The report describes the current intake system at MLSA, the only statewide legal services provider that provides a full range of services to eligible clients. We congratulate MLSA for instituting a telephone hotline for advice and referral to its extended service component in 1996 and expanding it statewide in 1997. This effort extended access to many Montana low income residents in remote areas of the state. The report lists the strengths and weaknesses of MLSA's telephone intake system. However, it makes no recommendations for improving the intake system or for the statewide delivery system. The report does not discuss MLSA's relationship to the other providers and the role of the non-statewide providers in the current or future delivery network or how the issue of equal access to legal services for all low-income persons in the state can best be collectively addressed. There is also no discussion of policies or mechanisms for referral of service applicants among all the providers.

              As noted below, the Committee needs to establish measurable goals and objectives for maximizing client access to high quality services including advice, brief service, and direct representation.

              The report describes the improved technology at MLSA. Montana Legal Services Association is applauded for its upgrades in telephony, computer hardware and software. The Committee may wish to assess the technological status of its partners in the delivery network such as the private attorneys and others who either assist or provide services to low income individuals to determine the potential for more efficient communication and information exchange methodology. Also the Committee should investigate the use of technology for better client access to services such as video conferencing, remote computer access, and a web page with community legal education, pro se information and materials, and other appropriate legal information.

              This section of the report describes an array of activities demonstrating the good working relationship between MLSA and the private bar. The activities include an annual resolution and financial support from the Montana Law Foundation and the state bar and local bar associations' cooperation with local field office programs on pro bono endeavors. As stated in Section III the State Bar has hired a pro bono coordinator and created an Access to Justice Committee to enhance these efforts.

               The supplemental Report should include a review of the contributions these two additions have made to the service delivery efforts in Montana.

              Local bar associations participate in pro se bankruptcy and dissolution clinics, a family law advice clinic, a State Law Library advice clinic, an "inverse pyramid" advice clinic, and landlord/tenant clinics.

              The Corporation applauds the efforts to involve the bar in increasing the pro se opportunities for the low income community. The Committee may also want to consider additional ways of expanding access including collaborative efforts by all legal services providers in the state to:

              The report states that the Committee unanimously found that MLSA was the leader in providing training, information exchange and expert assistance to the private bar and other service providers. The report recommended that MLSA should continue to serve as a clearinghouse for information regarding the legal needs of the poor. The report does not detail the role MLSA plays in training or as a clearinghouse. The extent of coordination of training among providers is unclear. The report does not explain if there is an ongoing and periodic assessment of current needs of all legal service advocates and pro bono attorneys throughout the state. It is unclear if there is any coordination of legal work and information sharing among legal services providers in Montana.

              The Committee should supplement the Report to include a discussion of the access to adequate and appropriate training and professional development opportunities that exists for the other providers in the state. The supplemental Report should also discuss any coordination and information sharing that exists among the providers. If there is none, why this situation exists and what efforts can be made to enhance coordination of legal work in the state.

              This section of the report describes an array of activities demonstrating the good working relationship between MLSA and the private bar. The activities include an annual resolution and financial support from the Montana Law Foundation and the state bar and local bar associations' cooperation with local field office programs on pro bono endeavors. As stated in Section III the State Bar has hired a pro bono coordinator and created an Access to Justice Committee to enhance these efforts.

              The supplemental Report should include a review of the contributions these two additions have made to the service delivery efforts in Montana.

              There does not appear to be state-based strategy to involve stakeholders in a coordinated and sustained effort to preserve and expand existing state revenue sources. The report discussed the funding currently available to MLSA, and its plan apply for grants, to conduct a private donor campaign, and to reintroduce filing fee legislation in 1999.

              The Corporation suggests that the Committee carefully reconsider the issue of diversified funding and determine if there is any possibility of formulating a plan for coordinated resource development effort that would involve other delivery partners in Montana.