Wilhelm H. Joseph, Jr.
Executive Director
Legal Aid Bureau, Inc.
500 East Lexington Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21202

Dear Mr. Joseph:

Thank you for the Maryland State Planning Report. We have had an opportunity to review the Report and would like to share the following observations with you.

The Corporation compliments Maryland on its extensive planning and especially congratulates the Legal Aid Bureau (LAB or Bureau) the Maryland Legal Services Corporation (MLSC), and the Maryland Coalition on Civil Justice (MCCJ) for their ongoing efforts to improve services for clients in Maryland. It is clear that participants in the Maryland Coalition on Civil Justice have focused their energy on creating a delivery system that is responsive to the most compelling needs of eligible clients, ensures the highest and most strategic use of all available resources, and maximizes the opportunity for clients throughout the state to receive timely, effective and appropriate legal services.

The Report describes the extensive planning that commenced in 1996 with the establishment of the MCCJ, which is comprised of the Legal Aid Bureau, the twenty-seven IOLTA funded organizations, the Maryland State Bar Association, the Judiciary and other stakeholders. The MCCJ continues to conduct ongoing planning for the state.

The Steering Committee of the MCCJ-- which includes representatives of providers, the judiciary, law schools, funding agencies, the State bar, and the pro bono community-- acts as the implementing and oversight body for the overall state planning. The individual members of the Steering Committee are highly respected and influential leaders in the legal community and the organizations they represent are the major stakeholders in the legal community in the state. A possible next step for the MCCJ is to add individuals to the Steering Committee from the client and business community to benefit from the opinion of these important communities.

The MCCJ is implementing a recommendation of the Intake and Technology Work Group to create a centralized intake system to serve the entire state as part of the Maryland Legal Assistance Network (MLAN). MLAN will attempt to build an integrated delivery system with a one entry point telephone intake, advice and referral system, an on-line computerized website Peoples Law Library (PLL) which will be available to clients, a Lawyer to Lawyer website (LTL), and expanded pro se activities. An Oversight Committee for MLAN, chaired by the Chief Judge of Maryland Court of Appeals, has been established, and a timetable has been set to implement the Network. MLAN is a significant opportunity for LAB and MLSC to work together to establish an integrated statewide intake system that provides the coordination of intake between programs that is currently lacking in Maryland. LSC applauds the MCCJ and MLAN on their ambitious and creative efforts to establish a delivery network that maximizes client access, efficient delivery, and high quality legal assistance.

The Report does not indicate that there is a technology plan for Maryland. The 1996 Plan concludes that automation within the legal services delivery system is significantly lower than in the private practice area and results in inefficiencies, duplication of efforts and ineffectiveness. These deficiencies are not addressed in the 1996 Plan. It was unclear from the Report if there is any strategy to lift all the providers to a specific technological level. Subsequent discussions between the LSC staff person, state leaders and the Executive Director of MLSC clarified the current state of technology in Maryland. In 1996, LSC hired a consultant, conducted a survey of its recipients and developed a plan to enhance technology for its recipients. As a result, all MLSC recipients have at least one Pentium computer in each of their offices and there is an ongoing examination of two case management software programs (Time & Kemp) by various recipients. Maryland planners may want to consider developing a technology committee, establishing goals for maintaining or improving the current level of technology, appointing leaders to guide the efforts in this area and setting a time period in which to reach the goals.

Maryland is fortunate to have an array of self-help opportunities and education and advice materials available to low-income persons. Indeed it may be one of the national leaders in the area of pro se initiatives. The University of Maryland School of Law and University of Baltimore Law School clinical offices have asserted significant leadership in developing pro se projects with the Maryland courts. Legal education materials are available on the Bureau's website and brochures are distributed in offices and during community outreach activities. The Bureau has programs initiated by the state's two law schools working with the circuit courts in Baltimore City and Anne Arundel County to assist pro se domestic litigants to navigate the court process and effectively and efficiently prepare documents and present their cases. The various other providers have developed self-help and educational materials that they make available to their clients. While there is a significant range of pro se efforts there does not appear to be any systematic ongoing sharing or coordination.

The MLAN project intends to substantially increase access to those seeking basic legal information, advice, education, and pro se assistance through an integrated network which includes an expanded assisted, pro se, discrete task ("unbundled") legal services and expansion of legal education through the Internet-based "People's Law Library."

The Bureau has a suitable training structure in place for its staff. It regularly assesses its staff's training needs in both substantive and skill areas, develops an annual training plan for staff and pro bono providers and conducts regular in-house trainings which are made available to volunteers and pro bono attorneys. Its staff has access to subsidized trainings sponsored by bar associations and the Maryland Institute for Continuing Professional Education of Lawyers. Bureau staff participates actively with other legal service providers in task forces and coalition work.

There is no information in the Report on the scope of assessment of training needs or training conducted by the other legal services providers in the state. It is unclear how much coordination of training among providers takes place in the state.

There is a strong continuing legal education structure in place through the Maryland State Bar Associations's Pro Bono Resource Center of Maryland, Inc. (PBRC),⁽¹⁾ for volunteer lawyers and pro bono program staff. PBRC sponsors or co-sponsors several training programs each year in areas of law relevant to low-income clients.

Desk manuals of selected legal information and documents pertaining to various legal subjects are usually prepared in conjunction with training events. There are plans to provide these materials electronically on the Lawyer To Lawyer website. Private attorneys and law professors work with legal service advocates to design and present substantive and skills training.

The 1996 Plan does not specifically address coordination of legal work and the state's capacity to provide training, information and expert assistance.

The MCCJ may want to consider a coalition between LAB and PBRC to establish a system that would analyze the training needs of all providers in the state and establish training programs that advocates from each of the providers and all pro bono attorneys can attend.

Maryland is fortunate to have a robust system of private bar involvement and dynamic coordination of those efforts. There are vibrant pro bono programs in many jurisdictions including Baltimore City, Harford County, Montgomery County, Prince George's County, Charles County and Anne Arundel County. The Maryland Volunteer Lawyer Service (MVLS) operates in most of the state. The number of clients served by pro bono lawyers has increased from 5,897 cases in 1993 to 7,993 in 1997.

PBRC coordinates pro bono activities statewide and conducts recruitment, retention and recognition statewide. Most of the MLSC-funded pro bono programs use PBRC to help provide increased participation by pro bono attorneys. PBRC works with local pro bono programs to recruit and train volunteer attorneys to take cases from the local pro bono programs.

Pro bono lawyers serve in a broad range of functions including individual representation, staffing telephone hotlines, visiting soup kitchens and shelters to advise the homeless of their rights, counseling new immigrants through advice clinics, working as co-counsel on systemic issues, assisting with legislative initiatives, serving as experts in highly specialized areas of law, and mentoring and training other volunteer attorneys.

The Corporation congratulates Maryland on the extensive coordination and collaboration between and among staff providers and the private bar and encourages continuation of the fine efforts in this area.

Maryland is one of the most successful, if not the most successful states in leveraging resources for the delivery of legal services to the poor. Recent data collected by the ABA/NLADA State Planning Assistance Network shows Maryland at the top in per capita funding for legal services.

While the Report is silent on statewide resource development strategies, the 1996 Plan included seven recommendations to expand funding: a filing fee surcharge (passed in 1998); establishing a legal services foundation; increasing local funding through coordinated fundraising or contracts to provide specific representation to needy populations; state funding with the bar leadership approaching the state government about long and short term funding for specific legal assistance programs; a lawyer assessment; establishing mandatory pro bono or a buy out payment of $350 to satisfy the pro bono obligation; and residuals from class actions.

The Corporation applauds Maryland on its success so far and encourages the MCCJ to pursue the resource development recommendations set out in the 1996 Plan.

The Corporation congratulates Maryland on its notable accomplishments and continuing efforts to implement additional improvements so that all clients statewide will receive effective and appropriate legal services. We look forward to working with you over the next year as you

continue to expand access and provide high quality legal services to the low-income individuals in Maryland. The LAB should report back to LSC on January 15, 2000 to update the Corporation on what has been accomplished since the last report. Please contact me if there are any questions.

______________________
¹  Previously the People's Pro Bono Action Center.