ILNews

Funding less for legal aid offices

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

In October, the Indiana Bar Foundation’s board of directors approved allocating $487,205 from its reserves to fund the state’s pro bono districts in 2012. The foundation distributes funds to the districts from interest on lawyer trust accounts, and those funds have been diminishing since 2009.

IOLTA funds for 2012 amounted to just $253,865, which when combined with the reserve amount, will bring total funding to $741,070. That’s about $176,000 less than 2011 and about $1.6 million less than 2010.

Chuck Dunlap Dunlap

At the end of this year, a little less than $1 million will be left in reserves.

“The difficult and philosophical question is how much of the reserve do you use?” said Charles Dunlap, the foundation’s executive director. “You don’t want to run out, but you don’t want pro bono districts to run out of money in the short-term.”

Tough times all around

Other legal services for the poor are struggling with budget woes, too. Indiana Legal Services had already weathered a round of budget cuts this year after Washington lawmakers voted to reduce funding to the Legal Services Corp., which funds ILS and other legal aid organizations around the country.

On Nov. 15, ILS learned that the LSC will lose more than $56 million in 2012 – 12.9 percent of its total budget – and that the shortfall would be passed on to field offices. The end result is a loss of nearly $819,000 for ILS in 2012, said ILS executive director Norman Metzger.

With more than 75 percent of its budget dedicated to personnel costs, Metzger said job cuts are inevitable, although he knows that some offices are already understaffed due to existing budget constraints. While it’s up to the ILS board to decide, he predicts that some of its $1 million reserve will have to be allocated to help struggling legal aid organizations.

“We aren’t going to be carrying a million dollar reserve into 2013 – the board could decide that, but I would be surprised,” Metzger said.

According to LSC statute, its board of directors must reallocate funding based on the decennial Census poverty count in each state or service area, Metzger explained. But unlike the previous 40 years, the Census Bureau in 2010 didn’t do a poverty population count.

“They wanted to go to the short form and they eliminated a lot of questions, and one of the questions they eliminated was about income. So now LSC is dealing with the Census Bureau to come up with poverty estimates,” he said.

Funding was a popular topic of conversation at the National Legal Aid & Defender Association annual conference and Centennial Celebration in Washington D.C. Dec. 7-10. Metzger, who attended, said legal aid providers across the country are struggling with waning budgets. In one session, attendees learned about possible outcomes of the upcoming LSC funds reallocation. And he said that ILS could see a measurable increase in funding, but any increase wouldn’t be realized until 2013.

LSC will look at small area income and poverty estimates and the American Community Survey to determine which parts of the country have the most need.

iolta“Louisiana, their poverty population is way down – it’s about 500,000 or 600,000 less in Louisiana in 2010 than in the year 2000, and the reason for that is Hurricane Katrina. A lot of the people that left were poor people,” Metzger said. He said in that same time frame, Indiana’s poverty population has increased 28.4 percent. “So Louisiana may be cut by 30 percent, and Indiana would get a 20-percent increase.”

Metzger said he would hesitate to call that good news for Indiana, because any increase in funding would simply be a reflection of greater poverty levels. He also said that anticipating an increase in LSC funding might be a gamble.

“So the question is: how do we go about planning?” he said.

Many unknowns

Indiana’s pro bono districts are realigning in 2012. District 7, based in Terre Haute, will be absorbed by the immediate surrounding districts. Sullivan and Vigo counties will become part of District 13, the Volunteer Lawyer Program of Southwestern Indiana; Clay and Putnam counties will become part of District 10; and Vermillion and Parke counties will become part of District 4. Dunlap said District 7 currently does not have a plan administrator.

Richmond’s District 9 will become part of District 8 – Legal Volunteers of Southeast Indiana. Currently, Richmond has a part-time plan administrator, and Dunlap said how staffing may change was still being discussed.

Monica Fennell, executive director of the Indiana Pro Bono Commission, said she hoped realignment would not have a negative impact on services and that each district has a great amount of autonomy in determining its priorities from year to year.

But what Fennell and Dunlap cannot predict is when IOLTA interest rates will rebound.

“The bottom line is, we’re in the third year of close to a zero interest rate nationally,” Dunlap said. “The open question is: how long is the interest rate environment going to be like this?”

Some pro bono districts have other funding sources, and ILS has other grantors, too. But with such uncertain economic times, it’s hard to say if other funding sources will remain steady.

Norm Metzger mug Metzger

“It’s not just LSC, it’s not just IOLTA … it’s other funding, like United Way is down,” Metzger said. He said that ILS had seven grants from different United Way offices. Four of those are down, and one was eliminated.

Scott Wylie, plan administrator for the VLP of Southwestern Indiana, said that pro bono resources are increasingly challenged to meet the needs of the public.

“I think it’s a situation that’s affecting every county in Indiana, and that is we will have fewer resources to cover a greater number of people. So it’s going to mean that fewer people are going to be linked to pro bono assistance – it’s just a sad reality,” Wylie said.

Metzger is concerned not only about legal services for the poor in Indiana, but nationwide.

“There was stimulus money that created legal aid funding for homeless people, stimulus money that created legal aid funding for mortgage foreclosure – all of that money now has come to an end,” he said.

The ILS board of directors has a meeting scheduled for Dec. 22, at which time they will begin looking at ways to cope with the budget reduction.

“It’s hard to have a joyous holiday spirit knowing that we’re going to be laying off people,” Metzger said.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. A high ranking Indiana supreme Court operative caught red handed leading a group using the uber offensive N word! She must denounce or be denounced! (Or not since she is an insider ... rules do not apply to them). Evidence here: http://m.indianacompanies.us/friends-educational-fund-for-negroes.364110.company.v2#top_info

  2. A high ranking bureaucrat with Ind sup court is heading up an organization celebrating the formal N word!!! She must resign and denounce! http://m.indianacompanies.us/friends-educational-fund-for-negroes.364110.company.v2#top_info

  3. ND2019, don't try to confuse the Left with facts. Their ideologies trump facts, trump due process, trump court rules, even trump federal statutes. I hold the proof if interested. Facts matter only to those who are not on an agenda-first mission.

  4. OK so I'll make this as short as I can. I got a call that my daughter was smoking in the bathroom only her and one other girl was questioned mind you four others left before them anyways they proceeded to interrogate my daughter about smoking and all this time I nor my parents got a phone call,they proceeded to go through her belongings and also pretty much striped searched my daughter including from what my mother said they looked at her Brest without my consent. I am furious also a couple months ago my son hurt his foot and I was never called and it got worse during the day but the way some of the teachers have been treating my kids they are not comfortable going to them because they feel like they are mean or don't care. This is unacceptable in my mind i should be able to send my kids to school without worry but now I worry how the adults there are treating them. I have a lot more but I wanted to know do I have any attempt at a lawsuit because like I said there is more that's just some of what my kids are going through. Please respond. Sincerely concerned single parent

  5. California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) End of Year Report 2014. (page 13) Under the current system many local registering agencies are challenged just keeping up with registration paperwork. It takes an hour or more to process each registrant, the majority of whom are low risk offenders. As a result law enforcement cannot monitor higher risk offenders more intensively in the community due to the sheer numbers on the registry. Some of the consequences of lengthy and unnecessary registration requirements actually destabilize the life’s of registrants and those -such as families- whose lives are often substantially impacted. Such consequences are thought to raise levels of known risk factors while providing no discernible benefit in terms of community safety. The full report is available online at. http://www.casomb.org/index.cfm?pid=231 National Institute of Justice (NIJ) US Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs United States of America. The overall conclusion is that Megan’s law has had no demonstrated effect on sexual offenses in New Jersey, calling into question the justification for start-up and operational costs. Megan’s Law has had no effect on time to first rearrest for known sex offenders and has not reduced sexual reoffending. Neither has it had an impact on the type of sexual reoffense or first-time sexual offense. The study also found that the law had not reduced the number of victims of sexual offenses. The full report is available online at. https://www.ncjrs.gov/app/publications/abstract.aspx? ID=247350 The University of Chicago Press for The Booth School of Business of the University of Chicago and The University of Chicago Law School Article DOI: 10.1086/658483 Conclusion. The data in these three data sets do not strongly support the effectiveness of sex offender registries. The national panel data do not show a significant decrease in the rate of rape or the arrest rate for sexual abuse after implementation of a registry via the Internet. The BJS data that tracked individual sex offenders after their release in 1994 did not show that registration had a significantly negative effect on recidivism. And the D.C. crime data do not show that knowing the location of sex offenders by census block can help protect the locations of sexual abuse. This pattern of noneffectiveness across the data sets does not support the conclusion that sex offender registries are successful in meeting their objectives of increasing public safety and lowering recidivism rates. The full report is available online at. http://www.jstor.org/stable/full/10.1086/658483 These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of conclusions and reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community. People, including the media and other organizations should not rely on and reiterate the statements and opinions of the legislators or other people as to the need for these laws because of the high recidivism rates and the high risk offenders pose to the public which simply is not true and is pure hyperbole and fiction. They should rely on facts and data collected and submitted in reports from the leading authorities and credible experts in the fields such as the following. California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 0.8% (page 30) The full report is available online at http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Adult_Research_Branch/Research_Documents/2014_Outcome_Evaluation_Report_7-6-2015.pdf California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) (page 38) Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 1.8% The full report is available online at. http://www.google.com/url?sa= t&source=web&cd=1&ved= 0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F% 2Fwww.cdcr.ca.gov%2FAdult_ Research_Branch%2FResearch_ documents%2FOutcome_ evaluation_Report_2013.pdf&ei= C9dSVePNF8HfoATX-IBo&usg=AFQjCNE9I6ueHz-o2mZUnuxLPTyiRdjDsQ Bureau of Justice Statistics 5 PERCENT OF SEX OFFENDERS REARRESTED FOR ANOTHER SEX CRIME WITHIN 3 YEARS OF PRISON RELEASE WASHINGTON, D.C. Within 3 years following their 1994 state prison release, 5.3 percent of sex offenders (men who had committed rape or sexual assault) were rearrested for another sex crime, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) announced today. The full report is available online at. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/rsorp94pr.cfm Document title; A Model of Static and Dynamic Sex Offender Risk Assessment Author: Robert J. McGrath, Michael P. Lasher, Georgia F. Cumming Document No.: 236217 Date Received: October 2011 Award Number: 2008-DD-BX-0013 Findings: Study of 759 adult male offenders under community supervision Re-arrest rate: 4.6% after 3-year follow-up The sexual re-offense rates for the 746 released in 2005 are much lower than what many in the public have been led to expect or believe. These low re-offense rates appear to contradict a conventional wisdom that sex offenders have very high sexual re-offense rates. The full report is available online at. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236217.pdf Document Title: SEX OFFENDER SENTENCING IN WASHINGTON STATE: RECIDIVISM RATES BY: Washington State Institute For Public Policy. A study of 4,091 sex offenders either released from prison or community supervision form 1994 to 1998 and examined for 5 years Findings: Sex Crime Recidivism Rate: 2.7% Link to Report: http://www.oncefallen.com/files/Washington_SO_Recid_2005.pdf Document Title: Indiana’s Recidivism Rates Decline for Third Consecutive Year BY: Indiana Department of Correction 2009. The recidivism rate for sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05%, one of the lowest in the nation. In a time when sex offenders continue to face additional post-release requirements that often result in their return to prison for violating technical rules such as registration and residency restrictions, the instances of sex offenders returning to prison due to the commitment of a new sex crime is extremely low. Findings: sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05% Link to Report: http://www.in.gov/idoc/files/RecidivismRelease.pdf Once again, These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community. No one can doubt that child sexual abuse is traumatic and devastating. The question is not whether the state has an interest in preventing such harm, but whether current laws are effective in doing so. Megan’s law is a failure and is destroying families and their children’s lives and is costing tax payers millions upon millions of dollars. The following is just one example of the estimated cost just to implement SORNA which many states refused to do. From Justice Policy Institute. Estimated cost to implement SORNA Here are some of the estimates made in 2009 expressed in 2014 current dollars: California, $66M; Florida, $34M; Illinois, $24M; New York, $35M; Pennsylvania, $22M; Texas, $44M. In 2014 dollars, Virginia’s estimate for implementation was $14M, and the annual operating cost after that would be $10M. For the US, the total is $547M. That’s over half a billion dollars – every year – for something that doesn’t work. http://www.justicepolicy.org/images/upload/08-08_FAC_SORNACosts_JJ.pdf. Attempting to use under-reporting to justify the existence of the registry is another myth, or a lie. This is another form of misinformation perpetrated by those who either have a fiduciary interest in continuing the unconstitutional treatment of a disfavored group or are seeking to justify their need for punishment for people who have already paid for their crime by loss of their freedom through incarceration and are now attempting to reenter society as honest citizens. When this information is placed into the public’s attention by naive media then you have to wonder if the media also falls into one of these two groups that are not truly interested in reporting the truth. Both of these groups of people that have that type of mentality can be classified as vigilantes, bullies, or sociopaths, and are responsible for the destruction of our constitutional values and the erosion of personal freedoms in this country. I think the media or other organizations need to do a in depth investigation into the false assumptions and false data that has been used to further these laws and to research all the collateral damages being caused by these laws and the unconstitutional injustices that are occurring across the country. They should include these injustices in their report so the public can be better informed on what is truly happening in this country on this subject. Thank you for your time.

ADVERTISEMENT