Stephen M. Orchard

The Legal Aid Board administers legal aid on behalf of the Lord Chancellor and advises on developing and improving the legal aid system in England and Wales. This system is currently going through a series of major changes in order to meet the Government’s long term objective of providing legal aid services through fixed price contracts. The allocation of resources to these contracts will be based on an assessment of the need for legal services within local communities.

1.2 During the course of 1997 and 1998, the Legal Aid Board established a Regional Legal Services Committee (RLSC) for each of the Board’s 13 geographical areas. The role of the RLSCs is to advise the Legal Aid Board on how local needs and priorities for legal services can be met in each geographical area, within a nationally agreed framework, in order to form the basis for the contracting of legal aid services within a controlled budget. RLSCs also have a key role to play in the development of the Community Legal Service as outlined in the White Paper "Modernising Justice" published by the Lord Chancellor’s Department in December 1998, particularly in the development of new partnership arrangements between the Board and other funders of legal services.

1.3 During the course of 1998, in the geographical area for which it is responsible, each RLSC was asked to carry out work on:

• assessing the need for legal services;
• gathering information on the supply of legal services;
• prioritising geographical areas, categories of work and types of individual most in need of legal services;
• developing a regional strategy to meet the need for legal services in consultation with appropriate organisations.

The primary objective in producing these strategies was to inform the letting of contracts for civil advice and assistance by each of the Board’s Area Offices.

Each RLSC has now produced and consulted upon a regional strategy and these strategies were presented to the Board for formal approval on 25 February 1999. In deciding to approve all of the regional strategies as submitted, the Board took into account the processes used by the RLSCs to develop their strategies, including the extensive consultation exercises designed to ensure that the strategies reflected local needs. In addition, the Board gave careful consideration to a number of key issues identified by the RLSCs as needing to be addressed at a national level.

1.6 This report outlines the processes involved in preparing the regional strategies, identifies the key national issues raised by the RLSCs and the Board’s proposed response and shows how.

1.7 Section 2 of this report, RLSC Structure, outlines the structure and members of the RLSCs and summarises the relationship between the Committees and the Legal Aid Board.

Section 3, Operation of the RLSCs, sets out the methods of working adopted by the RLSCs in the preparation of the first regional strategies, including the consultation process.

Section 4, Key Issues, outlines the key issues identified by the RLSCs which will be addressed on a national level by the Legal Aid Board.

Section 5, Regional Strategies and Contracting, covers the relationship between the regional strategies prepared by the RLSCs and the contracts that the Legal Aid Board is proposing to let during the course of 1999/2000.

Section 6, Community Legal Service, considers the future role of the RLSCs in the context of current proposals for the development of a Community Legal Service.

The RLSC structure emerged from the Board's experience of running the North Western Legal Services Committee (NWLSC). NWLSC was inherited by the Board from the previous Law Society administration. The Committee, originally set up in 1977 to co-ordinate and improve legal services in Manchester, following proposals to the Royal Commission on Legal Services, was refocused by the Board in 1992. Under its new remit the Committee was asked to prioritise geographical areas, categories of work and individuals' need, and develop and monitor a regional access strategy. Valuable lessons learnt from NWLSC informed the RLSC proposals.

Each RLSC has a membership of six. Four of those members are appointed from outside the Board and provide an independent and informed sounding board, bringing their experience and expertise to bear on the recommendations RLSCs make to the Board and, where relevant and appropriate, to the Lord Chancellor. These members are drawn from the region in which they serve, as local knowledge is important. In addition, each of the four members are required to have knowledge and experience of one or more of the following:

• legal aid private practice;
• provision in the not-for-profit sector (advice or law centres);
• the role and function of local authorities;
• background and experience of the consumer perspective.

Each RLSC is chaired by a member of the Legal Aid Board with the manager of the relevant Legal Aid Board Area Office serving as an ex officio member of the RLSC. The Area Managers have a particular role in advising on the practicability of any recommendations RLSCs are considering and providing feedback to ensure RLSCs are fully informed of progress in implementing their strategic plans. Each RLSC is supported by a Regional Legal Services Adviser (RLSA) who is a member of staff of the Legal Aid Board and is based in the relevant Area Office.

It is the role of RLSCs to advise the Legal Aid Board on how local needs and priorities for legal services can be addressed in each geographical area within a nationally agreed framework, and a controlled budget. It is the Area Manager’s responsibility to ensure that any contracts which are let provide for the priority needs set out in the regional strategy developed by the RLSC and approved by the Legal Aid Board.

The full Legal Aid Board, which includes the Chairs of all the RLSCs, considers reports, information and feedback from the RLSCs. It is the responsibility of the Board to ensure regional strategies are appropriately co-ordinated and priorities justifiable within the broad framework for national prioritisation.

In addition to the members of the RLSCs themselves, there is an open invitation to anyone who is interested in the provision of legal services to be involved in the work of the RLSCs through their wider Networks. Everyone who joins a Network is invited to consultative events and receives news of developments in their region through regular newsletters. Now with over 5,000 members nationally, the role of the Networks is important to the operation of the RLSCs, not only in providing wide information bases and starting points for project groups but also as means of disseminating information, raising awareness and encouraging local initiatives to meet needs.

As outlined in section 1 above, the primary task for each RLSC during 1998 was to produce a regional strategy containing recommendations on priority need for legal services provision in their region, by geographical area and category of law. In considering appropriate priorities, RLSCs considered both the need for legal services, and the existence of any non-Legal Aid Board funded supply in meeting that need. This section of the report outlines the key stages involved in operation of the RLSCs leading to the submission of regional strategies to the Legal Aid Board.

In order to carry out this work, the RLSCs were asked to define discrete geographical areas which could be used as the basis for the assessment of need and the subsequent letting of contracts. These areas or "bid zones" were required by the Board to be described with reference to the boundaries of Electoral wards as these were the smallest units for which information of a statistical nature was readily available.

In theory, bid zones could comprise any number of wards and may therefore be subdivisions of local authorities, or amalgamations of parts, or whole authorities. In determining bid zones, the RLSCs aimed to take into account local knowledge about client access patterns and transport networks while ensuring that zones were appropriate to form the basis for contracted service delivery. In many cases, the RLSCs concluded that local authority boundaries offered an appropriate geographical unit, although it was necessary to vary this approach to reflect particular local circumstances in some regions.

Whilst contracts will generally be let on the basis of the bid zone in which a provider is located, clients will not be restricted to using contracted service providers in the bid zone in which they live. They will be free to use any contracted provider of their choice.

The RLSCs were asked to assess the need for legal services within the scope of legal aid in specified categories of law for eligible clients: Consumer and General Contract; Debt; Employment; Housing; Immigration; Matrimonial and Family; Mental Health; and Welfare Benefits. The RLSCs were also asked to consider whether there was a local need for service provision in any other more specialist categories of law, for example Community Care, Education or Prisoners’ Rights.

The starting point used by the RLSCs for the assessment of need for legal services was a range of national information, including:

• proxy for financially eligible population
• predictive need models
• indicators of general deprivation

Each of these are considered further below with further issues relating to the models discussed in section 4 of this report.

Legal Aid is means tested. Generally, a person is eligible for "advice and assistance" if they have a weekly disposable income of £80 or less, and disposable capital of less than £1000. National information on income and capital is not available and so it is not possible to estimate the size of the population who would be eligible for legal aid using this method.

Clients who receive "passporting benefits" are automatically eligible for legal advice and assistance providing they do not have capital greater than £1000. The relevant benefits are Income-Based Job Seeker’s Allowance, Family Credit and Disability Working Allowance. Data on individuals in receipt of these benefits could act as a proxy for legal aid eligibility. However, this data is not currently available at a level of geography small enough to be linked to the regions covered by the Legal Aid Board’s Area Offices.

The only data available which meets the condition of availability at a sufficiently local level is ward level income support data. The Department of Social Security has produced a regional data set of income support claimants based on a 100% sample for 1996 and the Legal Aid Board believes that 1996 income support data is likely to provide the best currently available proxy for legal aid eligibility.

The Legal Aid Board has developed predictive need models for certain categories of law. These models focus on identifying the key factors likely to indicate the need for legal help in a particular category of work. The models do not "count" the number of individuals in need of legal assistance. They provide relative indicators of where need is likely to be concentrated.

Models have been developed in the categories of debt, housing and welfare benefits. Work is on-going to develop a predictive need model for immigration and also to develop a "general eligibility" model which could be used where it is difficult to isolate factors associated with the need for help in an individual category, for example, employment.

There are a number of deprivation indices which have been developed for the purpose of identifying relative levels of deprivation. The most well known of these are the Jarman index, which is used for resource allocation purposes in the health sector, and the Department of Environment’s Index of Local Conditions (ILC), which was developed to provide a single measure of deprivation in local authority areas and has been used for the distribution of funds from the Single Regeneration Budget.

For the purpose of legal services provision, general deprivation indices have to be used with caution. For example the Jarman index concentrates on those factors believed to increase the workloads of General Practitioners and other primary healthcare workers. Some of these factors, for example, having moved house in the last year, are unlikely to have any relevance to deprivation and the need for legal services. The Index of Local Conditions, although not useful for counting individuals in need of legal advice and assistance, does provide background information about the relative locations of economically deprived populations. Despite these limitations, both the Jarman index and Index of Local Conditions were able to provide some additional information which was used by a number of the RLSCs to assist in refining their conclusions.

In order to enable the RLSCs to complete the initial prioritisation of need for advice and assistance in each of the bid zones, it was necessary for information to be obtained about the supply of legal services.

The Board maintains information about the volume and value of legally aided cases undertaken by private practice solicitors. The Board also records the work carried out under Board contracts by the not-for-profit sector.

In addition to the organisations and agencies in the not-for-profit sector funded by the Board, there are numerous other organisations within the sector providing advice and assistance. This can include those services carried out in-house by local authorities at both a County and District level, and services provided by voluntary agencies. Information on these non-Board funded services was of more importance to the RLSCs than information relating to the existing Board funded supply, since the intention was to use Board contracts to complement work carried out by organisations funded from other sources, and particularly to give priority to those areas where there was priority need which was not being addressed or being addressed inadequately. RLSCs were therefore asked to gather information on non-legally aided services and to consider this in setting the relative priorities.

In practice, the collection of comprehensive information on non-legally aided services proved extremely difficult. There was no single available source with information on all non-legally aided services and there were no objective evaluation criteria which could be used on a systematic basis for classifying and comparing different forms of service provision. Attempts were made to gather information on the work carried out in non-LAB funded organisations using the Board’s approved supplier questionnaire which was sent to voluntary sector organisations and local authorities. (Time did not permit this approach in London). Whilst this exercise provided some useful information, in many cases significant information gaps still remained.

The non-Legal Aid Board funded work includes services provided directly by local authorities and services provided by independent not for profit agencies funded by local authorities and other funders. The services provided directly by the local authorities tend to concentrate on housing, where unitary and district councils have a statutory duty to provide advice, and welfare benefits where a number of authorities have specialist benefits advice units. It is likely that a potential for a conflict of interest will exist for these directly provided local authority advice services, for example between the local authority seeking to limit the number of homelessness acceptances and the role of the same local authority housing advice service in advising the homeless.

Other organisations providing legal services outside the Board's funding include many CABx and other not for profit advice agencies funded by local authorities, the health services and charities, including the National Lotteries Charity Board. Some of the non-legally aided services are targeted at clients not eligible for legal aid or cover activities such as tribunal representation which could not be funded through the legal aid system.

Given the difficulties in collecting and assessing information on non-Board funded services, coupled with the issues about potential conflicts of interest and services outside the scope of legal aid, the RLSCs tended to adopt a cautious approach to adjusting priorities for legal aid contracts based on the availability of non-Board funded supply. In the future, the new partnership relationships with local authorities and other funders discussed in section 6 below should enable more comprehensive and reliable information to be obtained.

Starting from the basis created by information from eligible population proxies, predictive needs models and general indicators of deprivation, the RLSCs were able to use local knowledge coupled with information on the supply of non-LAB funded services to arrive at an initial assessment of the priority need for services.

The RLSCs were required by the Board to provide a table showing the relative priorities within their regions for each of the bid zones and covering each of the specified categories of law. In identifying the relative priorities, the RLSCs had regard to the following definitions:

The relationship between the RLSC relative priorities and the award of contracts for advice and assistance is outlined in section 5 of this report.

These proposed relative priorities, together with supporting information, were published in draft regional strategies. These draft regional strategies were then subject to the extensive consultation process outlined below.

Consultation with providers and users of services, as well as other groups interested in legal services provision, is a major element of the work of the RLSCs. The purpose of the consultation is to gather further information, to validate existing information, and to improve understanding of the priority needs for legal services and how these can be best addressed. It is through such consultation that the views of local providers and users of services can feed directly into the work of the RLSCs on the prioritisation of need for legal services in the different parts of their regions.

Each of the RLSCs identified a number of topics in which it felt that the experience of local service users and providers would help it identify the need for legal advice and the needs of different client groups. In almost every region, a number of focused consultation meetings were held to discuss such topics as the need for immigration advice, the need for employment advice, the identification of barriers to access by specific client groups (for example minority ethnic communities, people who are housebound and those with physical disabilities), and the specific problems of access to services in rural areas.

In addition to the focused consultation events, each RLSC organised a number of larger consultation conferences to discuss the full version of their draft strategy. Nationally, over 3400 individuals attended these consultation conference or the more specialist focus groups. These covered solicitors in private practice, the not-for-profit agencies, local authorities, health authorities, community groups and individual consumers. Written submissions were also encouraged by the RLSCs and over 400 responses were received.

Overall, the response to the consultation process was very positive. In addition to providing specific information and points of detail regarding information contained in the strategy, the consultation process raised some specific issues regarding the methodological approach taken by the RLSC to assess need and determine priorities for provision. In addition, other key issues were identified which were outside the remit of the RLSCs and which therefore needed to be referred to the Legal Aid Board at a national level. These issues are considered in section 4 of this report.

Preparation, Submission and Publication of Regional Strategies

Each original draft strategy was amended in the light of comments and information gathered during the consultation period. In a number of cases this involved modifying the bid zones to more accurately reflect local patterns of access to service, changing priorities to take into account specific local factors or other additional information or identifying special needs which could be addressed locally, for example the need for suppliers with ethnic minority languages or the need for outreach services in rural communities.

Following the consultation process and the agreement of a revised draft, the regional strategies were submitted to the full Legal Aid Board for approval. The Legal Aid Board considered and approved all 13 regional strategies without amendment.

In approving the regional strategies, the Board gave particular consideration to the issues outlined in section 4 of this overview report. The Board also recognised that the London RLSC had experienced particular difficulties in preparing their strategy due to a range of social, economic and geographic complexities particular to London. As a result, the RLSC in London had concluded that their plan should be regarded as provisional. Despite this limitation, the London RLSC had been able to make recommendations in those categories of law where their preliminary conclusions had been broadly borne out during the consultation process. The Board accepted that these recommendations were sufficient to form the basis for contracting in the specified categories of law and that the London regional strategy should be accepted.

The regional strategies have now been published. The strategies will serve as a key element of the framework for the award of contracts for advice and assistance. This is considered further in section 5 below.

Arising out of the preparation of the regional strategies, including the extensive consultation process, a number of key issues were identified. This section of the report summarises those issues which are of national significance or which require further consideration by the Legal Aid Board.

During the consultation process, a number of concerns were raised relating to the use by the RLSCs of the Board’s predictive needs models. The view was expressed that the housing model was the weakest of the three predictive need models, largely because the model did not take account of factors related to homelessness and repossession, nor could it be adjusted to reflect local authority service delivery in relation to housing repairs. Weaknesses in the debt and welfare benefits models were related to the fact that they might under predict need in rural areas where unemployment tended to be lower but where the work which was available might be part-time and low paid. In addition, the models could not take into account seasonal fluctuations which might significantly impact on the need for legal services in geographic areas heavily dependent on such activities as tourism and agriculture. In London, further difficulties were encountered due to patterns of need and access to services bearing little or no relationship to local authority or other boundaries and the complexities created by small pockets of intense need situated in close proximity to areas of very high economic prosperity.

Whilst these concerns do have some validity, it is important to recognise that the models were intended only as a nationally consistent starting point in the assessment of the need for legal services. Each of the RLSCs was able to take into account local knowledge and other information, particularly that collected on a local basis, before arriving at their relative priorities for legal services. In housing, for example, it became evident during the preparation of the strategies that such factors as homelessness applications and the proportion of such applications rejected by the local authorities were important and should therefore be taken into account, although this was not always practicable.

In considering the potential further development and refinement of the predictive needs models, the lack of availability of relevant information for the whole of England and Wales broken down to a sufficiently local level must be regarded as a major constraint. This does not, however, mean that the models cannot be enhanced and it is proposed that the Board carries out further work on the models during the course of 1999/2000.

At the same time, it is necessary for the Board to be aware of the requirements which could be imposed on the new Legal Services Commission which will replace the Board, probably in 2000, to assess the need for all publicly funded legal services, not just those funded by the Board/Commission and not just those applicable only to eligible clients. The development of this broader approach to the assessment of need will need careful consideration.

The traditional approach to the delivery of legal services by a client travelling to see an adviser may not be the most effective, particularly where there are insufficient concentrations of eligible clients living within a defined geographical area to make it feasible for a quality supplier to maintain their service.

For example, in the South Eastern region, the RLSC identified two separate groups of small concentrations of eligible clients whom it considered could be denied access to a quality service because it was unlikely that there would be a quality assured supplier able to specialise in particular categories of social welfare law work under their contract. These two groups were first, residents in rural areas living in small villages and hamlets and second, urban residents in some of the more affluent parts of the region.

For such groups as these, some form of alternative to the traditional method of office based, face to face service delivery could be more appropriate and effective. Appropriate methods of delivery could include outreach services, local or national telephone advice services or even, in time, services provided on the Internet. Some of these services are already available.

Jane Steele and John Seargeant from the Policy Studies Institute recently carried out a research study for the Board looking at the contribution of specific methods of delivery. This research concentrated on telephone advice services, outreach services, and second tier services (by which we mean a combined approach, providing specialist advice and support to front line advisers, training in specialist areas to frontline advisers and finally taking complex cases on referral). The research studied several services already providing help employing these methods of delivery.

As a result of the research recommendations we are clear that these methods of service delivery offer considerable promise, and it is our intention to conduct a small number of focused pilots aimed at drawing up management and quality criteria appropriate to the methods of delivery employed, and drawing up contracts which meet our service delivery objectives. These pilot projects will be based, wherever possible, on specific needs identified by the RLSCs and linked to the partnership programmes with local authorities and other funders. The Board has already requested expressions of interest from organisations for a small number of initial pilot projects and it is anticipated that some of these projects will be able to proceed during the course of 1999.

In addition, although separate from the Methods-of-Delivery pilots, the Board will also be working closely with the Lord Chancellor’s Department and other agencies on the development of a specification for a Community Legal Service Internet site.

As noted above in relation to methods of service delivery, those living in rural areas have particular difficulty in accessing services. The provision of specialist legal services to such communities will need careful consideration by the Board’s Area Offices when awarding contracts.

In addition to client groups unable to access services due to geographic factors, the consultation process has shown that there are other distinct client groups who experience difficulties in accessing legal services due to a range of other factors. Examples of such groups would include clients with mental health problems, the elderly and those from minority ethnic communities, particularly those whose first language is not English.

Many of the RLSCs recognised that some people from minority ethnic communities may be much more prepared to use advice services provided within their own community, while Muslim women, for example, may only feel comfortable seeing a female adviser. People for whom English is a second language should ideally be provided with bilingual services, with interpreters as a second best alternative.

Whilst some of these client groups might benefit from particular methods of service delivery, the RLSCs also suggested that the Legal Aid Board should use contracts to encourage suppliers to develop practices which could assist certain disadvantaged client groups, particularly where the RLSC has evidence of such clients being denied access. This might include suppliers having premises accessible for clients with mobility problems. Other suggestions include requiring suppliers to have on their list of experts, names of organisations and/or individuals who will provide interpretation and translation services for those whose first language is not English and for clients who may be profoundly deaf and reliant on "signing" for communication.

It may be appropriate for these issues to be addressed in the context of the "Quality Task Force" which has been established by the Lord Chancellor’s Department to agree common standards with which all suppliers in the Community Legal Service will be required to comply. The Board is actively participating on the Quality Task Force. The Board will also need to take active steps to ensure that it is able to measure the extent to which particular groups in society may be disadvantaged in accessing legal services.

It is worth pointing out, however, that it may not be appropriate to require a contractor to provide particular facilities where that contractor is not dealing with clients with the needs identified. However, where access for a client group needing specific facilities is identified as a priority, it would be entirely justifiable for a contract to be let to providers able to demonstrate their ability to provide such access.

All the RLSCs gave considerable attention to the needs of clients with mental health problems. The RLSCs identified two types of need in this category, general legal services for people with mental health problems living in the community and more specific mental health legal services for people who have been detained in district psychiatric hospitals, in medium secure units and in special hospitals.

Through consultation, including with organisations such as MIND, the RLSCs were made aware that people with mental health problems living in the community may experience difficulties in accessing legal services across the range of civil categories. Such needs would normally be dealt with through contracts employing specific methods of delivery aimed at reaching this client group.

In relation to the more specific mental health category of work, much of the work relates to the needs of detained patients or restrictions on their freedom following discharge. Mental health patients who have been sectioned under the Mental Health Act are entitled to have this detention reviewed at regular intervals, by a panel of Hospital Mangers or, ultimately, the Mental Health Review Tribunal. Work in support of a review by the Hospital Managers can be funded under the advice and assistance scheme. ABWOR is available for representation at Mental Health Review Tribunals both types of support can be provided under Board contracts.

Clients with need for services in this category will normally require advisers to travel to them. This is a complex, specialist category of work and not generally one where we would expect the adviser to be on the doorstep of all clients. It is therefore likely that the needs for such services should be considered over a wider area than would be the norm for a standard contract bid zone. Those with a high degree of specialist expertise in this area may well provide services over a wide geographical area.

The RLSCs therefore generally concluded that a single standard bid zone approach to assessing need was inappropriate for the Mental Health category of work. Rather an approach which specified the need over a wider area was appropriate. This would also provide more helpful advice to the Area Manager in determining where and how best to meet the needs in this category of work through contracts.

There are three key areas of work in this category of law: applications for asylum, disputes over nationality, and assistance with applications to enter or remain. Most of the RLSCs found during the consultation process that the categories of work related to two distinct client groups. In matters related to applications to enter or remain and nationality disputes, need tends to be found mainly among resident ethnic minority populations experiencing difficulties for example in bringing dependent relatives into the country or who have unresolved spousal issues.

In terms of asylum, the need for services tends to be linked to the location of ports of entry and detention centres, as well as family and kinship connections which lead asylum seekers to locate into an area. In general, it is difficult to predict the need for legal services for asylum seekers because factors which cause inflows of refugees are not domestic in character and can be subject to sudden change. Much of the current expenditure is likely to relate to asylum seekers where the vast majority of the clients are eligible for legal aid.

Whilst the pattern of distribution of asylum seekers has tended to be relatively concentrated in the past, more recently the Social Services departments of the local authorities have been relocating asylum seekers in low cost bed and breakfast accommodation in almost every part of the country. This decentralisation of asylum seekers may accelerate quickly if the Home Office proceeds with proposals to disperse asylum seekers on a national basis, although there is a suggestion that such dispersed individuals will simply drift back, particularly if there is no help or support available.

The Board and RLSCs recognised that the problems relating to the provision of legal advice to asylum seekers was compounded by the very limited number of quality assured legal services providers in this category of law. The Board had already proposed in its report to the Lord Chancellor in November 1998 that the Board should take a proactive approach to the development of new local service provision, supported by specialist national or regional agencies as appropriate. As a result the Lord Chancellor asked the Board to make a separate report on the way forward in immigration, informed by the consultation undertaken by the RLSCs.

Consultation with users and providers of immigration services suggested that the lack of legal aid funding for representation in immigration matters was a major impediment to access to services in the immigration category. Poor quality solicitors taking on immigration cases often referred clients to not-for-profit organisations whose other sources of funding enables them to provide representation in immigration matters. The not-for-profit agencies were, however, currently unable to cope with the volume of demand for their services. The Board's report to the Lord Chancellor identifies the lack of funding for representation in immigration tribunal matters as being a major disincentive for quality practitioners to expand in immigration work.

The findings of the RLSCs in respect of immigration support the findings of the work which has been undertaken centrally at the Board.

The RLSC’s will continue with their work although the difficulties, particularly in the major conurbations, are considerable.

In relation to mental health, it has already been noted above that the RLSCs concluded that it would generally be more appropriate for specialist suppliers to be awarded contracts covering more than a single standard bid zone. This issue is not, however, exclusive to mental health and most of the RLSCs gave careful consideration to the balance between the need for specialist suppliers providing services across larger geographic areas and the need for local access to services through non-specialist providers.

Each RLSC has reached its own conclusion on the appropriate balance, taking into account the geographic nature of the region and the local assessment of needs. This will be taken into account wherever possible in the letting of contracts.

During the consultation process, all the RLSCs were made aware of strong concerns about the scope of legal aid. Whilst matters concerning the scope of legal aid are essentially a matter for the Lord Chancellor rather than the Legal Aid Board, it was the clear view of the RLSCs that the Board should be asked specifically to raise with the LCD the possibility of extending the scope of legal aid specifically to cover tribunal representation.

The views expressed on tribunal representation crossed a number of categories of law. The position in immigration has already been noted above.

In respect of employment, it was also considered by a number of the RLSCs that the absence of legal aid for representation at tribunals caused significant disadvantage to those individuals who were not being assisted by a Trade Union.

The Government is currently conducting a review of the extent to which current procedures and other arrangements in tribunals, including representation, comply with the European Convention on Human Rights and European Union obligations. The review will identify options for ensuring compliance in the future and the Legal Aid Board will await the outcome of this review before making any specific proposals to the Lord Chancellor on this matter.

In reaching decisions about the relative priority of need within bid zones, the RLSCs were required to consider non-LAB funded supply.

As noted in section 3 above, many of the RLSCs found it difficult to obtain accurate information on the full extent of non-LAB funded services in their regions as no single organisation has the duty to maintain records of such services. The position was further complicated by the tendency for many of the not-for-profit agencies to have definite funding only on an annual basis with the potential for their future funding to be reviewed and subsequently reduced or cut, particularly given the overall constraints on local authority resources.

Despite these factors there were, however, a number of examples where the RLSC reduced the priority of particular services within a bid zone due to the existence of non-LAB funded supply. This non-LAB funded supply was generally all or partially funded by local authorities.

There is an argument that by taking into account the local authority funded supply, the LAB is penalising those local authorities which are most supportive of the not-for-profit agencies providing advice and assistance to high quality standards. This is a complex issue which needs to be addressed as part of the move towards the implementation of a Community Legal Service. The developing partnership relationships between the Legal Aid Board and local authorities, particularly in the Pioneer and Associate Pioneer Partnerships (see section 6 below) should provide a framework within which a co-ordinated approach can be developed for the public funding of high quality legal services covering the spectrum of social welfare law.

The RLSCs were conscious of the need to find ways of involving the ultimate customer of legal services in the consultation process concerning the need for legal services. All the RLSCs were successful in identifying customer and community groups which could be considered to provide a customer perspective on the important issues being debated. Individual users of legal services were, however, largely absent from the consultation process.

The RLSCs are being asked to give this issue of customer involvement particular attention during 1999. The Arrangements and Directions issued by the Board under which the RLSCs operate are being amended with a specific reference being included to the aim of:

"considering how views of users and potential users of publicly funded legal services can be taken into account in planning for and delivering such services;"

In addition, customer or user participation in service planning and delivery should also be addressed within the framework of the Pioneer or Associate Pioneer Partnerships with local authorities, possibly making use of consultation mechanisms such as Citizens Juries which have already been set up by a number of authorities.

As noted in section 4 above, the Government is seeking a fundamental reform of the legal aid system. This includes a move to providing legal aid services through fixed price contracts in accordance with the plans developed by the RLSCs.

In addition to the work of the RLSCs which has been covered in the earlier sections of this report, the move to fixed price contracts involves three other major elements:

• the Legal Aid Franchise Quality Assurance Standard (LAFQAS) which will provide the quality assurance framework within which all contracted legal services providers will operate;
• a contracting framework, supported by appropriate contract documentation;
• the arrangements that the Board will follow for allocating money from within the overall budget for civil advice and assistance between geographical areas and categories of work, taking into account the regional strategies prepared by the RLSCs.

This section of the report concentrates on the third of those elements and looks at the relationship between the regional strategies and the contracts that will be let by the Legal Aid Board.

The total level of resources for advice and assistance will be subject to an overall control total set by the Lord Chancellor. Although a firm figure has not yet been announced, the Lord Chancellor has said publicly that he does not intend, upon the introduction of contracting, to reduce the current level of spend on advice and assistance. The key objective for the Legal Aid Board is to provide services to meet local needs and priorities as far as possible within the funds that will be available.

The first stage in this process involves the allocation of resources from a national total to a figure for each of the Board’s 13 Area Offices. Initially it is proposed to make this allocation:

in the family category to reflect current levels of expenditure by Area Office, this level of allocation automatically produces a "high" priority in the family category for every bid zone;

in categories of non-family work, except immigration, to reflect a 25% shift towards an allocation based on the area proportions of the 1996 income support figures (as a proxy for legal aid eligibility);

in immigration, to divide the current expenditure between the Area Offices following further research and consultation.

Within the Area Offices, guideline financial allocations and numbers of case starts will be assigned to each of the bid zones identified by the RLSCs. These guideline allocations will be informed by current spend on advice and assistance in the zone, adjusted to take account of advice from the RLSCs and the allocation for the Area Office as a whole. A "High" relative priority determined by an RLSC for a particular category of law in a specific bid zone would be likely to lead to the letting of contracts specifying that category of work, whereas a "Low" relative priority would be covered by the general arrangements for providers to carry out a certain limited amount of work within the tolerances of the specified category contracts which they had been awarded.

In order to be able to bid in the first stage of contracting, legal services providers were required to apply to join Section A of the Bid Panel by 31 January 1999. Any provider which has not already applied for a franchise must also submit a franchise application by 31 March 1999. Section B of the Bid Panel comprises applicants who have failed to meet the timetable or requirements to qualify for Section A but have, as a minimum, passed a preliminary audit in relevant franchise categories.

It is currently anticipated that providers on Section A of the Bid Panel will be invited to submit bids to provide advice and assistance under contract by 30 July 1999 (potential Not for Profit contractors operate to a different timetable). Providers on Section B may be invited to bid where the bids from Section A will not guarantee sufficient access to meet high priority needs identified in the regional strategy prepared by the RLSC. Providers will not be limited in their bids by the notional allocation to the Bid Zone in which their office is situated and they will not be limited to serving clients who live in the Bid Zone. Since, however, the notional allocation to the Bid Zone will attempt to reflect the likely need for legal services, taking into account the assessment made by the RLSC, providers will be asked to justify their bids if they apply for more than the notional allocation.

The Legal Aid Board has published a consultation document on the rules and guidance that will be used by the Board in the decision making process following the submission of bids from the legal services providers. The consultation period for this document ended on 31 January 1999 and the Board is currently preparing the post consultation contract documentation, rules and guidance. The rules and guidance will cover situations both where the bids exceed the notional allocation and where the total of the bids is less than the available funds.

Although the RLSCs are not directly involved in the contract decision making process, they do have a key role in monitoring the implementation of the regional strategies. RLSCs will receive regular summary reports on the service provided under contracts (although the Committees have no remit for individual contract management). The RLSCs will need to form a view on how the contracts let are in practice achieving the objectives of the regional strategies and will then take account of relevant information on the work actually provided under the contracts in reviewing the regional strategies and determining the way forward for subsequent years. The regional strategies will be reviewed annually.

The RLSCs have a key role to play in the development and implementation of the Government’s proposals for a Community Legal Service. The Lord Chancellor has defined his "core vision" of a Community Legal Services as:

• a network of quality providers of legal services;
• supported by co-ordinated funding;
• delivering services to local communities;
• in accordance with an effective assessment of local needs.

This "core vision" relates closely to the work that has already been carried out by the RLSCs in the development of the regional strategies.

The Access to Justice Bill currently before Parliament creates a new organisation, the Legal Services Commission, to replace the Legal Aid Board and to take the leading role in driving forward the concept of the Community Legal Service. Clause 5 (1) of the Bill requires the Commission to "establish, maintain and develop a service known as the Community Legal Service". The Commission will have a specific responsibility to work with local authorities and other funders who support the provision of legal services in the community to assess local levels of need for publicly funded civil legal services and jointly plan how resources can best be targeted at priority needs. The Commission will also act as a direct funder of some of these services, using the Community Legal Services Fund.

Once the Bill is enacted, the current Regional Legal Services Committees of the Legal Aid Board will become Regional Legal Services Committees of the Legal Services Commission. The significant increase in the responsibilities of the Commission in comparison with the Legal Aid Board will also lead to an increase in the responsibilities of the RLSCs. In the preparation of the current regional strategies, and in accordance with key initiatives developed by the Lord Chancellor’s Department, the RLSCs have begun the process of developing partnership relationships with local authorities and other funders. These relationships will become fundamental to the success of the Community Legal Service. In addition, the RLSCs may need to take a broader approach to the assessment of need for legal services and become actively involved in the consideration of appropriate methods of service delivery to meet identified need.

In order to begin the preparation for the Community Legal Service, the RLSCs have already started to become involved in a Pioneer Partnership programme, developed by the Lord Chancellor’s Department, involving the development of new relationships between the Legal Aid Board, local authorities and other funders. Local authorities in six areas have been invited to work with the Board to establish best practice in relation to the assessment of need, evaluation of existing provision, development of appropriate referral arrangements, consideration of appropriate methods of delivery and co-ordination of funding. The RLSCs in these areas will have a key role to play in all of these activities.

Some 40 further local authorities have been invited to become Associate Pioneers. The Board and RLSCs will be working with these Associates as with the full Pioneers, although the Associates will not be subject to the national research programme which has now been commissioned by the Lord Chancellor’s Department.

In order to reflect the changing role of the RLSCs, the Legal Aid Board has approved revised Arrangements and Directions which set the framework for the work of the RLSCs in the period from 1 April 1999 to 31 March 2001. In relation to the Community Legal Service, the revised directions are as follows:

RLSCs will seek to develop relationships with the other funders of legal services (including local authorities, health authorities and charitable organisations) within their area with the aim of:

• reviewing the need for legal services, including services funded by the Board and other legal services;
• identifying the supply of legal services including any overlaps between providers and seeking to re-focus provision where desirable;
• establishing referral arrangements between providers;
• beginning to develop proposals to ensure that members of the local community are aware of, and able to access, the services offered by providers in the area;
• identifying appropriate alternative methods of delivering legal information, advice and assistance;
• considering how views of users and potential users of publicly funded legal services can be taken into account in planning for and delivering such services;
• establishing arrangements for future co-operation.

The revised Arrangements and Directions for the RLSCs also cover the timetable for the first review of the regional strategies. With the new contracts for advice and assistance coming into operation on 1 January 2000 and the publication of the current regional strategies in March 1999, it is proposed that the RLSCs should publish draft regional reports and strategies on 31 March 2000. These draft reports and strategies would provide an initial evaluation of the implementation of contracting and would set out proposals which would be taken into account by the new Legal Services Commission in the letting of any new contracts from 1 April 2001

Since the RLSCs began work, the Lord Chancellor has made proposals to develop the Community Legal Service promised in the government’s manifesto. The publication of the first regional strategies by the RLSCs marks an important stage in delivering the Lord Chancellor’s proposals for securing the provision of legal services based on the assessment of the need for such services within local communities. At the same time, it is important to recognise that much work remains to be done in order to develop the full potential of the proposed Community Legal Service and secure the potential benefits for those sections of the community in greatest need.

In this overview report, the Legal Aid Board itself has identified a positive programme of action which will be needed to build upon the work carried out to date by the RLSCs. This programme includes:

• further development and refinement of the predictive needs models to provide an improved basis for the assessment of the need for legal services within local communities for services to eligible clients within the scope of legal aid;
• close co-operation with the Lord Chancellor’s Department and Pioneer Partner local authorities on the development of new approaches to assess the need for all publicly funded legal services, not just those within the scope of legal aid;
• initiation of new arrangements within which the Legal Aid Board, local authorities and other funders can develop a co-ordinated approach to the funding and provision of quality assured legal services;
• implementation of a range of pilot projects to test alternative methods of service delivery designed to meet the needs of clients who would otherwise find it difficult to access quality legal services;
• evaluation of the specific needs of minority ethnic communities, including the provision of bilingual services, women only services and interpreters;
• consideration of the needs of other potentially disadvantaged client groups, including those with physical disabilities and those with mental health problems;
• development of new approaches to the provision of immigration services;
• consideration of the issues arising out of the European Convention on Human Rights and European Union obligations;
• identification of ways of involving the ultimate consumers of legal services in the consultation process concerning the need for legal services.

The programme to establish the Community Legal Service goes beyond the responsibilities of the Legal Aid Board. Instead, it will be essential for the Board to work closely with the Lord Chancellor’s Department, other central government departments, local authorities, other funders, legal aid solicitors in private practice, not-for-profit advice agencies and consumers of publicly funded legal services. The Board is committed to taking a proactive approach to the development of partnership relationships with these organisations and others who share the belief in the value of publicly funded legal services.