February 24, 1999

Nan Heald
Executive Director
Pine Tree Legal Assistance, Inc.
88 Federal Street
P. O. Box 547
Portland, Maine 04112-2300

Re: Legal Services Corporation State Plan--State of Maine

Dear Ms. Heald:

The Legal Services Corporation thanks you for timely submission of the Legal Services Corporation State Plan--State of Maine. The staff of the Office of Program Performance has had an opportunity to review the Plan and would like to share the following observations with you.

LSC recognizes the extensive planning engaged in by the key stakeholders in Maine since 1990. The Plan clearly chronicles the past planning and gives a description of the current position of the LSC-funded legal services program and non-LSC programs in their collaborative effort to achieve a comprehensive integrated delivery system. Maine's planning has been unique in the extensive leadership and support of the state and federal judiciary it has received. The considerable efforts of the Commission on Legal Needs, The Commission to Study the Future of Maine's Courts, the September 1995 Forum on the Future of Legal Services, The Justice Action Group, (JAG), The Legal Services Response Team (LSRT), the succeeding Fall Forum, and the Task Forces created subsequent to the Forum have all contributed to the many positive and significant changes in the delivery system in Maine. LSC would like to specifically congratulate you for your efforts to create a delivery system that enhances services for clients.

The legal services providers continue to discuss an array of issues that will be considered by the larger community, including JAG , LSRT, the Maine Bar Foundation or individual providers. These issues include: Unbundling of legal services, non-lawyer assistance to pro se litigants, making the court/administrative systems easier to use by consumers, addressing the legal needs in rural areas, and fundraising.

The Corporation has been informed that JAG, LSRT and several of the Task Forces have continued to meet and that JAG will provide coordination and leadership for future planning. The Corporation encourages the continued planning on these important issues.

1. A Delivery Network that Maximizes Client Access, Efficient Delivery, and High Quality Legal Assistance.

Each of Maine's five legal services providers maintains its own intake system.⁽¹⁾ Pine Tree conducts telephone intake at each of its offices and Legal Services for the Elderly (LSE) has a hotline for senior citizens. There has been significant improvement to the environment that existed in 1990 when the three providers that existed at that time had little coordination with each other. The changes have included Pine Tree's installation of a frame system allowing any of its four offices to transfer a call directly to each office and, in the future, will allow Volunteer Lawyers Project (VLP) to transfer cases to Pine Tree or vice versa. This evolution is an important enhancement to the intake services available to clients. A 1997 survey indicated that 25% of all callers to the major providers had to be referred to another provider for assistance. The greatest overlap in services occurs between Pine Tree and VLP. The frame system should allow for a smooth referral of clients when necessary and avoid clients being bumped between providers.

The Plan enumerates an ambitious list of intake/access goals created by the Intake Group and shared by the Maine legal services providers. However, while these goals are very laudatory, the Plan does not indicate if there is a plan to implement these goals.

The planners may want to consider selecting a few specific goals from those listed in the Plan and work toward achieving them. You may also want to consider designating a group to lead this endeavor and set time lines in which to reach the goals.

2. Coordinated Efforts and a Capacity to Utilize New and Emerging Technology to Assure Compatibility, Promote Efficiency, Improve Quality and Expand Services to Clients.

The continued implementation of the technology plan is supported by the Maine Bar Foundation.

The planners should be congratulated for the planning in this area and the Corporation encourages the continued implementation of the Technology Plan.

3. Coordinated Effort to Expand Client Access to the Courts, Enhance Self-help Opportunities for Low-income Persons, and Provide Preventive Legal Education and Advice.

This section of the Plan describes Maine's long history of efforts to expand client access to the courts, enhance self-help opportunities for low-income persons, and provide preventive legal education and advice with a variety of techniques. These efforts include Pine Tree's use of self-help pamphlets for clients, Maine Equal Justice Project's (MEJP) activities in education and numerous efforts to make the courts more responsive to pro se litigants, many of which have been initiated by the court.⁽²⁾ Coordination in this area seems to be very strong. While individual projects continue,⁽³⁾ it is unclear from the Plan if this coordination will continue and if it does, who will provide the leadership. The Corporation applauds the many significant accomplishments in this area and encourages the stakeholders to continue in their endeavors to improve access to the court for clients.

4. Coordination of Legal Work and a Capacity to Provide Training, Information and Expert Assistance Necessary for the Delivery of High Quality Assistance.

There seems to be little coordinated training at this time. Pine Tree does include staff at LSE in its substantive law trainings. The Maine State Bar Association offers free CLE programs to private attorneys willing to accept pro bono cases in areas of law most likely to involve VLP referrals. The Maine Trial Lawyers Association participates as mentors and co-counsel on cases with Pine Tree and LSE. JAG did not establish a Task Force for training and there is no training plan. There are efforts to better coordinate referrals of appropriate restricted cases to MEJP, which was created in 1997 to do restricted work.

The planners may want to consider examining the possibility of a structured program to assess the needs for training of staff of all the programs and participants in pro bono from VLP. Perhaps one entity could take on the responsibility of providing training and support as Pine Tree did prior to 1996. The providers may want to consider joint efforts in sharing information about significant judicial, legislative and administrative development affecting clients, sharing information on legal strategies, having casehandlers communicate electronically using brief banks and developing practice manuals.

5. Coordination and Collaboration With, and a High Degree of Involvement by the Private Bar.

The Corporation recognizes the vibrant pro bono program in Maine, which includes participation of 70% of the private bar in pro bono activities. It is also significant that, since 1993, LSE has operated a reduced fee panel for individuals age 60 or over with certain types of legal problems, which cannot be handled by the LSE staff.

The Plan includes a thoughtful array of goals developed by the Pro Bono Task Force. Some have been implemented, i.e., Landlord/tenant panel, while others have not, i.e., Courthouse lawyer of the day. VLP has created new panels for immigration cases and a virtual law firm has been developed to help with restricted cases. Unfortunately, there does not seem to be a plan for any further activity in the pro bono area. The Maine Bar Foundation is to continue to explore ways to strengthen pro bono in the state, but it is unclear if the Foundation has a specific agenda to do so. The planners may want to consider prioritizing the goals in this area and determine how and when the goals may be achieved.

6. Diversified Funding and Coordination of Resource Development Efforts.

Since 1990 there have been a number of significant improvements in resource development including: the IOLTA program was converted from a voluntary to an opt out program: new annual fundraising by Pine Tree; the passage of a filing fee bill; improved bank rates for IOLTA funds; creation of externships at the law school. All of these positive accomplishments were achieved with the cooperation of various stakeholders in the state. The providers continue to meet informally to discuss resource allocation issues and fundraising needs. The Maine Bar Foundation has also expressed interest in finding ways for IOLTA grants to leverage funding from other sources, as have the Commissioners of the Maine Civil Legal Services Fund. However, it is not clear whether JAG or the LSRT will revive or create new working groups around these issues in the future.

The legal services providers may want to consider the possibility of approaching the Bar Foundation to seek leadership in a coordinated program to develop resources.

7. Next Steps.

The Corporation congratulates Maine on its notable accomplishments over many years. 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 Maine. The planners should report back to LSC on October 1, 1999 to update the Corporation on what has been accomplished since the last report. Please contact me if there are any questions.

________________
¹ Pine Tree Legal Assistance Inc., Legal Services for the Elderly, Volunteer Lawyers Project, Maine Equal Justice Project, Maine Equal Justice Partners, and Cumberland Legal Aid Clinic of the University of Maine School of Law.

² Creation of the Family Division of the District Court, establishing the new position of Judicial Branch Volunteer Coordinator, and the creation of new system of case management officers (CMO's).