Then the commission will be able to focus on finding ways to improve the system and prevent having to turn away so many people who need a lawyer.

Perfect time

The Supreme Court must appoint the 17 individuals to the commission. Members are slated to include practicing attorneys, judges, and academics as well as representatives from nonprofits outside of the legal community and from the fields of business, finance and labor.

Also on the commission will be representatives from four different legal service providers in the state along with the chair of the Pro Bono Commission.

Once the members are appointed, they will go through a strategic planning process to develop a more detailed agenda for how the commission will work and what it will do, according to Dunlap. The specifics of formulating a structure and putting together a plan were left to the appointees.

To help facilitate the creation of the Indiana access commission, the American Bar Association appropriated a $7,500 grant. But the money could be lost if members have not been appointed and the strategic planning process has not started by the end of the year, Dunlap said.

Despite the many months that passed before the Supreme Court issued the order, Dunlap is confident the Supreme Court will not let this commission languish. Chief Justice Dickson has made access to justice his highest priority and this commission fits with that goal, Dunlap said.

To Wylie, this is the “absolutely perfect” time for the commission to be formed. The economic recession has depleted resources from the service providers, making them as small as they can be and still exist.

And as the economy recovers and the number of people needing free legal help declines, the commission can rebuild the provider system to be smarter and more effective.

In 2007, the Volunteer Lawyer Program had more funds and staff available to serve fewer clients, Wylie said. As the recovery continues, the commission can lead the improvements so the agencies will eventually be able to serve more clients on the same budget they had in years prior to the recession.•


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I think the cops are doing a great job locking up criminals. The Murder rates in the inner cities are skyrocketing and you think that too any people are being incarcerated. Maybe we need to lock up more of them. We have the ACLU, BLM, NAACP, Civil right Division of the DOJ, the innocent Project etc. We have court system with an appeal process that can go on for years, with attorneys supplied by the government. I'm confused as to how that translates into the idea that the defendants are not being represented properly. Maybe the attorneys need to do more Pro-Bono work

  2. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

  3. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  4. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  5. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.