U.S. Department of Justice’s

National Institute of Justice and Office for Access to Justice

with the National Science Foundation

White House Legal Aid Interagency Roundtable:

Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

February 2016
2 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

AUTHORS’ NOTE

A thoughtful and dynamic group of experts assembled in May 2015 for a two-day workshop to discuss a 

research agenda and federal priorities for civil legal aid. These experts engaged in lively discussions, 

sparked new ideas, and put forth many recommendations to the representatives from the White House 

Legal Aid Interagency Roundtable. We extend our sincere thanks to all of the participants for taking time

out of their busy schedules to attend and so fully engage.

This meeting was a true collaboration among the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office for Access to 

Justice (ATJ), the U.S. Department of Justice’s National Institute of Justice (NIJ), and the National 

Science Foundation (NSF). We would like to thank our colleagues Maureen McGough, John Picarelli, and 

Seri Irazola from NIJ for their partnership and support. We also thank the co-directors of the NSF’s Law 

and Social Sciences Program, Jon Gould and Helena Silverstein for their invaluable expertise on social 

science and justice and their knowledge of the legal research community.

We also extend our deepest thanks to our colleagues at ATJ – Lisa Foster, Karen Lash, Jenni Katzman, 

Bob Bullock, Andrew Stanner, Natalie Sampey, Helam Gebremariam, Anne Traum, and Jenna Le – for 

their support throughout the planning and hosting of the meeting and preparation of this report. We 

especially thank ATJ’s wonderful Office Manager Stephan Matthews, without whom the meeting would 

not have been possible.

While this report is primarily a summary of the discussions, in some instances we have included 

participants’ statements unedited. The recommendations, points of view, and opinions contained in the 

report are those of the experts and do not necessarily represent the views of the authors or the official 

position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice or the National Science Foundation.

For more information about:

• The Office for Access to Justice, please visit www.justice.gov/atj/

• The National Institute of Justice, please visit www.nij.gov

• The National Science Foundation, please visit www.nsf.gov

• The White House Legal Aid Interagency Roundtable, please visit http://www.justice.gov/lair

Maha Jweied

Deputy Director

Office for Access to Justice

U.S. Department of Justice

Allie Yang-Green

Counsel

Office for Access to Justice

U.S. Department of Justice

NCJ 249776

This report is available online at www.justice.gov/lair/select-publications-and-research.
Executive Summary 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

On May 20 – 21, 2015, the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office for Access to Justice (ATJ) and National Institute 

of Justice (NIJ), in collaboration with the National Science Foundation (NSF), hosted a Civil Legal Aid Research 

Workshop.1 The workshop was designed to help create a civil legal aid research agenda and identify federal 

priorities on civil legal aid for the conveners and the White House Legal Aid Interagency Roundtable (WHLAIR).2

The workshop brought together an Expert Working Group (EWG) of approximately 40 domestic and 

international researchers and practitioners to discuss the existing literature and research gaps concerning 

civil legal aid and its intersection with public safety and criminal justice.3 The workshop accomplished 

three goals.

First, it assisted NIJ to identify a civil legal aid research agenda in anticipation of possible dedicated 

funding of this work. By its current authority, NIJ is called to “engage in and encourage research and 

development to improve and strengthen the criminal justice system and related aspects of the civil justice 

system.”4 The 2017 President’s Budget requests $2.7 million for a proposed Civil Legal Aid Research 

Institute housed at NIJ.5 If the funding request is approved by Congress, this Civil Legal Aid Research 

Institute would be tasked with coordinating the U.S. Department of Justice’s efforts to develop a better 

understanding of the policy issues related to civil legal aid, to improve research and data collection, and 

to provide policy makers with more timely and detailed data to support their efforts to improve the nation’s 

civil legal aid programs.

Second, the workshop enabled WH-LAIR agencies to hear from civil legal aid experts on the 

effectiveness of civil legal aid at the intersection with public safety and criminal justice and the critical 

need for research and evaluation in this arena. This is important because WH-LAIR has been 

encouraging research and evaluation with respect to existing federal programs involving civil legal aid. In 

addition, President Obama explicitly mandated the WH-LAIR to “advance relevant evidence-based 

research, data collection, and analysis of civil legal aid and indigent defense, and promulgate best 

practices.”6 Furthermore, the September 2015 Executive Order on Using Behavioral Insights to Better 

Serve the American People encourages executive departments and agencies to “strengthen agency 

relationships with the research community to better use empirical findings from the behavioral sciences.”7

The workshop and this report assist WH-LAIR in fulfilling these obligations.

8

Finally, the workshop helped spur domestic activities to implement the United Nations’ (UN) call for indicators on 

access to justice as a development and anti-poverty goal. On September 25, 2015, the UN unanimously 

adopted the 2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development (Agenda), which included 17 Global Goals to end 

 1 The workshop’s agenda is reproduced at Appendix A.

2 The Presidential Memorandum formally establishing the White House Legal Aid Interagency Roundtable (WH-LAIR) 

is reproduced at Appendix C. The WH-LAIR’s toolkit can be found at: http://www.justice.gov/lair. 

3 The members of the Expert Working Group and the federal participants in the Workshop are listed in Appendix B.

4 The National Institute of Justice’s authorizing legislation is found at 42 U.S.C. §§ 3721 – 3723.

5 Both the President’s 2015 Budget and 2016 Budget had requested the same, but Congress did not appropriate the 

funds.

6 See Presidential Memorandum – Establishment of the White House Legal Aid Interagency Roundtable (WH-LAIR), 

Section 4(v), reproduced at Appendix C.

7

 Executive Order 13707, Using Behavioral Science Insights to Better Serve the American People, Sec. 1(a)(iv) 

(Sept. 15, 2015).

8 Appendix D includes a sample of federally funded or authored research on civil legal aid and the WH-LAIR 

agencies’ research programs. 
4 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

extreme poverty. Among these goals, Global Goal 16 calls on countries to: “Promote peaceful and inclusive 

societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and 

inclusive institutions at all levels.”9 To track progress on these goals, the Agenda calls for the creation of global, 

regional, and national indicators that will be in place for the next 15 years. In anticipation of the UN’s inclusion of 

Global Goal 16 in the Agenda, the Expert Working Group (EWG) considered how to track access to justice and 

which indicators could be used for that purpose.

10

Over the two days, participants engaged in facilitated discussions on the following topics:

Measuring Access to Justice in the Civil Context

Civil Legal Aid as a Necessary Service for the Reentry Population

Human Trafficking and Civil Legal Aid

Consumer Protection and Civil Legal Aid

Elder Abuse and Civil Legal Aid

Domestic Violence and Civil Legal Aid

Each topic opened with presentations by four or five experts, a brief overview of related federal activity 

presented by a WH-LAIR representative, and a facilitated discussion within the EWG. At the conclusion of the 

discussions, participants were divided into six breakout groups to identify specific, actionable recommendations 

for the conveners and WH-LAIR. These breakout groups aligned with the panel topics, and participants were 

asked to draft recommendations that could advance federal efforts to identify research gaps in the field and set 

civil legal aid priorities.

This report summarizes the presentations, discussions, and recommendations organized by topic.

The conveners were pleased to foster cooperation between domestic and international researchers and 

practitioners in the civil legal aid field. The lively exchange of ideas at the workshop was a measure of this new 

cooperation, but so too are the many contacts that have continued after the meeting. This report provides the 

federal government, researchers, and civil legal aid community with recommendations that can help steer the 

direction of civil legal aid research and potential reform strategies for years to come.

 9 See General Assembly resolution 70/1, Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development 

A/RES/70/1, (Oct. 21, 2015) (emphasis added), available at

http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E.

10 The anticipated process to establish the indicators for Global Goal 16 is included in Appendix E.
Table of Contents 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 3

Measuring Access to Justice in the Civil Context ......................................................................................... 7

History and Current State of Civil Legal Aid Research............................................................................. 7

Comparative Perspective: The Approach to Civil Legal Aid Research in Australia .................................7

The International Legal Aid Group’s Research Efforts ............................................................................. 8

The Role of Indices: The Justice Index .................................................................................................... 9

Post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals and Global Goal 16 on Access to Justice ..........................9

Discussion ..............................................................................................................................................11

Recommendations..................................................................................................................................11

Reentry & Civil Legal Aid ............................................................................................................................13

Civil Legal Aid Addressing Collateral Consequences of Convictions and Criminal 

Records...................................................................................................................................................13

The Public Defense Perspective on the Civil Legal Needs of the Reentry Population ..........................14

Impact of Clean Slate Interventions........................................................................................................14

Researching the Impact of Civil Legal Aid on Child Support Disputes for the Reentry 

Population...............................................................................................................................................15

Discussion ..............................................................................................................................................16

Recommendations..................................................................................................................................16

Human Trafficking & Civil Legal Aid ............................................................................................................19

Who Are the Trafficking Victims? ...........................................................................................................19

Legal Framework for Trafficking Prosecution and Remedies for Victims...............................................20

Civil Litigation for Trafficking Victims ......................................................................................................20

Finding Lawyers for Trafficking Victims ..................................................................................................21

Discussion ..............................................................................................................................................21

Recommendations..................................................................................................................................22

Consumer Protection & Civil Legal Aid........................................................................................................23

Legal Aid as the Canary in the Coal Mine ..............................................................................................23

Studying Civil Justice Decision-Making..................................................................................................23

Consumer Debt Research Projects and Use of Technology..................................................................24

Studies on Debt Collection and Access to Credit Reports in Texas ......................................................25

Discussion ..............................................................................................................................................25

Recommendations..................................................................................................................................26

Elder Abuse & Civil Legal Aid .....................................................................................................................29

Elder Abuse and Rural Communities .....................................................................................................29

Research on Elder Abuse and Legal Interventions ................................................................................29

Medical-Legal Partnership as a Model for the Delivery of Civil Legal Aid..............................................30

Tribal Communities and Medical-Legal Partnership...............................................................................31

Discussion ..............................................................................................................................................32

Recommendations..................................................................................................................................33

Domestic Violence & Civil Legal Aid ...........................................................................................................35

Alaska as a Case Study for Native and Rural Communities ..................................................................35

Texas RioGrande Legal Aid and the Bi-national Project on Family Violence ........................................36

Randomized Study on Triage and Civil Protection Orders.....................................................................36

Employment Law and Domestic Violence ..............................................................................................37

Discussion ..............................................................................................................................................37

Recommendations..................................................................................................................................38

Conclusion: The Way Forward....................................................................................................................41
6 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

Appendix A: Agenda ...................................................................................................................................43

Appendix B: List of Participants ..................................................................................................................47

Appendix C: Presidential Memorandum --

Establishment of the White House Legal Aid Interagency Roundtable ......................................................53

Appendix D: Existing Federal Research and Capacity ...............................................................................57

Appendix E: Indicator Formation Process for Global Goal 16 ....................................................................61
Measuring Access to Justice in the Civil Context 7

MEASURING ACCESS TO JUSTICE IN THE CIVIL CONTEXT

The Expert Working Group (EWG) began with presentations by five experts who spoke about the ongoing 

domestic and international efforts to measure access to justice in the civil context, including the development of 

new methodologies and indices. The panel also discussed the United Nations (UN) activity to establish the

post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs or Global Goals) to end extreme poverty and the inclusion of 

access to justice in that framework.

History and Current State of Civil Legal Aid Research

Professor Rebecca Sandefur from the American Bar Foundation and the University of Illinois opened the panel 

by providing the historical context of civil legal aid research in the United States. She explained that around 

1982, the Legal Services Corporation’s research office was closed due to funding shortages. As a result, little 

was done to advance a civil legal aid research agenda until about five years ago when grassroots efforts began 

to coalesce around the topic. However, research activity remains limited and fragmented, with no permanent 

source of funding or infrastructure to support this work.

11

She also provided an overview of her findings on the utilization rates of legal services. Her research indicates 

that while two-thirds of adults have problems that can be resolved through a legal intervention, very few access 

the justice system.12 The research further indicates that the most common reason why people do not access or 

seek legal assistance is because they are unaware that their problems are legal in nature. They may go to 

social service providers, but rarely seek legal counsel or solutions.

13 This contradicts the widely held belief that 

the primary reason individuals do not seek legal assistance is due to cost concerns. She explained that while 

cost is a major issue, it is only the fourth or fifth most common reason why people do not seek legal 

assistance.14 And relatedly, she confirmed that the United States funds civil legal aid at one of the lowest levels

among Western countries.

In order to have an even better grasp on the need, she urged research and study on the following topics: how

many legal needs go unmet; what are the consequences of those unmet legal needs; how to scale up small 

civil legal aid projects that are already in the pipeline; and how to repurpose existing data to support and engage 

with small-scale civil legal aid projects.

Comparative Perspective: The Approach to Civil Legal Aid Research in Australia

Suzie Forell, Principal Researcher of the Law & Justice Foundation of New South Wales, Australia, (LJF)

provided an international comparison on access to justice research by describing efforts in Australia to study the 

 11 A notable effort to improve this situation is the National Legal Aid and Defender Association’s public legal aid 

research database, available at http://legalaidresearch.org.

12 See Rebecca Sandefur and Aaron Smyth, Access Across America: First Report of the Civil Justice Infrastructure 

Mapping Project, American Bar Foundation, American Bar Foundation 16 (2011), available at 

http://www.americanbarfoundation.org/uploads/cms/documents/access_across_america_first_report_of_the_civil_just

ice_infrastructure_mapping_project.pdf; Rebecca L. Sandefur (forthcoming) “What We Know and Need to Know 

about the Legal Needs of the Public,” University of South Carolina Law Review; Rebecca L. Sandefur (forthcoming) 

“Bridging the Gap: Rethinking Outreach for Greater Access to Justice,” University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law 

Review; Rebecca L. Sandefur, Accessing Justice in the Contemporary USA: Findings from the Community Needs 

and Services Study, American Bar Foundation (2014), available at 

http://www.americanbarfoundation.org/uploads/cms/documents/sandefur_accessing_justice_in_the_contemporary_u

sa._aug._2014.pdf.

13 Id.

14 Id.
8 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

civil legal aid need and impact. She explained that the Australian legal aid community uses her organization’s

research to inform their decision-making.

15 As such, LJF’s research has focused on identifying: 

The prevalence, distribution, and consequences of legal problems;

What, if anything, people do about their legal problems and relatedly, to whom they turn for help or the

reasons for inaction;

The barriers people face in accessing legal help and resolving issues; and

The implication of these findings for legal assistance services.

LJF’s key findings have confirmed that legal problems are widespread and that half of the population has legal 

needs.

16 The research also found that those most vulnerable to legal problems have less knowledge and fewer

resources, and face systemic barriers. Like Professor Sandefur’s research in the United States, LJF’s research 

confirmed that in Australia few people with legal problems seek lawyers or legal assistance. LJF’s research also 

demonstrated, however, that some Australians turn to non-legal advisors, who in limited instances have 

resolved their clients’ problems. 

As Ms. Forell explained, the need for civil legal aid research – particularly research at the intersection of high

legal need and low capability – is ongoing in Australia. This type of research involves system review, provider

evaluation, and capacity building. The existing research confirms that civil legal aid should be timely, targeted,

appropriate to client need and capability, and combined with other services.17 Ms. Forell noted that this 

research might be helpful to the United States in its ongoing efforts to study these problems.

The International Legal Aid Group’s Research Efforts 

Professor Alan Paterson, Chair of the International Legal Aid Group (ILAG), provided an overview of ILAG and 

its activities to support evidence-based research on the need for civil legal aid and its effectiveness.18 ILAG is a 

network of policymakers and academic researchers, and its mission is to improve evidence-based

policymaking in poverty legal services through research on access to justice.

Worldwide, ILAG participants have completed 26 large-scale studies of public justiciable needs.19 This 

research confirms that many people do not seek legal assistance nor do they handle their legal needs on their

own – in fact, they only obtain a lawyer in a small percentage of cases. The dominant factor determining 

people’s response to civil legal problems is how people characterize the problems—as legal or not legal.

Again, as with Professor Sandefur’s findings, this research has demonstrated that the high cost of legal 

services is not the primary reason people do not seek legal assistance. Professor Paterson also noted that this 

research has confirmed that early intervention is important to obtain good outcomes for clients.

He provided some examples of ongoing research efforts with preliminary results: one on the use of technology 

to enhance service delivery in the Netherlands, and another on the importance of peer review and quality in the 

 15 See Law and Justice Foundation of New South Wales website: http://www.lawfoundation.net.au/.

16 See Coumarelos, Macourt, People et al., Law and Justice Foundation of NSW, Sydney, Legal Australia-Wide 

(LAW) Survey: Legal Need in Australia (2012), available at

http://www.lawfoundation.net.au/ljf/site/templates/LAW_AUS/$file/LAW_Survey_Australia.pdf. 

17 See Pascoe Pleasence, Christine Coumarelos, Suzie Forell & Hugh McDonald, Reshaping Legal Assistance 

Services: Building on the evidence base (2014), available at 

http://www.lawfoundation.net.au/ljf/site/templates/reports/$file/Reshaping_legal_assistance_services_web.pdf. 

18 See The International Legal Aid Group’s website: http://www.internationallegalaidgroup.org. 

19 See Pascoe Pleasence, Nigel J. Balmer, and Rebecca Sandefur, Paths to Justice: a Past, Present and Future

Roadmap, UCL Centre for Empirical Legal Studies, London (2013), available at 

http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/files/PTJ%20Roadmap%20NUFFIELD%20Published.pdf. 
Measuring Access to Justice in the Civil Context 9

United Kingdom, Chile, and China.20 He remarked that ILAG’s efforts to contribute to research on legal aid 

match well with the purposes of the workshop and reminded the EWG of the opportunities to collaborate with 

researchers in other countries to grow the evidence base.

The Role of Indices: The Justice Index 

The National Center for Access to Justice at Cardozo Law School (NCAJ) launched the Justice Index in 2014 to 

draw on the power of data and indicators to increase access to justice in the United States.21 The Justice Index 

creates a state-by-state picture of civil legal aid – a snapshot of the traditional assistance provided by civil legal 

aid programs and of new models of assistance located not only in legal aid programs but in courts and other 

settings.

Professor David Udell, the Executive Director of NCAJ, explained that the purpose of the Justice Index is to 

provide courts with indicators and data that promote replication of best practices to increase access to justice. 

The Justice Index ranks the 50 states and Washington, DC based on their adoption of laws, rules and practices

in four categories: (i) number of civil legal aid attorneys, (ii) systems to support self-represented litigants, (iii) 

systems to support people with limited English proficiency, and (iv) systems to support people with disabilities.

Professor Udell reported that officials in almost every state justice system are engaging with NCAJ and its 2015 

Justice Index research initiative. He further noted that officials in several states have reported using the Justice 

Index indicators to educate their court staff about best practices. Some state officials have sought NCAJ’s 

assistance to set a reform agenda relying on the Justice Index criteria. According to Professor Udell, credible 

comparisons force a public conversation that cannot be ignored and create incentives for officials and the 

public to bring about reform. 

Post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals and Global Goal 16 on Access to Justice

Professor Udell then discussed the UN’s post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals, known as the Global 

Goals, and the inclusion of access to justice in Global Goal 16, and expressed his hope that officials in the WHLAIR agencies will draw on their expertise (and on existing systems of indicators like NCAJ’s Justice Index and 

the World Justice Project’s Rule of Law Index) to create more indicators to measure access to justice in the 

United States.

He noted that the previous development goals, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), were established in 

2000 to track and promote progress in the developing world, but the MDGs did not include access to justice for 

a variety of reasons, including that it was considered too difficult to measure.

22 With the expiration of the MDGs 

on the horizon, countries around the world, including the U.S., agreed on the UN’s new Global Goals, and 

agreed to apply them universally to help end extreme poverty in both developing and developed countries. 

Notably, Global Goal 16 includes “access to justice”. Professor Udell explained that it is included thanks to 

growing awareness that most things can be measured and to the emergence of the global access to justice 

movement over the past ten years, with its emphasis on “legal empowerment of the poor” as a strategy for 

 20 See Alan Paterson and Roger Smith (2014), Face to Face Legal Services and Their Alternatives: Global Lessons 

from the Digital Revolution, available at

http://www.ilagnet.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33:auto-generate-fromtitle&catid=12&Itemid=122. 

21The Justice Index was launched with pro bono research support from law firms, expert input from bar associations 

and other entities, and pro bono tech support from corporations, see http://www.justiceindex.org/. Relatedly, the 

World Justice Project publishes the “Rule of Law Index,” which provides original, impartial data gathered through 

survey questioning of experts and lay people on how the rule of law is experienced by the general public in 102 

countries around the world. See http://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index. 

22 See Risa Kaufman and David Udell, “The Global Access to Justice Goal,” available at 

http://ncforaj.org/2015/08/03/the-global-access-to-justice-goal/.
10 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

ending poverty.23 He noted that the Secretary General, in the Synthesis Report supporting the Global Goals, 

has described justice as central to the Global Goals, important both as an independent goal and as a predicate 

for accomplishing other anti-poverty Global Goals.

24 He remarked this approach paralleled the WH-LAIR 

activity of including legal services among the range of supportive services provided in federal programs that help 

the vulnerable and underserved. 

Following Professor Udell’s presentation, Dr. Jennifer Park, Senior Statistician with the U.S. Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) and a key member of the U.S. team participating in the development of these 

indicators, provided valuable insight on the process to establish them. She explained that while the MDGs have 

been monitored over the past 15 years, they were limited in application and scope because they were

developed outside the context of measurability. Dr. Park explained that this is in contrast to the current effort

to establish the SDGs’ indicators because the statistical community has been involved from the start in 

identifying the 17 Global Goals and 169 associated targets.

She explained that the UN Statistical Commission is managing the process to help identify and select indicators 

to measure progress across these goals and targets as well as the process to monitor progress against those 

indicators. She noted that by leveraging official statistics, involving stakeholders, and pulling in big data, the 

selection of indicators can be done in a transparent and accessible way.

The indicators will be used at three levels:

At an international level, for comparison among member states;25

At a regional level, using supplemental indicators more relevant for a given region – such as 

the Americas; and

At the national level, with additional indicators that are most meaningful to measure access to 

justice in the United States.

Dr. Park explained that researchers will have the opportunity to be involved in identifying what these indicators 

should look like at all levels. Within the federal government, the U.S. Department of State is taking the lead in 

organizing the U.S. government’s views by working with the 127 programs that produce federal statistics and

other stakeholders.

Dr. Park also explained that the indicator formation process will naturally involve input from a variety of actors,

including the UN, member countries, regional bodies, and individual experts. The EWG was informed that the

U.S. Government will look to the expert community for feedback on the indicator formation process to ensure 

that the chosen indicators are relevant and useful. She then explained that the United States is approaching this 

process openly and intends to monitor its domestic progress at the global, regional, and, perhaps most 

importantly, national levels in a transparent way. Dr. Park cautioned that the national level indicators should be 

readily accessible to the public and that the EWG should keep this in mind. The final process for gathering input

continues to be developed and will be posted on the UN Statistical Division’s web site.

 23 For more information on the U.N.’s Initiative on Legal Empowerment of the Poor, see

http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/ourwork/democraticgovernance/focus_areas/focus_justice_law/legal_em

powerment.html. 

24 The Road to Dignity by 2030: Ending Poverty, Transforming All Lives and Protecting the Planet: Synthesis Report 

of the Secretary-General On the Post-2015 Agenda (Dec. 2014), available at 

http://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/reports/SG_Synthesis_Report_Road_to_Dignity_by_2030.pdf. 

25 The international or global indicators will be finalized by March 2016. See Appendix E.
Measuring Access to Justice in the Civil Context 11

Discussion

History of civil legal aid and research. The EWG discussed the historical context behind losing the research 

arm of the Legal Services Corporation in the 1980s and the resulting dearth of civil legal aid research and 

evaluation. One expert countered that narrative by discussing a 1994 civil legal aid study that established a 

methodology which was used over 30 times in reports done in state settings.

26 He asserted that those “legal 

needs studies” and others including cost-benefit analysis have had positive impacts on state efforts to expand 

funding for civil legal aid. But another expert cautioned that those studies were not scientific and not peer 

reviewed; so while they may have had a successful advocacy impact in some settings, they cannot be relied 

upon by the scientific community. She explained that that is an area of research that has remained dormant and 

is in great need.

Impact of politics on research and evaluation. One expert cautioned that research and evaluation should be 

depoliticized. The EWG discussed ways to achieve that goal – including data collection of basic targets, such as 

the number of individuals who are unrepresented in state justice systems, and collecting data transparently so 

that the interpretation will be neutral. One expert suggested using independent bodies to perform “legal needs

assessments,” which was the case in the United Kingdom until recently had an independent body that 

performed this work. He also suggested that the United States needs to engage in greater public education and 

awareness of civil legal aid.

How to prioritize research agenda. The EWG discussed priorities for a civil legal aid research agenda.

Experts discussed the need to identify timing of the legal intervention; the effectiveness and impact of the 

particular intervention; the factors that are preventing people from using civil legal aid; and ways in which 

proposed innovative models and new technologies can expand the delivery of civil legal aid.

Global Goal 16 indicators and data to measure access to justice. The EWG was particularly interested in 

opportunities to provide feedback to OMB and the U.S. government on indicator formation around Global Goal 

16. 

Recommendations

The breakout group on measuring access to justice in the civil context made the following recommendations:

1. Create Sound Indicators for Sustainable Development Goals. The federal government should 

suggest sound indicators for the SDGs related to civil legal aid. It should ensure that the 

indicators are concrete and relevant to civil legal aid providers and capture the cascading benefits 

of legal aid, rather than simply tallying services provided.

2. Collect data or commission a census of unrepresented litigants. The Bureau of Justice 

Statistics or another statistical agency should explore producing a national census of number of 

unmet civil legal needs, the number of unrepresented civil litigants, the number of litigants with

representation, and a description of the types of services provided to litigants. This census should

interview people and use data maintained by the courts as well as by service providers and other 

stakeholders. Too little is known about the number of people served by civil legal aid, the size of 

the unmet need, the types of services actually provided, and the outcomes of these services.

 26 The Comprehensive Legal Needs Study funded by the American Bar Association and released in 1994 is available 

at 

http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/legalservices/downloads/sclaid/legalneedstudy.authcheckdam

.pdf. 
12 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

3. Compile a list of existing federally-funded or produced civil legal aid research. The federal 

government should compile an inventory of civil legal aid research, documenting relevant 

research conducted or funded by federal agencies.27

4. Fund research on the benefits of early intervention by civil legal aid. Future research should 

help to identify and quantify the cascading benefits of early intervention by civil legal aid. Such 

research should also examine the consequences of inaction for individuals and communities in 

the face of the civil legal aid crisis.

5. Fund research into use of non-lawyers in service delivery. Research examining how legal 

services could be effectively re- and/or de-regulated to increase access while preserving 

consumer protections should also be funded.

6. Incentivize researcher-legal aid provider cooperation. Incentivize researcher-provider 

cooperation so that researchers will have access to sufficient data for study and feedback on the 

appropriate problems and issues to examine.

7. Encourage holistic services. The federal government should encourage a holistic approach to 

civil legal aid by helping to promote multidisciplinary teams of lawyers and other professionals 

and involving non-lawyers in service delivery. This is especially important as lawyers perform 

more “unbundled services”.

8. Support experiential education. The federal government should recognize the growing interest 

in experiential education in law schools by providing opportunities for law students to assist in

providing civil legal aid.

9. Create a national self-help portal. The federal government should consider creating a national 

self-help portal for people with civil legal problems that would provide basic information on legal 

processes, offer common court forms and directions, and potentially include links to services 

provided.

 27 Appendix D of this report attempts to implement this recommendation.
Reentry & Civil Legal Aid 13

REENTRY & CIVIL LEGAL AID

Each year, nearly 650,000 individuals are released from state and federal prisons. Another nearly 12 million 

cycle through local jails, and even more get criminal records without doing time. According to the U.S. 

Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, more than 100 million individuals have a criminal history on 

file in state records. When reentry fails, the societal and economic costs are high. High rates of recidivism mean 

more crime, more victims and more pressure on an already overburdened and costly criminal justice system.

People with a criminal record frequently encounter significant barriers to securing a job, obtaining housing, and 

continuing their education. Some employers admit they are unlikely to hire an applicant with a criminal record. 

Having a record of even a single arrest without a conviction can also profoundly reduce a person’s earning 

capacity. Studies also demonstrate the negative impact of a criminal record in securing housing, education, and 

credit. These consequences affect adults with a criminal record as well as youth involved in the juvenile justice 

system.

Legal aid helps the reentry population with all of these problems. For example, legal aid can secure 

expungement or sealing of records or even a pardon for eligible people, thereby improving prospects for 

employment, housing, and education. Legal aid can also correct inaccurate criminal records, reinstate a 

revoked or suspended driver’s license, and modify child support orders to more realistic payment obligations.28

This session called upon legal aid experts and researchers to discuss the delivery of civil legal aid for the reentry 

population and both the existing and needed research on its impact.

Civil Legal Aid Addressing Collateral Consequences of Convictions and Criminal 

Records

Since the 1990s, Community Legal Services of Philadelphia (CLS) has worked to address collateral 

consequences of incarceration in response to the community’s needs. CLS Litigation Director Sharon 

Dietrich explained that her office’s primary way of mitigating clients’ collateral consequences is through 

clearing criminal records. Criminal records, even without conviction, impact clients’ ability to get jobs and 

secure housing, as the use of background screening by employers, colleges, and landlords has 

dramatically increased in recent years.29 CLS helps its clients expunge criminal records, correct violations 

of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), and resolve criminal debts such as supervision fees and bail

judgments.

CLS also addresses collateral consequences through impact litigation and advocacy.

30 It has filed class 

action lawsuits to seek damages for FCRA violations and challenge the constitutionality of state laws that 

restrict employment of people with certain criminal records. In addition, CLS engages in advocacy on 

issues such as broadening expungement laws. 

 28 See WH-LAIR’s case study, Civil Legal Aid Supports Federal Efforts to Help People with Criminal Records Make a 

Successful Reentry (April 2014), available at www.justice.gov/lair/wh-lair-case-studies. 

29 See, e.g., Michelle Natividad Rodriguez and Maurice Emsellem, National Employment Law Project, 65 Million Need 

Not Apply: The Case for Reforming Criminal Background Checks for Employment (2011), available at 

http://nelp.org/content/uploads/2015/03/65_Million_Need_Not_Apply1.pdf; Rebecca Vallas & Sharon Dietrich, Center

for American Progress, One Strike and You’re Out (2014), available at 

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/criminal-justice/report/2014/12/02/102308/one-strike-and-youre-out/; 

Sharon Dietrich, Community Legal Services of Philadelphia, EEOC’s Criminal Record Guidance One Year Later: 

Lessons from the Community (2013), available at 

http://clsphila.org/sites/default/files/issues/EEOC%20CHR%20guidance%20one%20year%20later%20-

%20policy%20paper.pdf.

30 For more information about CLS’s impact work, see http://clsphila.org/learn-about-issues. 
14 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

Ms. Dietrich noted that the research demonstrating that recidivism diminishes over time has been helpful 

in supporting CLS’s reentry work.

31 She also noted that current policies on the use of criminal records,

such as life-long bans, contradict the research findings.32

The Public Defense Perspective on the Civil Legal Needs of the Reentry Population

Michelle Bonner, Chief Counsel – Defender Legal Services of the National Legal Aid & Defender Association

and Co-Chair, of the American Bar Association’s Reentry and Collateral Consequences Committee discussed 

the critical need for civil legal aid to address collateral consequences experienced by the reentry population. 

Reflecting on her experience as a public defender and a legal services director for a program that served

formerly incarcerated women, Ms. Bonner highlighted the top civil legal needs of the reentry population as 

matters related to: employment, driver license reinstatement, housing, child custody, child support payments, 

domestic violence, disability benefits, immigration, and education. 

Ms. Bonner noted that public defenders often recognize the civil legal needs of their clients and, when possible,

participate in initiatives such as the Community-Oriented Defender Network, which promotes defender-civil legal 

aid collaboration and holistic representation.

33 Yet given funding restrictions, public defender offices usually limit 

their direct civil legal services to alternatives to incarceration. Communication and coordination between civil 

legal aid programs and criminal legal aid providers is still generally lacking and urgently needed. Ms. Bonner 

noted that research on the intersection between civil and criminal legal problems could incentivize advocates to 

increase collaboration between their respective civil and criminal legal programs. Ms. Bonner also suggested 

more research on how criminal records affect civil legal challenges, and on the effectiveness of the holistic 

defense approach.

Impact of Clean Slate Interventions

The Clean Slate Clinic of East Bay Community Law Center (the Clinic) has served almost 10,000 people over 

the past decade through Clean Slate Intervention, a program that works to clear criminal records through 

expungement.34 The Clinic’s faculty director, Professor Jeffrey Selbin, provided an overview of the clinic’s 

activities and noted that clients often remark that expunging their records restores rights they did not even 

realize they had.

Professor Selbin described the Clinic’s studies on how Clean Slate Intervention affected clients’ lives in two

areas:

Earnings: Professor Selbin, together with an economist, is studying the economic impact of the Clean 

Slate Intervention by looking at pre- and post-intervention earnings. People with criminal records face 

barriers to employment, but does record clearing result in better employment outcomes? Preliminary 

evidence suggests that the Clean Slate Intervention stems the decline in earnings and may even boost 

 31 See Alfred Blumstein and Kiminori Nakamura, Extension of Current Estimates of Redemption Times: Robustness 

Testing, Out-of-State Arrests, and Racial Differences, Final report for the National Institute of Justice Grant #2009-IJCX-0008, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice (2012); Alfred Blumstein and Kiminori Nakamura, 

‘Redemption’ in an Era of Widespread Criminal Background Checks, NIJ Journal, June 2009; Megan C. Kurlychek, 

Robert Brame, and Shawn D. Bushway, Enduring Risk? Old Criminal Records and Short-Term Predictions of 

Criminal Involvement, 53 Crime & Delinq. 64 (2007).

32 Shawn D. Bushway and Gary Sweeten, Abolish Lifetime Bans for Ex-Felons, Criminology & Public Policy, 

Volume:6 Issue:4, Pages:697 to 706 (November 2007). 

33 See National Legal Aid and Defender Association’s Community Oriented Defender Network, available at 

http://www.nlada100years.org/CODNetwork; see also, Brenna Center for Justice, Community Oriented Defender 

Network, available at https://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/community-oriented-defender-network.

34 Professor Selbin shared a short video featuring the Clinic, which can be accessed at 

http://www.kaltura.com/tiny/aver9. 
Reentry & Civil Legal Aid 15

earnings. However, the study also found that people with criminal records seek Clean Slate legal 

remedies after a prolonged period of declining earnings. This finding suggests possible benefits of an 

earlier intervention by legal service providers and/or expungement by operation of law.35

Dignity: Professor Selbin, together with a criminologist and the Clinic’s executive director, is studying 

the dignity impact of the Clean Slate intervention. There is a heavy psychosocial toll associated with the 

degrading experience of arrest and conviction. Professor Selbin analyzed qualitative data on the 

clients’ experience of the intervention. He noted that the findings suggest that how we help people is 

just as important as what we do. Clients placed high value on some less obvious benefits, such as a 

sense of relief, a renewed sense of dignity, and personal empowerment. The process, not just the 

outcome, can serve as a ritual to reintegrate people into the society.

Professor Selbin relayed that these studies provide an initial basis to identify more targeted and effective 

strategies to facilitate reentry, increase employment prospects, and reduce recidivism.

Researching the Impact of Civil Legal Aid on Child Support Disputes for the Reentry Population

Child support payments have a real impact on the reentry population because child support obligations are not 

held in abeyance while the paying parent is in prison. As a result, significant debt may accrue, and failure to 

pay the child support may result in reincarceration under civil contempt laws.

36 Professor Tonya Brito of the 

University of Wisconsin Law School discussed her current research on how legal assistance influences lowincome litigants’ access to justice in the child support context. 

She explained that her research explores how legal assistance influences the outcome, rather than whether

legal assistance affects outcomes. The study is looking at data from two states that offer contrasting models of 

legal assistance in child support enforcement proceedings: free attorney representation in Wisconsin and limited 

legal assistance in Illinois.

Preliminary findings from the study showed that parents defending against child support contempt claims rarely 

get a free attorney even though they are entitled to one under the law in most states, and even though the real 

threat of prison puts their liberty at stake. Further, the study revealed how non-defense legal professionals think 

of the role of defense counsel: judges and other attorneys were not troubled by the absence of defense counsel 

and, in fact, did not believe that defense counsel impacted case outcomes. Professor Brito stated that further 

research is needed to understand the contributing factors to the low take-up rate of free counsel and what 

mechanisms can be employed to increase access.

 35 Jeffrey Selbin and Justin McCrary, Got Clean Slate? New Study Suggests that Criminal Record Clearing May 

Increase Earnings (unpublished research summary, 2014), available at

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2486867. 

36 See, e.g., Tonya L. Brito, Fathers Behind Bars: Rethinking Child Support Policy Toward Low-Income Noncustodial 

Fathers and Their Families, 15 J. Gender Race & Just. 617 (2012). 
16 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

Discussion

Expungement laws’ variations and policy advocacy. One expert noted that the definition of “expungement”

varies across the country and many states lack record sealing or expungement provisions.37 While this creates 

difficulties for legal service providers, it provides an opportunity for comparative study. The experts agreed that 

there needs to be more advocacy to broaden record sealing and expungement laws. For example, states can 

adopt automatic expungement laws that would clear misdemeanor records after a reasonable amount of time 

has passed.

38

Expungement ritual and public ceremony. The EWG commented on the role of ritual or public ceremony 

involved in expungement. One expert stated that some clients resent redemption ritual because their

interactions with the criminal justice system were unfair from the start. Another expert noted that due to racial 

disparities in the criminal justice system, people of color may have to “jump through additional hoops” in the 

process and may view a public ceremony as yet another hurdle.

Recommendations

The breakout group on reentry and civil legal aid made the following recommendations:

1. Examine whether existing rules, regulations, and practices on reentry need to be revised.

Federal agencies should examine their existing rules, regulations, and practices in order to

ensure that they are aligned with the Administration’s goals of supporting reintegration of the 

reentry population – as evidenced by the activity of the Federal Interagency Reentry Council.39

2. Fund research on the consequences of sealing or expunging criminal records. What are 

the consequences of sealing or expunging criminal records? This might include cost-benefit 

analysis and whether expungement improves employment outcomes.

3. Fund studies to compare automatic expungement and expungement by application. What 

are the relative costs and benefits of automatic expungement and expungement by application?

This might include examining whether expungement by application has benefits associated with 

having someone participate in a public ritual.

4. Fund research on the timing and type of civil legal aid. Research questions might include: Is 

the provision of civil legal aid during incarceration, rather than just post-incarceration, 

comparatively beneficial? What are the relative benefits and costs of different forms of assistance 

for the reentry population (e.g., legal aid, self-help, other support and services)?

5. Fund research on the economic impact of legal aid on the reentry population. Research 

questions might include: Do the long-term employment outcomes for the reentry population vary 

with the provision of civil legal aid?

6. Articulate a national strategy to address civil legal needs in reentry. The federal government 

should clearly articulate a national strategy to address civil legal needs in reentry using a multiprong strategy that leverages the federal government as convener, funder, and moral authority.

 37 An inventory of state-by-state expungement rules compiled by the National Association of Criminal Defense 

Lawyers is available at http://www.nacdl.org/rightsrestoration. 

38 Rebecca Vallas and Sharon Dietrich, Center for American Progress, One Strike and You’re Out (2014), available at 

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/criminal-justice/report/2014/12/02/102308/one-strike-and-youre-out/. 

39 The federal government’s coordinated effort in this area is exemplified by the works of the Federal Interagency 

Reentry Council. See https://csgjusticecenter.org/nrrc/projects/firc/. 
Reentry & Civil Legal Aid 17

7. Foster integration of civil and criminal legal services. As the problems faced by the reentry 

population do not neatly separate into criminal and civil categories, the federal government 

should foster integration of civil and criminal legal services and their providers to better serve the 

reentry population.

8. Encourage public-private partnerships for successful reentry. The federal government 

should encourage public-private partnerships that can create more opportunities for individuals 

reentering society to make a successful transition.

9. Provide support to civil legal aid’s activities on behalf of the reentry population. The federal 

government should expand resources for civil legal aid to address collateral consequences of 

incarceration in addition to the daily emergency needs that monopolize the use of scare existing 

resources (e.g., foreclosure or domestic violence). 

Human Trafficking & Civil Legal Aid 19

HUMAN TRAFFICKING & CIVIL LEGAL AID

Over 20 million men, women, and children around the world, including in the United States, are victimized by 

forced labor and sex trafficking. Human trafficking is modern day slavery and considered to be one of the fastest 

growing criminal industries in the world. Many victims are lured with false promises of well-paying jobs or 

manipulated by people they trust. They are forced or coerced into prostitution, domestic servitude, or other types 

of forced labor in places like sweatshops, massage parlors, farms, restaurants, hotels, and domestic service. 

These victims – both U.S. citizens and foreign nationals – typically require a multitude of emergency and longterm services including housing, food, healthcare, mental health and substance abuse treatment, and 

immigration and other legal assistance.

Legal aid helps trafficking victims access resources needed to regain control of their lives and avoid retrafficking. Such resources include housing, food stamps, medical assistance, public benefits, education, 

employment authorization, and name changes. Legal aid also helps immigrant victims obtain immigration relief 

and remove trafficking-related convictions and other criminal records such as prostitution charges under state 

law.

40

This session called upon legal aid experts and researchers to discuss the delivery of civil legal aid for human 

trafficking victims and both the existing and needed research on its impact.

Who Are the Trafficking Victims?

Dr. Meredith Dank, Senior Research Associate at the Urban Institute’s Justice Policy Institute, provided an 

overview of the characteristics of human trafficking victims. Labor trafficking and sex trafficking victims differ in 

their type of victimization, their needs, and the community response. But both types of victims share common 

features in that they belong to hidden populations and rarely self-identify as victims of human trafficking.

41

For labor trafficking, victims are largely foreign born and mostly from Asia and Latin America. In her research, 

Dr. Dank found that about 71 percent came to the United States on a legal visa, but nearly 70 percent were 

undocumented at the time of escape.

42 Traffickers often use the victims’ immigration status to further exploit 

them, in addition to other forms of force, fraud, and coercion.

Sex trafficking victims, on the other hand, tend to be domestic. Traditionally, the research has focused on

domestic minors, especially girls, but recent research has shed light on boys and LGBTQ trafficking victims.43

These victims are particularly vulnerable because they are less likely to be identified as sex trafficking victims.

Dr. Dank explained that many trafficking victims of both types have the added vulnerability of being homeless

and 70 percent of them have been arrested at least once.44 The victims therefore tend to view law enforcement

 40 See WH-LAIR’s case study, Civil Legal Aid Supports Federal Efforts to Help Human Trafficking Victims (Feb. 

2016), available at www.justice.gov/lair/wh-lair-case-studies. 

41 See, e.g., Colleen Owens and Meredith Dank, Understanding the Organization, Operation, and Victimization 

Process of Labor Trafficking in the United States, 2014, available at 

http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/413249-Understanding-the-Organization-Operationand-Victimization-Process-of-Labor-Trafficking-in-the-United-States.PDF.

42 Id.

43 See Meredith Dank et al, Surviving the Streets of New York: Experiences of LGBTQ youth, YMSM and YWSW 

Engaged in Survival Sex, 2015, available at http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publicationpdfs/2000119-Surviving-the-Streets-of-New-York.pdf. 

44 See Meredith Dank et al., Locked In: Interactions with the Criminal Justice and Child Welfare Systems for LGBTQ 

Youth, YMSM and YWSW Who Engage in Survival Sex, 2015, available at

http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/2000424-Locked-In-Interactions-with-the-CriminalJustice-and-Child-Welfare-Systems-for-LGBTQ-Youth-YMSM-and-YWSW-Who-Engage-in-Survival-Sex.pdf. 
20 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

with suspicion. Dr. Dank recommended that more research be conducted on the effects of the criminalization of 

victims and what is needed to help them assimilate into their communities. She noted that assimilation is

difficult when basic needs like shelter are not met. Research also found that not all victims have an interest in

pursuing criminal charges against their traffickers; thus, often their civil legal needs are more important. Dr. 

Dank recommended research to identify the types of legal solutions (criminal or civil) that address victims’ need.

Legal Framework for Trafficking Prosecution and Remedies for Victims

Professor Kathleen Kim of Loyola Law School gave an overview of the legal framework around human 

trafficking and discussed prosecution of these crimes and the remedies available to victims.

Human trafficking is a contemporary form of “unfree labor”. In other words, workers – no matter how they come 

to the workplace – are not free to quit due to “force, fraud, or coercion”. The primary indicator of trafficking, 

therefore, is a coercive working environment, with recruitment and migration as secondary indicators.

With its doctrinal background in the Thirteenth Amendment’s abolition of slavery, the cornerstone of 

contemporary federal trafficking laws is Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) of 2000, which added new 

criminal penalties for trafficking, adopted prevention strategies to combat trafficking, and created a range of 

remedies for trafficking victims.45 Under the TVPA and its subsequent reauthorizing laws, trafficking victims may 

be eligible for T-visas, which can provide a path to citizenship, and are given a private right of action to sue their 

traffickers.

46 Professor Kim explained that victims find additional causes of action in the Racketeer Influenced 

and Corrupt Organizations Act, the Alien Tort Claims Act, and the Fair Labor Standards Act. On the state level, 

over 43 states have trafficking laws, and states such as California provide civil remedies. Professor Kim 

recommended that the states without civil remedies should be encouraged to provide them.

Civil Litigation for Trafficking Victims

Trafficking victims can pursue legal remedies and face a range of legal needs. Trafficking victims sue for 

damages and attorney’s fees against traffickers or anyone who knowingly financially benefited from their 

trafficking under 18 U.S. Code § 1595. According to data compiled by the Human Trafficking Pro Bono Legal 

Center (the Center), 147 federal civil trafficking cases were filed between 2003 and 2015.

47 Most of them relate 

to labor trafficking. The Center reported that among them, domestic servitude cases make up the majority and 

many of the defendants are corporations, such as labor recruiters. 

Ms. Martina Vandenberg, Founder and President of the Center presented this data and challenged the EWG to 

consider why there have been so few civil trafficking cases over these years, especially when the number of Tvisas issued in 2013 alone was 848. She explained that presumably each individual receiving a T-visa could 

bring a civil trafficking case.

Trafficking victims also have a variety of legal needs. For example, they often need vacatur of criminal 

convictions related to trafficking, which might be prostitution or loitering.48 Under federal law, youth under the 

 45 See Polaris Project, Current Federal Laws, available at https://polarisproject.org/current-federal-laws/. 

46 See Jill Laurie Goodman & Dorchen Leidholdt (eds.), Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, 

First Department & New York State Judicial Committee on Women in the Courts, Lawyer’s Manual on Human 

Trafficking: Pursuing Justice for Victims (2013), available at 

https://www.nycourts.gov/ip/womeninthecourts/pdfs/LMHT.pdf.

47 For more information on the case database available through The Human Trafficking Pro Bono Legal Center, see

http://www.htprobono.org/resources/. 

48 The Vacatur & Expungement Database created by The Human Trafficking Pro Bono Legal Center, Advocating 

Opportunity, CAASE, the Legal Aid Society of New York, the Urban Justice Center, the Women's Law Center of 

Maryland, and with pro bono assistance from Weil, Gotshal & Manges provides more information on vacatur laws, 

available at https://sites.google.com/a/htprobono.org/vsdatabase/. 
Human Trafficking & Civil Legal Aid 21

age 18 are automatically considered victims, but many states still prosecute children for prostitution. Other legal 

needs include immigration relief, family matters such as child custody and divorce, civil protection orders, name 

changes, enforcement of restitution orders, disability benefits, landlord-tenant issues, tax law issues, and 

defamation litigation. Ms. Vandenberg suggested examining the legal needs of trafficking victims as a potential 

area of further research. 

Finding Lawyers for Trafficking Victims

Vivian Huelgo Chief Counsel of the American Bar Association Task Force on Human Trafficking and 

Commission on Domestic & Sexual Violence, addressed the concerns of finding and connecting lawyers to 

trafficking victims.

Ms. Huelgo noted that although many lawyers are interested in becoming more involved in these cases, their

lack of expertise often inhibits their involvement. She explained that while comprehensive training is needed to 

support attorneys’ taking these cases, quality training is not widely available. She suggested that better data 

collection and research around the legal needs of trafficking victims can support efforts to advocate for 

increased funding to create quality training for lawyers. 

Additionally, Ms. Huelgo recommended exploring the use of privacy law to protect trafficking victims. She asked 

the EWG to consider the appropriate response to traffickers who post victims’ pictures online. She noted that 

vacatur statutes do not address such issues and that the legal community should consider how best to handle 

such problems where no formal legal response exists.

Discussion

Identifying legal needs of trafficking victims. The EWG discussed the difficulty of measuring the legal 

needs of trafficking victims because they rarely recognize their needs as legal. One expert noted that the 

underlying problem is that victims do not know what their rights are. For foreign born victims, their

consulates in the U.S. should give them “know your rights” cards upon entry, but it is not always done. 

One expert relayed that among the many cases she reviewed, only two clients had the card, which she 

credited with helping the clients escape. The expert urged the EWG to consider how to distribute “know 

your rights” information to victims in an effective way.

The EWG further discussed the need to carefully consider what kind of questions should be asked to accurately 

understand and respond to the victims’ needs. As one anecdotal example of an unexpected legal need, the 

North Carolina pro bono project found that almost all sex trafficking victims they served asked for a name 

change.

Challenges of civil litigation against traffickers. One expert noted that while attorneys’ fees may be 

recovered in civil suits brought under 18 U.S. Code §1595, the private bar has not mobilized to file those suits. 

She further noted that in her experience of litigating these suits pro bono, she had never recovered awarded 

attorneys’ fees. Another difficulty, noted by an expert, is that the victim might only be able to recover damages after 

going through a traumatizing discovery process. Many sex trafficking victims also may be deterred from 

pursuing a civil suit against their traffickers because of fear of retaliation.

Finding legal help. One expert stated that while many law firms are interested in trafficking cases for pro 

bono work, many are unwilling to handle certain types of matters such as family law, which is a major 

area of legal need for trafficking victims.

Addressing trafficking internationally. The EWG discussed how trafficking can be addressed 

internationally. One expert relayed her organization’s work raising awareness in communities where 

recruiters are active. She noted that non-legal community-based organizations can be highly effective in 

supporting relevant research initiatives. Another expert agreed and highlighted the importance of client-
22 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

centered lawyering that focuses on developing trust and cultural competence and overcoming language 

barriers.

Lastly, an expert noted the need for cooperation in two areas related to trans-national trafficking: (1) assisting 

victims when they are sued by perpetrators in their countries of origin; and (2) finding pro bono lawyers in those 

countries who can protect the victims’ families.

Special concerns working with victims. Another expert relayed the results of a study on LGBTQ trafficking 

victims. She trained and used service providers from an LGBTQ street organization to interview research 

subjects. The results were amazingly rich interviews and minimized risk of re-traumatization due to the 

sensitivity of the interviewers. 

Another expert noted that representing trafficking victims in civil suits calls for a tremendous amount of

emotional and physical resources, and that the cultural competency learning curve is very steep.

Recommendations

The breakout group on human trafficking and civil legal aid provided the following recommendations:

1. Fund research on connecting trafficking victims to legal services and related outcomes.

Research questions might include: How do trafficking victims find legal services? How does legal 

representation impact the outcomes of trafficking victims in related legal proceedings? Can a study 

analyze trafficking victim information in connection with T-visa applications to better understand how 

victims escape and whether or how they access legal assistance?

2. Fund research on victimization under criminal justice and immigration systems. Even after 

escaping, trafficking victims are sometimes further victimized by the criminal justice and immigration 

systems. The federal government should fund research on how to address multiple layers of 

victimization, particularly with non-citizen trafficking victims.

3. Fund research on trafficking victims’ structural vulnerabilities. In order to promote thoughtful 

prevention efforts, the federal government should fund research to study trafficking victims’ structural

vulnerabilities and what places them in those positions of vulnerability.

4. Provide more training to local law enforcement on human trafficking. The federal government 

should increase its support of local law enforcement training on trafficking so that they can better 

identify victims and respond accordingly.

5. Improve outreach to trafficking victims. The federal government should support efforts to improve 

outreach to trafficking victims through its law enforcement offices and nongovernmental partners such 

as faith- or community-based programs and legal service providers. 

6. Create a legal service referral pipeline and promote legal representation of victims. The federal 

government should create a referral pipeline connecting trafficking victims to legal service providers 

through victim-witness coordinators or other appropriate offices. Also, in federal criminal cases against 

traffickers, the federal prosecutors should promote appointment of Guardians Ad Litem for minor 

victims and representation of other victims by pro bono or legal aid attorneys to protect their rights.

7. Seek restitution orders in trafficking prosecution. To help trafficking victims access services and 

meet financial needs, the federal prosecutors should actively seek restitution orders in human 

trafficking prosecution cases in accordance with the mandatory restitution provisions.

49

 49 See The Human Trafficking Pro Bono Legal Center & Wilmer Hale, When “Mandatory” Does Not Mean Mandatory: 

Failure to Obtain Criminal Restitution in Federal Prosecution of Human Trafficking Cases in the United States (2014), 

available at http://www.htprobono.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/HTProBono-Trafficking-Restitution-Report.pdf. 
Consumer Protection & Civil Legal Aid 23

CONSUMER PROTECTION & CIVIL LEGAL AID

Each year, approximately 25 million adults are victims of consumer fraud. Victims include the poor, the elderly, 

and other vulnerable populations. In the worst cases, fraud can lead to homelessness and bankruptcy. The 

shame of being defrauded inhibits some victims from reporting scams and seeking help.

Fraud takes many different forms, and perpetrators use a variety of approaches. Although anyone may be 

susceptible to abusive practices, the most vulnerable among us are often the target of mortgage scams, Ponzi 

schemes, identity theft and predatory lending schemes. The Government Accountability Office reports that 

financial exploitation of the elderly has reached epidemic proportions. Older adults are targeted for their 

retirement savings and accumulated home equity, and because they also are more likely to experience 

cognitive decline, they can be more susceptible to financial scams.

Identity theft also threatens consumers. Using someone else’s personal information to fraudulently obtain goods 

or services was the number one complaint to the Federal Trade Commission’s Consumer Sentinel database, 

and the third most common credit card complaint made to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. There 

are 16.6 million new victims annually, with devastating consequences, including tax problems, lowered credit 

ratings, lawsuits, and garnishment. Children are also victims. A study of 40,000 children found that about 10% 

had someone else using their Social Security Number.

Legal aid helps address these problems by asserting consumer rights when businesses, lenders, or debt 

collectors have not followed the law. Legal aid also assists consumers by providing debt collection information, 

preventing unnecessary foreclosure or repossession, and correcting harm caused by identity theft or credit 

reporting errors.

50

This session called upon legal aid experts and researchers to discuss the delivery of civil legal aid in the 

consumer protection context and both the existing and needed research on its impact.

Legal Aid as the Canary in the Coal Mine

Ira Rheingold, Executive Director of the National Association of Consumer Advocates, explained that civil legal

aid has long played an important role protecting consumers, serving as “the canary in the coal mine.” The worst 

consumer abuses originate in low- and moderate- income communities, and legal aid organizations are wellsituated to inform public agencies on emerging issues. 

He noted that legal aid lawyers and consumer advocates have warned about predatory lending issues long 

before it became a full-blown crisis. The focus then shifted to foreclosure prevention work. Today, as foreclosure 

prevention funding decreases, debt work has become prevalent with the growth of the debt industry.

Mr. Rheingold asserted that today the greatest threat to the consumer protection system is debt collection.

Every day court dockets are filled with debt collection cases that end in default judgments. This reality affects 

people’s belief in the fairness of the justice system.

He encouraged the EWG to consider research related to civil legal aid and the following areas: payday lending; 

short-term loans; subprime lending; and credit reporting. 

Studying Civil Justice Decision-Making

Professor Sara Sternberg Greene of Duke University School of Law discussed a study she conducted on civil 

justice decision-making. She also described a new project she is embarking on in North Carolina (soon to be 

expanded to other states) to measure outcome differences based on different levels of legal service.

 50 See WH-LAIR’s case study, Civil Legal Aid Supports Federal Efforts to Help Protect Consumers (May 2015), 

available at www.justice.gov/lair/wh-lair-case-studies. 
24 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

In her civil justice decision-making study,51 Professor Greene conducted in-depth interviews with public housing 

residents on why they were or were not seeking legal help on issues such as abusive debt collection. The study 

found that people were confused about the difference between criminal and civil justice procedures and that 

there was a large group of people who did not seek civil legal help for that reason. For example, in some 

instances, debt collectors threatened delinquent borrowers with criminal prosecution and incarceration. As a 

result, those borrowers were fearful of seeking legal help, based in part on their negative perception of the

criminal justice system. This study demonstrates that the legal aid community should focus not only on those 

who seek help, but also those who do not seek help because of misperceptions about the civil justice system.

Professor Greene also discussed a new study that she and others are conducting in partnership with Legal

Aid of North Carolina.

52 Her team will survey a number of people who contact Legal Aid of North Carolina for 

help and track the outcomes based on the assistance they received: no help, limited help (such as advice only),

and representation or extensive help. The study will focus on issues relating to consumer debt problems,

expungement, housing, and health, and will assess the resolution of the problem, long term financial and health 

outcomes of clients, and clients’ satisfaction with the legal intervention.

Consumer Debt Research Projects and Use of Technology

Nan Heald, Executive Director of Pine Tree Legal Assistance (Pine Tree), a statewide legal aid program in 

Maine, discussed her office’s work in debt collection cases and the role of technology in responding to client 

needs.

In 2012, Pine Tree began the “lawyer of the day” project to assist defendants appearing in debt collection cases, 

many of which involved credit card debt. Of the roughly 550 cases where Pine Tree provided limited 

representation, all but two were dismissed for lack of proof regarding the validity of the debt at issue. But 

unfortunately, most cases that do not benefit from Pine Tree’s representation are resolved without due scrutiny 

by the court.

Ms. Heald explained that Pine Tree is starting a pilot study with Harvard Law School, the University of

Connecticut School of Law, and the University of Maine School of Law to look at the impact of consumer debt

and debt collection on an individual’s financial health, including the outcome of her debt collection case, her 

credit score, her personal stress level, and her knowledge of good debt management practices.

53 Those 

who participate in the study may get education materials, full representation, financial counseling, or some

combination of these. The “Financial Distress Research Project” will attempt to determine whether the strategies 

make a difference and which strategy makes the greatest difference.

Additionally, Ms. Heald discussed the effectiveness of Pine Tree’s website as a legal aid tool. In 1996, Pine Tree 

lost half of its staff due to budget cuts. In order to continue its service with limited staff, the organization launched 

its website and made educational materials available in plain language.

54 While the website is widely

accessed,

55 Ms. Heald noted that Pine Tree has limited knowledge of how effectively people use the

information to resolve their legal problems, which might be a useful research topic.

 51 Sara Sternberg Greene, Race, Class and Access to Civil Justice, 101 Iowa L. Rev. (forthcoming 2016).

52 Sara Sternberg Greene and Mathew McCubbins, Aiding the Access to Justice: An Empirical Study of Legal Aid to 

the Poor (forthcoming).

53 See Dalié Jiménez, D. James Greiner, Lois R Lupica, Rebecca L Sandefur, Improving the Lives of Individuals in 

Financial Distress Using a Randomized Control Trial: A Research and Clinical Approach, 20 Geo. J. Pov. L. & Pol’y 

449 (2013); see also D. James Greiner, Dalié Jiménez, Lois R. Lupica, Lay Deployment of Professional Legal 

Knowledge (Aug. 2, 2015), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2633032. 

54 See Pine Tree Legal Assistance’s website: www.ptla.org.

55 There are 1.3 million people in Maine, and Pine Tree recorded 1.1 million visitors to its website in 2014.
Consumer Protection & Civil Legal Aid 25

Studies on Debt Collection and Access to Credit Reports in Texas

Professor Mary Spector of Southern Methodist University, Dedman School of Law (SMU), discussed three 

studies on debt collection cases, consumer debt-related complaints, and accessibility of credit reports. 

The first study reviewed court records for 45,000 debt collection cases in 40 Texas counties, representing 

about 25 percent of the state, and made in-court observations in certain jurisdictions.56 The study showed that 

the debt collector won most of the time. However, when the consumer appeared, the collectors’ win rate 

dropped to 33 percent, and when the consumer appeared with a lawyer, the collectors’ win rate dropped to less 

than 5 percent. She explained that the findings demonstrated that having a lawyer made a real difference.

The second study looked at consumer complaints filed with the Texas Office of the Attorney General to 

understand the Texas consumers’ experiences.

57 The complaints showed continued harassment from debt 

collectors despite existing state and federal protections. Among the most troubling findings were the frequency

of complaints regarding threats and the use of criminal prosecution for failure to pay civil debts, particularly in 

connection with payday loans. 

Professor Spector explained that the last study was intended to measure credit reports’ error rate, but the study 

also demonstrated the difficulty of accessing credit reports for low- and moderate- income individuals.

58 SMU’s 

consumer advocacy clinic partnered with a Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA) program to help those who 

seek services for tax return preparation with accessing their credit reports and disputing any errors. Professor

Spector’s team found that some clients could not successfully obtain their credit reports from a website because

the screening questions were difficult. This difficulty was compounded if the client did not speak English.

Discussion

Legal aid’s role in informing policy makers about the debt crisis. The EWG discussed the role of 

legal aid in informing policymakers about debt collection practices. Beginning in 2008, the volume of debt 

collection cases increased dramatically. Legal aid can describe problems they see and be a critical portal

for other researchers and policymakers. Comparing consumer protection laws among the states could 

produce valuable research.

Influencing the behavior of courts and judges. The EWG discussed the judge’s role in consumer cases. 

Experts stated that some courts do not apply the rules when the defendants are not represented. One legal aid 

program director remarked that she hoped her office’s representation of clients in these cases might also serve 

to train judges to examine cases for proof of the validity of the debt instead of rubberstamping the creditors’ 

claims. One expert called for research on the impact of judicial education in handling these cases.

One expert referenced a courtroom study which found a correlation between the length of a proceeding and 

case outcome for the consumer defendant.59 The longer the proceeding, the more likely that it ended in an

outcome other than the plaintiff winning. The EWG agreed that there is a great need for judicial education and it 

also is a research opportunity.

Alternatives to attorney-based legal services. The EWG debated alternatives to traditional representation 

in consumer cases. Some experts advocated for tools or diagnostic approaches to better match a person’s 

 56 Mary Spector & Ann Baddour, Collection, Texas-Style: An Analysis of Consumer Collection Practices In and Out of 

the Courts, 67 Hastings L.J. __ (forthcoming).

57 Id.

58 Mary Spector, Understanding Consumer Reports: A Pilot Project Integrating Policy and Research into the Law 

School Clinic 3 (May 2015) (unpublished draft manuscript) (on file with author).

59 Mary Spector, Collection, Texas-Style: An Analysis of Consumer Collection Practices In and Out of the Courts, 67 

Hastings L.J. __ (forthcoming 2016).
26 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

need with the necessary legal intervention. This approach might involve consumer education, self-help 

centers, software to assist with filling out court forms, or assistance from trained non-lawyer professionals. 

An expert with an international perspective agreed that litigating every case with a lawyer is unwise 

because it might only add to the cost the debtor ultimately has to pay. According to this expert, Scotland 

has a similar problem. He thought supplying lawyers is not a systematic answer because it’s too 

expensive. But another expert thought that legal aid lawyers are not expensive; rather it is a matter of 

political will to fund them adequately.

Another expert noted that currently we do not have enough information on how well triage works and what types 

of intervention work best. Thus, more research is needed in this area. One researcher pointed out that court 

rules and proceedings need to be simplified before relying on nonlawyer help. Research on bankruptcy cases 

showed that many pro se petitioners are not successful because bankruptcy rules are difficult to understand, 

even for law students.

Others highlighted the important role of legal aid lawyers to advocate for changes in policies and court rules, 

such as working with courts to change pleading rules to dismiss “thinly pled” debt cases that do not establish the 

validity of the creditor’s claim. 

Relatedly, experts discussed the “commodification” of debt collection practice and the possible application of 

more routine practices on the defense side. For example, one expert wondered if it was possible to train 

defendants to follow a script that would prompt the right action from a judge and force the plaintiff-debt collector 

to produce evidence. Another idea that was discussed concerned whether technology could assist with debt 

defense, by linking court resources to simple phrases or questions such as “What is a petition?” or “What is a 

defense?” This idea was met with caution by one expert who noted that many online tools give bad advice.

Recommendations

The breakout group on consumer protection and civil legal aid provided the following recommendations:

1. Inventory existing federal agency research initiatives and databases on consumer protection.

The federal government, through WH-LAIR, should inventory and organize existing research initiatives

and databases relevant to consumer protection advocacy and expand access to this information.

2. Support better data collection and fund research on the high default rate in consumer cases. 

The federal government should support better data collection on consumer cases with the high default 

rate, such as the number of debt collection cases and the number of defaults. For example, the federal 

government should support creating additional detail and uniform coding to the State Court Guide to 

Statistical Reporting, which is a joint project of the Conference of State Court Administrators and the 

National Center for State Courts. The federal government should also fund research to address why

people default in such high rates in consumer matters and why they do not pursue legal remedies.

3. Fund research on the economic benefit of civil legal aid in foreclosure cases. Research 

questions might include: What are the economic benefits of legal aid in foreclosure cases? More 

specifically, what is the economic benefit to avoiding foreclosure and keeping people in their homes? 

How many homes were saved? What was the economic impact on those communities because they 

had more stability? 

4. Limit mandatory arbitration provisions and fund related research. The mandatory, pre-dispute 

arbitration provisions limit consumers’ ability to meaningfully dispute their claims and have a negative 

impact on civil justice. The federal government should address the harmful impact of the mandatory 

arbitration provisions and fund research on monetary losses related to arbitration requirements.
Consumer Protection & Civil Legal Aid 27

5. Fund research on the credit report dispute process. This research need recognizes the critical 

importance of credit reports to consumers and the frequency of credit reporting errors. How effective is

the current process to dispute credit report errors?

6. Direct federal settlement proceeds towards consumer protection advocacy. The federal agencies 

should direct an appropriate portion of settlement proceeds from consumer protection-related 

enforcement actions to fund legal aid programs that assist consumers and enforce consumer protection 

laws. In addition, the federal government should create more targeted funding, such as grants, for 

consumer protection advocacy.

7. Enhance the capacity of state courts to address debt collection issues. The federal government 

should help enhance the capacity of state courts to address debt collection issues through judicial 

education and technical assistance. The federal government should also study: the impact on the rule 

of law when judges rubberstamp debt collection cases, and how judicial education impacts outcomes.

8. Strengthen ties between the federal military community and civil legal aid providers. The federal 

government should strengthen ties between the federal military community and civil legal aid providers 

in order to strengthen protection and enforcement activities for service members and veterans.

9. Integrate civil legal aid expertise into federal agencies’ work. The federal government should use 

WH-LAIR to better integrate legal aid expertise into federal agencies’ anti-poverty programs through 

establishing regular and effective channels of communication.

Elder Abuse & Civil Legal Aid 29

ELDER ABUSE & CIVIL LEGAL AID

A hidden epidemic in America threatens far too many of the nation’s seniors: elder abuse affects 

approximately 10% of people age 60 and older, and close to 50% of people with dementia. Victimized by 

strangers and those on whom they depend, elder abuse leads to premature deaths, and increased 

hospitalizations; depletes the resources of individuals, families, businesses, and public programs such as 

Medicare and Medicaid; and places burdens on our health care, financial, and judicial systems. Without 

proper training, professionals working with older Americans too often miss signs of elder abuse. Despite 

the dire consequences, some studies suggest that as few as 1 in 23 cases is reported to authorities, and 

even fewer are ever prosecuted. Estimates of the direct medical costs associated with violent injuries to 

older adults add over $5.3 billion to the nation’s annual health expenditures.

Legal aid combats this epidemic by preventing mortgage foreclosures due to elder abuse, protecting 

physical safety by doing a holistic intake of elders, and providing legal help to break an abuser’s control 

over the victim with protective orders and guardianship proceedings. Legal aid also secures government 

benefits such as Medicaid and veterans’ benefits and counsels older adults about avoiding financial 

scams and exploitation.

60

This session called upon legal aid experts and researchers to discuss the delivery of civil legal aid for 

elder abuse victims and both the existing and needed research on its impact.

Elder Abuse and Rural Communities

Alison Paul, Executive Director of Montana Legal Services Association (MLSA), described her office’s 

efforts to provide civil legal aid services to her community, which includes tribal members. She explained 

that while MLSA does not have a targeted program for elder abuse, they address it through all of their 

activities. Such activities include protecting elders from financial exploitation (e.g., repairing credit scores) 

and a domestic violence program that serves elders. Of the 13 attorneys who serve the entire state, only 

five are available to handle domestic violence cases, which are not enough to meet the demand for their 

services.

She also described ongoing efforts to evaluate their services funded through a Vision 21 Victim Legal 

Assistance Network grant through the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office for Victims of Crime. Ms. Paul 

hopes that the study will help answer questions such as how to identify the hidden population of elder 

abuse clients, how MLSA can reach them, how to use limited staff for best results, and what is the best 

method to deliver services with limited resources.

Research on Elder Abuse and Legal Interventions

Prof. Victoria Rizzo of Binghamton University–State University of New York described research she 

conducted in New York City in partnership with the Jewish Association Serving the Aging (JASA). She 

noted that it is the first study of elder abuse prevention that uses multivariate analysis. She further

explained that there are challenges in performing this research, such as the ethical concerns of 

withholding versus providing treatment, consent, mandatory reporting requirements, resource access, 

finding the population, and interagency collaboration. 

JASA’s program, known as JASA LEAP, is designed to alleviate cases of elder abuse and neglect in all 

forms by integrating social workers and attorneys, who are employed by the same agency.61 In this 

 60 See WH-LAIR’s case study, Civil Legal Aid Supports Federal Efforts to Help Prevent Elder Abuse (April 2015), 

available at www.justice.gov/lair/wh-lair-case-studies. 

61 See Mara Schecter and Donna Dougherty, Combating Elder Abuse Through a Lawyer/Social Worker Collaborative 

Team Approach: JASA Legal/Social Work Elder Abuse Prevention Program (LEAP), Case Management Journals 

(2009). 
30 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

model, should a client choose to abandon a legal claim of elder abuse with a lawyer, the social worker 

can continue to implement a safety plan uninterrupted. And should the client later choose to reinstate the 

legal case, the lawyer can simply pick up where she left off.

While some research on elder abuse exists, Prof. Rizzo cautioned that it has limitations. She has 

attempted to address those limitations in her current research by designing the data collection forms to be 

reliable and consistent across cases. She also had two individuals to verify the information being 

recorded from case records and used multivariate analysis to examine the outcomes of JASA-LEAP.

Prof. Rizzo’s evaluation of JASA-LEAP included three of New York City’s boroughs, a total of 250 cases, 

with three different analyses (retention of clients, mistreatment status at case closure, and factors that 

predict abuse) and found:62

The retention rate for clients in the JASA-LEAP program, which includes the services of lawyers 

and social workers, was 71.7 percent, and the risk of further abuse to clients was reduced by 68.2 

percent;

Covariates (e.g., being female, living with the perpetrator, and being married to the perpetrator 

often predict unfavorable mistreatment status outcomes at JASA-LEAP case closure); and

Exposure to multidisciplinary service (law and social work) related to favorable outcomes at 

discharge.

Future elder mistreatment intervention research should find ways to develop prospective, quasiexperimental and experimental designs. Also, Professor Rizzo stated that an absence of psychometrically 

sound outcome measures denoting mistreatment status at case closure limits the field to subjective 

measurement methods, and development of a valid mistreatment status at case closure outcome 

instrument for use in social service intervention settings is a priority for future research.

Medical-Legal Partnership as a Model for the Delivery of Civil Legal Aid

Professor James Teufel of Mercyhurst University described the collaboration between civil legal aid and 

health services through Medical-Legal Partnerships (MLP) and his research on the effectiveness of this 

legal service delivery model.

He first provided an overview of the health care system in the United States and explained that while the 

United States spends significantly more money on health care for older adults than other developed 

countries, better health outcomes do not follow.63 Despite spending more on health care than any other 

country over the last 40 years, the United States’ relative rank in life expectancies has dropped,

64 calling 

into question whether this spending on health care is effective.

With that backdrop, Professor Teufel discussed the access to justice gaps in the United States and 

asserted that civil legal aid can impact the social determinants of health. He explained that by linking legal 

aid attorneys and medicine, hospitals and other healthcare providers can better address community 

health aims. Moreover, civil legal aid attorneys can help non-profit hospitals meet their community benefit 

requirements while being a sound financial and social investment.

 62 Victoria Marie Rizzo, David Burnes and Amy Chalfy, A Systematic Evaluation of a Multidisciplinary Social Work–

Lawyer Elder Mistreatment Intervention Model, Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect (2013), available at 

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08946566.2013.792104.

63 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD Health Statistics 2014: How does the United 

States compare? (2014), available at http://www.oecd.org/unitedstates/Briefing-Note-UNITED-STATES-2014.pdf.

64 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD Health Statistics (data covering 1960-2013), 

available at http://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?DataSetCode=HEALTH_STAT. 
Elder Abuse & Civil Legal Aid 31

He described an MLP program that started in 2003 in the most economically impoverished region in 

Illinois, which not only sustained itself, but has since scaled up. Building off of a relatively small 

investment, the program initially handled 46 cases, of which 16 were older adults. Ten years later, they 

were serving 750 cases, of which 500 were older adults. Professor Teufel explained that a key to this

sustainability and growth was demonstrating the MLP’s return on investment and that the MLP fit into the 

health care provider’s mission. Professor Teufel’s research supported that MLPs achieved a monetary 

financial return on investment that exceeded 200% and a broader social return on investment of more 

than 3000%.

65 He strongly recommended that the business case model for civil legal aid be developed to 

further support expansion of MLPs.

Tribal Communities and Medical-Legal Partnership

Matt VanWormer, Director of the Four Corners Legal Care of DNA–People’s Legal Services, Inc. (DNA), 

described his office’s efforts to set up and grow the MLP model in Indian country.66 His program primarily 

serves clients from the Navajo Nation, where poverty rates are three times higher than in the U.S. general 

population and the unemployment rate is also very high due to lack of economic opportunity.

67

Unfortunately, this economic situation results in exploitation and abuse of grandparents and elders in the 

community who may have some revenue through public benefits – albeit usually at low, fixed rates.

68

Powers of attorney may be misused to siphon income from grandparents, often resulting in negative

health effects.

Mr. VanWormer explained that with low police presence, lack of criminal law enforcement, and limited 

tribal sentencing authority, tribes are often reliant on federal authority to intervene. Overcrowded and 

substandard housing also drives up the risk of abuse. The rates of chronic disease are high, so medical 

complications exacerbate the problem. The prevalence of close-knit multigenerational families means 

elders are reluctant to report abuse. Moreover, access to services is limited due to elders’ limited mobility 

and cognition, their dependence on others, and limited number of nurses.

This reality led DNA to break out of the traditional model of providing legal services only to people who 

seek it and launch an MLP to incorporate elder abuse advocacy. The MLP has resulted in the 

development of a screening tool and a referral form in health centers and training for health care 

providers on the civil legal needs of their patients.

He reported that, although the data set is still small, the outcomes have been positive. According to Mr. 

VanWormer, in one year, health care providers made 32 direct referrals to legal aid lawyers about 

suspected elder abuse that resulted in actual cases. DNA also recovered $1.2 million in revenue for 

 65 See James A. Teufel, Danilea Werner, Diane Goffinet, et al., Rural Medical-Legal Partnership and Advocacy: A 

Three-Year Follow-up Study, Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved 23 (2012): 705–714; Teufel, J., 

Goffinet, D., Land, D. & Thorne, W., Rural health systems and legal care: Opportunities for initiating and maintaining 

legal care after the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Journal of Legal Medicine, 35, 81-111 (2014); 

Goffinet, D., Teufel, J., Land, D., Weaver, A. & Thorne, W., Medical-Legal Partnerships in the age of the Affordable 

Care Act, Clearinghouse Review: Journal of Poverty Law and Policy, 47, 265-266 (2013); Teufel, J., Weaver, A., 

Goffinet, D., Dudley, D. & Loops, K., Estimating the social return on investment of medical-legal partnership, 

Presentation at the National Medical-Legal Partnership Summit, McLean, VA (April 9, 2015). 

66 See DNA-People’s Legal Services, Inc.’s website: http://www.dnalegalservices.org/. For more information about 

the Four Corners Legal Care program, see http://medical-legalpartnership.org/partners/program-health-people/. 

67 Using 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, the U.S. Census reports the poverty rate for 

Navajo Nation families at 37.8 percent, compared to 11.5 percent for the U.S. population as a whole. See

http://factfinder.census.gov. 

68 See National Indian Council on Aging, A Review of the Literature Elder Abuse in Indian Country Research, Policy, 

and Practice (2004), available at http://nicoa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/elder_abuse_litreview.pdf.
32 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

families – through one-time and new monthly benefits for clients and successful enrollment in health 

insurance over three years. In addition, DNA is working to eliminate conditions that can create elder 

abuse and influence the community to prevent its recurrence.

Mr. VanWormer recommended that future research should concentrate on obtaining information on 

effective outreach to vulnerable elders and how prevention of elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation

makes a return on investment.

Discussion

Civil legal aid’s savings on health costs. The EWG discussed both the existing and needed research 

to determine whether and to what degree investing in civil legal aid may decrease health costs (including 

those to federal health care programs). There might be opportunities to gather data and research from 

economic development organizations in communities that might be able to track whether increasing 

clients’ successful enrollment in Social Security brings money to those communities. Another expert 

discussed that before we can move on to cost effectiveness studies, we need to invest and promote a 

good screening tool for elder abuse.

Supply and demand of civil legal aid. The experts discussed whether paralegals and non-lawyers could 

help satisfy the growing demand and what research would be needed to identify the best use of these 

professionals. The experts discussed the usefulness of employing paralegals when a triage system is 

employed – both to increase supply and decrease costs. Also discussed was the use of community 

leaders who can encourage clients to access civil legal aid, which the experts indicated is particularly 

helpful in rural and tribal communities. The experts discussed the impact of increasing the demand for

scarce civil legal aid by better identifying elder abuse victims. The EWG discussed the need for research 

to develop the best screening method to identify the most vulnerable so that the demand can be sorted

accordingly. 

Location of services. The EWG discussed the importance of co-location of services. Mobile units and 

other opportunities to bring civil legal aid to the clients are necessary. Therefore supporting these colocation programs like MLP and studying their effectiveness is key.

Federal benefits abuse. The EWG discussed federal law enforcement as a tool to prevent or end elder 

abuse given that some elder abuse manifests in federal benefits abuse, such as stealing Social Security 

income. 

Indicators on elder abuse. The experts discussed possible elder abuse indicators for the Global Goal 

indicator process. One preliminary indicator to be considered is the number of elder abuse victims, which 

is routinely underreported. One expert suggested metrics focusing on the number of victims, how they are 

differentiated, whether the abuse is physical, sexual, emotional, or financial. Another expert cautioned 

that indicators should be chosen in part based on their feasibility.
Elder Abuse & Civil Legal Aid 33

Recommendations

The breakout group on elder abuse and civil legal aid provided the following recommendations:

1. Collect better data. Better data will lead to the right research questions. For example, the federal 

government could explore adding elder abuse screening measures to appropriate agency goals 

under the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA). 

2. Fund research on the return on investment for health-related legal aid and how civil legal 

aid impacts the social determinants of health. The research can identify the direct impact of 

civil legal aid intervention on Medicare and specific health issues, such as diabetes.69 Additional 

research questions could include: How do you effectively reach the targeted population? What is 

the most effective way to use technology to reach tribal communities and rural communities?

3. Fund or author studies on the processes and outcomes of Medical-Legal Partnership.

Research questions might include: What makes MLPs effective? Can you show your funder that 

civil legal aid is impacting your bottom line?

4. Study types of elder abuse and impact of civil legal aid. Research questions might include: 

For different types of elder abuse, do the interventions by civil legal aid work the same? If not, 

how should the interventions be different?

5. Designate specific legal aid activities as a reimbursable medical expense. The WH-LAIR 

should work with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to develop a pathway to shift 

the cost of certain health-related civil legal aid services to be reimbursable under Medicaid and 

Medicare. This builds on the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Health Resources 

and Services Administration’s recognition of civil legal aid as an allowable expense for community 

health centers.70

6. Increase funding for civil legal aid to serve victims of elder abuse. Agencies and 

stakeholders should support diversification of funders through public-private partnerships, 

including private foundations. The U.S. government should fund the Elder Justice Act so that it 

can be as effective in the provision of legal services as the Violence Against Women Act.

7. Assist and develop outreach capacity, especially for rural and tribal communities that are 

often remote. By developing outreach capacity for these communities, elder abuse victims who 

are isolated would be better served. This includes the use of technology and multidisciplinary 

practices.

8. Convene healthcare administrators to educate them on the importance and value of civil 

legal aid. Federal agencies could convene administrators to encourage their support of civil legal 

aid and models like MLP across federal, state, and tribal entities.

 69 There are underutilized discrete Center for Medicaid Services older adult benefits that might be appropriate to 

explore such as older adult diabetes education/training benefits. See Diabetes National Coordinating Center (2013), 

Diabetes Self-Management Education/Training Reimbursement Toolkit; Health Indicators Warehouse (2014)

available at http://qioprogram.org/edc, Diabetes management benefit use: diabetic older adults, available at 

http://www.healthindicators.gov/Indicators/Diabetes-management-benefit-use-diabetic-older-adultspercent_1263/Profile/ClassicData.

70 National Center for Medical Legal Partnership, HRSA recognizes civil legal aid as “enabling service” for health 

centers (2014), available at http://medical-legalpartnership.org/enabling-services/.
34 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

9. Support greater education of medical professionals about what civil legal aid can do. It is 

important to raise awareness in the medical field about what lawyers can do that cannot be done 

by other service professionals. Relatedly, civil legal aid lawyers should be trained to articulate the 

value of their work to medical professionals and their patients.

10. Innovate electronic health records to flag for elder abuse. Such innovations could allow for 

systematic flagging in electronic health records to identify victims of elder abuse. Relatedly, 

screening and assessment through the electronic records system should be developed.
Domestic Violence & Civil Legal Aid 35

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE & CIVIL LEGAL AID

Nearly one in four American women have experienced domestic violence. On average, more than three women 

are murdered by their intimate partners in the United States every day. More than 15 million children in the 

United States live in families where partner violence has occurred, and seven million children live in families 

where severe partner violence has occurred. Children who have been exposed to violence are more likely to 

require hospitalization or mental health services, and are more likely to be involved in the child welfare and 

juvenile justice systems. The health-related costs of intimate partner violence exceed $5.8 billion each year, 

nearly $4.1 billion of which is for direct medical and mental health care services. Victims of intimate partner 

violence also lose a total of nearly 8 million days of paid work each year—the equivalent of more than 32,000 

full-time jobs—and nearly 5.6 million days of household productivity as a result of the violence. These acts of 

violence compromise public safety, restrict the U.S. economy, and destroy American lives.

Legal aid prevents future violence by obtaining, renewing and enforcing protective orders in court, providing 

resources to law enforcement and making perpetrators accountable through legal remedies, including 

incarceration. Legal aid also helps domestic violence victims by securing or modifying child custody orders so 

that a mother and her children can legally and safely leave the batterer, and helps resolve identify theft and 

other forms of financial exploitation perpetrated by abusers.

71

This session called upon legal aid experts and researchers to discuss the delivery of civil legal aid for domestic 

violence victims and both the existing and needed research on its impact.

Alaska as a Case Study for Native and Rural Communities

Nikole Nelson, Executive Director of Alaska Legal Services Corporation (ALSC), described the unique 

circumstances facing the Alaskan population, especially as it relates to its Alaska Native and rural 

communities.72 ALSC is a Legal Services Corporation-funded civil legal aid program that provides 

services in 11 offices across the state. But only four of these offices are on the road system, meaning that 

the rest are only accessible by plane, boat, or snow machine. This results in severe access limitations to 

essential services, including civil legal aid.

She reported that Alaska has one of the highest rates of domestic violence and sexual assault in the 

nation.73 Alaska Native women are overrepresented in domestic violence cases, which often results in 

negative contacts with the state Child Welfare Agency. Moreover, in child welfare proceedings, most of 

the Alaska Native children who are removed from their families are placed outside of their communities

and with non-tribal members. Ms. Nelson noted that the bipartisan, Congressionally-formed Indian Law 

and Order Commission found that criminal safety problems in Alaska are among the worst of all tribal 

communities and that rural Alaska Natives do not have access to the same level or quality of services as 

other U.S. residents.

74

 71 See WH-LAIR’s case study, Civil Legal Aid Supports Federal Efforts to Help Prevent Domestic Violence (April 

2014), available at www.justice.gov/lair/wh-lair-case-studies. 

72 See Alaska Legal Services Corporation’s website: http://www.alsc-law.org. 

73 See Attorney General’s Advisory Committee on American Indian/Alaska Native Children Exposed to Violence, 

Ending Violence So Children Can Thrive (2014), available at 

http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/defendingchildhood/pages/attachments/2015/03/23/ending_violence_so_chil

dren_can_thrive.pdf.

74 See Indian Law and Order Commission Report to the President & Congress of the United States, A Roadmap for 

Making Native America Safer: Chapter Two Reforming Justice for Alaska Natives: The Time is Now (2013), available 

at http://www.aisc.ucla.edu/iloc/report/files/Chapter_2_Alaska.pdf.
36 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

With only 30 attorneys, Ms. Nelson explained ALSC’s success hinges on its partnership with other social 

service providers. This includes collaboration with tribes to build tribal courts’ capacity and develop rules 

to govern their relationship with state courts. Additionally, legal advocates partner with tribal social 

services providers to protect native communities from having their children inappropriately removed by 

the state child welfare agency. Ms. Nelson recommended research to study the impact and effectiveness 

of legal services on these uniquely situated Alaskan communities.

Texas RioGrande Legal Aid and the Bi-national Project on Family Violence

Pamela Brown, the Director of Texas RioGrande Legal Aid (TRLA) Bi-national Project on Family Violence, 

provided an overview of TRLA. She explained it is the third largest legal aid provider in the country with a 

service area covering roughly one-third of the state, primarily along the Texas-Mexico border. TRLA’s 

service population is 70 to 90 percent Hispanic. Ms. Brown explained that while they receive many 

different grants that require voluminous reporting, it is unclear whether the reporting provides helpful data

that can evidence the program’s efficacy.

In 1999, TRLA began partnering with battered women shelters in 1999, thanks to a grant for Legal 

Assistance for Victims from U.S. Department of Justice’s Office on Violence Against Women. The shelters 

serve as an entry point for clients, where legal intake and screening can be performed. Once the shelter 

service providers identify the legal needs of these clients, TRLA can provide the needed legal services. 

Ms. Brown noted that research has demonstrated that civil legal aid is a key tool to help domestic 

violence victims escape their violent situation.75

Ms. Brown also described TRLA’s Bi-national Project on Family Violence, which she directs.76 This 

program grew out of the legal needs of TRLA’s client population along the United States-Mexico border. 

When their child custody disputes cross the border, they trigger obligations under the Hague Convention 

on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction to which the United States and Mexico are state 

parties. TRLA’s novel use of an international treaty to address their clients’ custody disputes is gaining 

popularity and continues to be better understood across the country.77 Ms. Brown noted that this segment 

of TRLA’s clients often identify their problems in terms of human rights, rather than a technical civil legal 

need such as obtaining a civil legal protection order.78 She recommended research on the impact of 

framing civil legal needs in human rights terms.

Randomized Study on Triage and Civil Protection Orders

Professor Jim Greiner from Harvard Law School described his ongoing research into civil protection 

orders (CPOs) for domestic violence victims and the type of legal representation needed to obtain them.

He explained that the goal of the research was to inform choices made in a triage environment: which 

treatment (level of service) should be applied to which clients with the goal of maximizing the number of 

CPOs obtained by the client population. 

 75 See, e.g., May Farmer and Jill Tiefenthaler, Explaining the Recent Decline in Domestic Violence, 21 Contemporary 

Economic Policy 158-172 (April 2003). 

76 See Texas RioGrande Legal Aid Bi-national Project on Family Violence website: http://www.trla.org/practicearea/bi-national-project-on-family-violence. 

77 Jeffrey Edleson and Taryn Lindhorst, Multiple perspectives on battered mothers and their children fleeing to the 

United States for safety: A study of Hague Convention cases, 25 (2010) available at 

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/232624.pdf; Simon Hattenstone, The Guardian, “My partner abducted my 

child: the parents left behind” (September 21, 2013), available at 

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/sep/21/partner-abducted-child-parents-left-behind. 

78 See Human Rights Local Lawyering Project at https://www.wcl.american.edu/humright/center/locallawyering.cfm. 
Domestic Violence & Civil Legal Aid 37

The study will take place in northeast Ohio at Community Legal Aid Services, where the researchers will 

track the CPO petitioners’ legal representation status in eight counties. The legal aid program covering 

these eight counties offers three levels of service: (1) a self-help packet only; (2) an explanatory phone 

call plus a self-help packet; and (3) full representation. About a third of the client population receives each 

level of service, but all clients are eligible for full representation. The findings will reveal whether triage 

decisions made by the legal aid provider avoid a potential “waste” of resources that would occur if, for 

example, CPO petitioners who would obtain CPOs with a self-help packet alone are instead given full 

representation. It will also reveal how much a difference full representation makes in CPO success rate, 

as opposed to lesser levels of service. Professor Greiner responded that on this latter subject, a 

preliminary look at some data revealed that in three counties, CPO petitioners who proceeded pro se

were met with a higher success rate than those with lawyers. But Professor Greiner cautioned that it 

would be inaccurate to conclude from this study that a petitioner should not seek a lawyer because 

assignment of petitioner to a lawyer was not random. These findings do suggest, however, that one 

cannot learn much of anything from comparing success rates in cases with lawyers to success rates in 

cases without lawyers, in any legal arena, unless the lawyers were randomly assigned.

Professor Greiner explained that research in other fields suggests that people are not good at making 

triage decisions (e.g., emergency room nurses and Navy Corpsman). For this reason, his research will 

attempt to find out if legal services providers are good at triage by constructing a double randomization 

tree – some clients in a triage system determined by a person and others by a totally random decision.

The EWG discussed the design of Professor Greiner’s study, specifically the use of a randomized study 

and whether that might harm those clients who are in the control group and not provided with legal 

services. Professor Greiner countered that the study uses an existing triage methodology that should 

predict who will do better with or without a lawyer. In addition, randomization is an acceptable allocation 

device when there are not enough lawyers to service all eligible petitioners.

Employment Law and Domestic Violence

Professor Robin Runge from The George Washington University explained that when she began her 

academic career, the notion that domestic violence victims could benefit from civil legal services was new. 

But studies since that time have demonstrated that accessing civil legal services improves victims’ 

outcomes and their economic status.79

Professor Runge noted that as an initial matter, the EWG should query how the law can support victims of 

domestic violence. One area of focus she suggested was employment law.80 If a domestic violence victim 

loses a job because of the effects of fear from her domestic violence situation, she may be eligible for 

unemployment benefits. Legal aid lawyers can also ensure that clients are protected from discrimination 

when they disclose domestic violence to their employer. Moreover, clients often need to access services 

during working hours and may need to take leave, which may not always be available. Therefore, she 

recommended additional research into the ways in which employment law might provide increased 

protections to domestic violence victims.

Discussion

Study design. An expert discussed a study design that measures outcomes and noted that it is difficult to 

do because clients have different preferences on the outcome in a given case. He noted that client 

 79 See Robin Runge, The Evolution of a National Response to Violence Against Women, 24 Hastings Women's L.J. 

429 (2013). 

80 See Robin Runge, The Legal Response to the Employment Needs of Domestic Violence Victims, 37-SUM Hum. 

Rts. 13 (2010). 
38 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

satisfaction surveys are also difficult for that reason and suggested that peer-reviewed studies would be a 

better alternative. By asking professionals to assess the work of other professionals, it might be possible 

to determine if a lawyer acted reasonably. Another expert explained that a human rights lens might help 

resolve some of these issues. By asking whether a client’s human rights were protected, one can avoid 

the subjective nature of client satisfaction.

Collaboration between researcher and provider. The EWG discussed the need to educate legal 

service providers on the importance of participating in research studies. The panelists agreed that a 

multidisciplinary approach is necessary. This might include embedding a researcher in a civil legal aid 

office to study wraparound services. It was noted that at the federal level, there has been increased 

pressure to fund research projects that include a team of researchers and practitioners.

Recommendations

The breakout group on domestic violence and civil legal aid provided the following recommendations:

1. Fund research on and support the use of alternative process. The federal government 

should fund research on the impact of removing family issues from the courts and developing 

alternative processes. Additionally, the federal government should explore ways to support 

alternative processes in family law matters that ensure victim safety and prevent re-victimization. 

This might be especially true for Native American families, where culturally-sensitive processes 

can create better outcomes for families.

2. Study co-location of services and the use of non-legal entities. Similar to efforts to study 

Medical-Legal Partnerships, federal agencies should fund research on the impact of co-locating 

services for victims of domestic violence and whether such models reduce rates of revictimization. Also, studying the use of non-legal entities (e.g., client navigators, social workers) to 

work with legal aid attorneys, and identifying non-legal solutions could be a way to address the 

legal aid resource issue.

3. Fund or perform research on legal assistance help-seeking patterns over time. Research 

questions might include: What are the help-seeking patterns of domestic violence victims as it 

relates to their legal needs? Which legal interventions provided at the early stages decrease the 

incidence of domestic violence? 

4. Adjust existing interventions and study the impact. The federal government should add civil 

legal aid to existing protocols, such as lethality assessment protocols, and study the impact of its

inclusion. Does the inclusion of civil legal aid in these protocols decrease the incidence of 

domestic violence?

5. Develop outcome measures for the impact of civil legal aid on domestic violence victims.

Desirable outcomes could include safety, economic independence, and family stability. The 

research should also provide guidance on how to measure these outcomes.

6. Perform research and evaluation of existing programs. The federal government should 

support partnerships between researchers and civil legal aid programs to develop needed 

research infrastructure. These researchers should assess the effectiveness of civil legal aid by 

looking at both legal and non-legal outcomes of their clients.

7. Fund or perform analysis of existing domestic violence policies. What is the impact of 

policies or recommendations by bodies such as the American Bar Association in the appropriate 

and efficient handling of domestic violence cases?
Domestic Violence & Civil Legal Aid 39

8. Support integration of civil legal aid across disciplines and government entities and 

institutionalize civil legal aid. Federal agencies should identify programs that can be more 

helpful to domestic violence victims through enhanced integration of civil legal aid.

9. Create tools for local organizations to develop a legal assistance network. The federal 

government should support the creation of networks or consortiums of civil legal aid providers, 

which can result in better outcomes for clients.

10. Educate first responders on civil legal needs of victims and develop screening tools. The 

federal government should educate the first points of contact for domestic violence victims, such 

as law enforcement, ER staff, and shelters, on the civil legal needs of this population, and 

develop screening tools that can help identify the legal needs and the points at which a legal 

intervention would be most impactful.

Conclusion: The Way Forward 41

CONCLUSION: THE WAY FORWARD

At the end of the two-day workshop, the Expert Working Group concluded that the impact of civil legal aid 

as a tool to empower the lives of low-income people is significantly understudied and that the federal 

government can and should help close that research gap. The participants were especially eager to learn 

about the research priorities of the conveners and the rest of the White House Legal Aid Interagency 

Roundtable.

Since the workshop, President Obama issued a Presidential Memorandum formally establishing the 

White House Legal Aid Interagency Roundtable and charged it to “advance relevant evidence-based 

research, data collection, and analysis of civil legal aid and indigent defense, and promulgate best 

practices.”81 This report is a first step in fulfilling this mandate.

While the experts provided over 50 specific recommendations to NIJ, ATJ, and NSF, including

suggestions for a potential research agenda, key themes emerged over the course of the workshop:

1. Increase support for civil legal aid through increased federal funding and programs that 

partner with civil legal aid;

2. Fund research on the delivery of civil legal aid to grow the evidence base and identify what 

works;

3. Expand private-public collaborations around civil legal aid; 

4. Improve data collection on the issues impacting civil legal aid and make available 

information on relevant federal databases and studies;

5. Create greater transparency regarding the federal government’s research capacity around 

civil legal aid; and 

6. Develop access to justice indicators to measure the United States’ implementation of 

Global Goal 16 of the UN’s 2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development with civil society 

input.

Although the experts directed their recommendations primarily at the federal government, they made it 

clear that support, data collection, and research should be a collaboration among the federal government, 

private foundations, academics, and practitioners. 

They also noted that their recommendations related to data collection and research were especially 

important in light of the UN’s 2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development and its call for international, 

regional, and national indicators on access to justice and urged greater inclusion of civil society into that 

process. Importantly, in addition to being charged with advancing this research activity, the White House 

Legal Aid Interagency Roundtable is also charged with assisting the United States with implementing 

Global Goal 16 of the UN Agenda.82 This workshop started the process of identifying and developing 

these indicators at home.

 81 See Presidential Memorandum – Establishment of the White House Legal Aid Interagency Roundtable (WH-LAIR), 

Section 4(v), reproduced at Appendix C.

82 Id. at Section 4(iv).

Appendix A: Agenda 43

APPENDIX A: AGENDA

WEDNESDAY, MAY 20, 2015

7:30 – 8:30 Registration – Great Hall 

8:30 – 9:00 Welcome 

 Assistant Attorney General Karol Mason, Office of Justice Programs

 Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch

 Director Lisa Foster, Office for Access to Justice

9:00 – 10:30 Panel 1: Overview - Measuring Access to Justice in the Civil Context

The panel will discuss the ongoing domestic and international efforts to measure access to justice 

in the civil context, including the development of new methodologies and indices. A discussion of 

the ongoing United Nations activity to establish the post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals 

and likely inclusion of access to justice in that framework will be included. All participants will 

have an opportunity to discuss their goals for the workshop and the questions they would like to 

explore over the course of the two days. 

 Moderator: Jon Gould, Co-Director, Law and Social Sciences Program, National Science 

Foundation

 Panelists: 

 Rebecca Sandefur, Faculty Fellow & Associate Professor of Sociology and Law, 

American Bar Foundation and University of Illinois

 Suzie Forell, Principal Researcher, Law & Justice Foundation of New South, Wales –

Australia

 Alan Paterson, Chair, International Legal Aid Group and Professor of Law and Director of 

the Centre for Professional Legal Studies, Strathclyde University Law School, Scotland 

 David Udell, Executive Director, National Center for Access to Justice

 Jennifer Park, Senior Statistician, U.S. Office of Management & Budget

10:30 – 10:45 Break

10:45 – 12:30 Panel 2: Civil Legal Aid as a Necessary Service for the Reentry Population

The panel will discuss civil legal aid as a necessary service for the reentry population. 

Researchers will discuss the findings of their research related to civil legal aid and reentry and 

future research needs. A facilitated roundtable discussion with all of the workshop’s participants 

will follow.

 Moderator: Helena Silverstein, Co-Director, Law and Social Sciences Program, National 

Science Foundation

 Federal Agency Discussant: Amy Solomon, Director of Policy, Office of Justice Programs, 

U.S. Department of Justice

 Panelists:

 Sharon Dietrich, Litigation Director, Community Legal Services of Philadelphia 

 Michelle Bonner, Chief Counsel, Defender Legal Services, National Legal Aid & Defender 

Association (NLADA); Co-Chair, Reentry and Collateral Consequences Committee, 

American Bar Association

 Jeffrey Selbin, Clinical Professor of Law, UC Berkeley School of Law 

 Tonya Brito, Burrus-Bascom Professor of Law, Director of Institute for Legal Studies, 

University of Wisconsin Law School
44 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

12:30 – 2:00 Break for Lunch

2:00 – 3:45 Panel 3: Human Trafficking and Civil Legal Aid 

The panel will discuss civil legal aid as a necessary service for survivors of human trafficking.

Researchers will discuss research findings and future research needs on the topic. A facilitated 

roundtable discussion with all of the workshop’s participants will follow.

 Moderator: Maureen McGough, Policy Advisor, National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department 

of Justice

 Federal Agency Discussant: Kathrina Peterson, Attorney Advisor, Office for Victims of Crime, 

U.S. Department of Justice

 Panelists:

 Martina Vandenberg, Founder & President, The Human Trafficking Pro Bono Legal 

Center

 Vivian Huelgo, Chief Counsel, ABA Task Force on Human Trafficking and Commission 

on Domestic & Sexual Violence

 Kathleen Kim, Professor of Law, Loyola Law School - Los Angeles

 Meredith Dank, Senior Research Associate, Justice Policy Center, The Urban Institute

3:45 – 4:00 Break

4:00 – 5:45 Panel 4: Consumer Protection and Civil Legal Aid

The panel will discuss civil legal aid as a necessary service in the consumer protection context.

Researchers will discuss research findings and future research needs on the topic. Panelists will 

also touch on special concerns for service members and the use of technology in the provision of 

legal services. A facilitated roundtable discussion with all of the workshop’s participants will 

follow.

 Moderator: Monica Vaca, Assistant Director, Division of Marketing Practices, Federal Trade 

Commission

 Federal Agency Discussant: Mary Griffin, Senior Advisor, Office of Financial Empowerment, 

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

 Panelists:

 Nan Heald, Executive Director, Pine Tree Legal Assistance 

 Mary Spector, Professor of Law, Southern Methodist University – Dedman School of Law 

 Sara Sternberg Greene, Associate Professor of Law, Duke University School of Law

 Ira Rheingold, Executive Director, National Association of Consumer Advocates

5:45 – 6:00 Wrap-Up for the Day

Karen Lash, Deputy Director, Office for Access to Justice

THURSDAY, MAY 21, 2015

8:30 – 9:00 Welcome

 Maha Jweied, Deputy Director, Office for Access to Justice

 Fay Lomax Cook, Assistant Director of the National Science Foundation for Social, 

Behavioral, and Economic Sciences

 Roy Austin, Director of the Office of Urban Affairs, Justice and Opportunity, White House 

Domestic Policy Council
Appendix A: Agenda 45

9:00 – 10:45 Panel 5: Elder Abuse and Civil Legal Aid

The panel will discuss civil legal aid as a necessary service for survivors of elder abuse. 

Researchers will discuss research findings and future research needs on the topic. Panelists will 

also touch on special concerns for indigenous communities and the effectiveness of innovations 

in the delivery of legal services, such as the Medical-Legal Partnership model. A facilitated 

roundtable discussion with all of the workshop’s participants will follow.

 Moderator: Andy Mao, Assistant Director/Elder Justice Initiative Coordinator, Civil Division, 

U.S. Department of Justice

 Federal Agency Discussant: Judith Kozlowski, Senior Advisor for Elder Justice, 

Administration for Community Living, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

 Panelists:

 Matt VanWormer, Director – Four Corners Legal Care, DNA – People’s Legal Services, 

Inc.

 James Teufel, Assistant Professor of Public Health and Director of the Institute for Public 

Health, Mercyhurst University 

 Alison Paul, Executive Director, Montana Legal Services Association

 Victoria Rizzo, Department Chair and Associate Professor of Social Work, Binghamton 

University – State University of New York 

10:45 – 10:50 Remarks

 Acting Associate Attorney General Stuart Delery

10:50 – 11:00 Break

11:00 – 12:45 Panel 6: Domestic Violence and Civil Legal Aid

The panel will discuss civil legal aid as a necessary service for survivors of domestic violence.

Researchers will discuss research findings and future research needs on the topic. Panelists will 

also discuss the unique needs of rural, indigenous, and cross-border communities. A facilitated 

roundtable discussion with all of the workshop’s participants will follow.

 Moderator: Bethany Backes, Social Science Analyst, Violence and Victimization Research 

Division, National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice 

 Federal Agency Discussant: Jennifer Kaplan, Supervisory Attorney Advisor, Office on 

Violence Against Women, U.S. Department of Justice 

 Panelists:

 Pamela M. Brown, Director, Bi-national Project on Family Violence, Texas RioGrande 

Legal Aid 

 Nikole Nelson, Executive Director, Alaska Legal Services Corporation

 Jim Greiner, Professor of Law, Harvard Law School

 Robin Runge, Adjunct Professor, The George Washington University Law School 

12:45 – 2:00 Break for Lunch

2:00 – 3:30 Breakouts in Small Groups to Prepare Recommendations on 

Research Needs/Federal Action

Led by Department of Justice and National Science Foundation staff.

3:30 – 4:00 Reports from Small Groups and Adjourn 

 Maha Jweied, Deputy Director, Office for Access to Justice

 Allie Yang-Green, Counsel, Office for Access to Justice

Appendix B: List of Participants 47

APPENDIX B: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

Expert Working Group

James Anderson 

Senior Behavioral Scientist 

RAND Corporation 

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 

Elizabeth Arledge

Deputy Director

Voices for Civil Justice 

Washington, DC 

Martha Bergmark

Executive Director 

Voices for Civil Justice 

Washington, DC 

Michelle Bonner 

Chief Counsel, Defender 

Legal Services 

National Legal Aid & 

Defender Association 

Washington, DC 

Tonya Brito 

Burrus-Bascom Professor of 

Law 

Director, Institute for Legal 

Studies University of 

Wisconsin Law School 

Madison, WI 

Terrence Brooks 

American Bar Association 

Chicago, Illinois 

Pamela Brown 

Director, Bi-national Project 

on Family Violence 

Texas RioGrande Legal Aid 

Weslaco, Texas 

Jackson Bunch 

University of Montana 

Missoula, MT 

Elizabeth Chambliss 

Professor and Director

NMRS Center on 

Professionalism 

University of South Carolina 

School of Law 

Columbia, South Carolina 

Peter Chapman 

Program Officer 

Open Society Justice 

Initiative 

Washington, DC 

Meredith Dank 

Senior Research Associate 

Justice Policy Center 

Urban Institute 

Washington, DC 

Sharon Dietrich 

Litigation Director 

Community Legal Services of 

Philadelphia 

Philadelphia, PA 

Suzie Forell 

Principal Researcher 

Law and Justice Foundation 

of NSW 

Sydney, New South Wales, 

Australia 

Franco Fraccaro 

Senior Policy Analyst 

Department of Justice 

Canada 

Ottawa, Ontario 

Sara Sternberg Greene 

Associate Professor of Law 

Duke Univ. School of Law 

Durham, NC 

Jim Greiner 

Professor of Law 

Harvard Law School 

Cambridge, MA 

Nan Heald 

Executive Director 

Pine Tree Legal Assistance 

Portland, Maine 

Alan Houseman 

President 

National Equal Justice 

Library 

Washington, DC 

Vivian Huelgo 

Chief Counsel 

Task Force on Human 

Trafficking & Commission on 

Domestic & Sexual Violence 

American Bar Association 

Washington, DC 

Risa Kaufman 

Executive Director 

Columbia Law School Human 

Rights Institute 

New York, NY 

Kathleen Kim 

Professor of Law 

Loyola Law School 

Los Angeles, CA 

Bharath Krishnamurthy 

Research Associate 

National Center for Medical 

Legal Partnership 

Washington, District of 

Columbia 

Cynthia Lee

Senior Court Research 

Associate 

National Center for State 

Courts 

Williamsburg, VA 

Erica Teasley Linnick 

Senior Program Officer 

Open Society Foundations 

New York, NY 

Mary McClymont 

President 

Public Welfare Foundation 

Washington, DC 

Abigail Moy 

Program Director 

Namati: Innovations in Legal 

Empowerment 

Washington, DC 
48 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

Nikole Nelson 

Executive Director 

Alaska Legal Services 

Corporation 

Anchorage, AK 

Alan Paterson 

Chair,

International Legal Aid Group 

Professor of Law & Director 

of the Centre for Professional 

Legal Studies Strathclyde 

University Law School 

Glasgow, UK 

Alison Paul 

Executive Director 

Montana Legal Services 

Association 

Helena, MT 

Paul Prettitore 

Senior Public Sector 

Specialist 

World Bank 

Washington, DC 

Ira Rheingold 

Executive Director 

National Association of 

Consumer Advocates 

Washington, DC 

Victoria Rizzo 

Department Chair and 

Associate Professor of Social 

Work 

Binghamton University 

– State University of NY

Binghamton, New York 

Robin Runge 

Adjunct Professor 

The George Washington 

University 

Law School 

Washington, DC 

Rebecca Sandefur 

Faculty Fellow and Associate 

Professor of Sociology and 

Law 

American Bar Foundation 

and 

University of Illinois 

Urbana, IL 

Don Saunders 

Vice President, Civil Legal 

Services 

National Legal Aid & 

Defender Association 

Washington, DC 

Jeffrey Selbin 

Clinical Professor of Law 

UC Berkeley School of Law 

Berkeley, CA 

Jennifer Smith 

Executive Director 

The International Legal 

Foundation 

New York, NY 

Mary Spector 

Professor of Law 

SMU Dedman School of Law 

Dallas, Texas 

Susan Sterett 

Professor 

Virginia Tech 

Alexandria, VA 

James Teufel 

Assistant Professor of Public 

Health, Director of Institute 

for Public Health 

Mercyhurst University 

Erie, PA 

Jennifer Tsai 

Senior Access to Justice 

Advisor 

American Bar Association 

Washington, DC 

David Udell 

Executive Director 

National Center for Access to 

Justice 

New York, NY 

Martina Vandenberg 

Founder and President 

The Human Trafficking Pro 

Bono Legal Center 

Washington, DC 

Matt VanWormer 

Director, Four Corners Legal 

Care 

DNA-People's Legal 

Services, Inc. 

Tuba City, AZ 

Richard Zorza 

Coordinator Emeritus 

Self Represented Litigation 

Network 

Bowie, MD 
Appendix B: List of Participants 49

Federal Participants

Hilary Axam

Director

Human Trafficking 

Prosecution Unit

Criminal Section, Civil Rights 

Division

U.S. Department of Justice 

Washington, DC

Bethany Backes Social 

Science Analyst Violence and 

Victimization Research

Division

National Institute of Justice

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Ben F. Belton

Senior Advisor to the Acting 

Commissioner

Office of the Commissioner

Social Security 

Administration

Baltimore, MD

Brea Burgie

Associate General Counsel

Office of the General Counsel

Executive Office for 

Immigration Review

U.S. Department of Justice

Arlington, VA

Mark Carter

Attorney Advisor

Office of Tribal Justice

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Frank Cristaudo

Executive Counselor to the 

Commissioner

Office of the Commissioner

Social Security 

Administration

Baltimore, MD

Silas V. Darden 

Director

Servicemembers and 

Veterans Initiative

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Sanzanna C. Dean

Senior Policy Advisor

Office of Juvenile Justice and 

Delinquency Prevention

Office of Justice Programs

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Nicole Dennis

Deputy Associate 

Administrator

Juvenile Justice System 

Improvement Division

Office of Juvenile Justice and 

Delinquency Prevention

Office of Justice Programs

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Lara Eilhardt 

Staff Attorney Office of the 

General Counsel

U.S. Department of Veterans 

Affairs

Washington, DC 

Lara.Eilhardt@va.gov

Lisa Foster

Director

Office for Access to Justice 

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Maria Fryer

Justice System Policy 

Advisor/ Substance Abuse 

and Mental Health

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Office of Justice Programs

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Jon Gould

Co-Director

Law and Social Science 

Program

National Science Foundation

Arlington, VA

Kathi L. Grasso

Director

Concentration of Federal 

Efforts Program

Office of Juvenile Justice and 

Delinquency Prevention

Office of Justice Programs

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Mary Griffin

Senior Advisor

Office of Financial 

Empowerment

Consumer Financial 

Protection Bureau

Washington, DC

Bristow Hardin

Government Relations and 

Public Affairs Office of 

Program Performance

Legal Services Corporation

Washington, DC

Norena A. Henry

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Office of Justice Programs

U.S. Department of Justice

Marcia Hurd

Senior Counsel to the 

Director

Office of Tribal Justice

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Wilfred E. Johnson, II

Senior Advisor Bureau of 

Primary Health Care

Health Resources and 

Services Administration

U.S. Dept of Health & Human 

Services

Rockville, MD

Maha Jweied

Deputy Director

Office for Access to Justice

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC
50 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

Jennifer Kaplan

Supervisory Attorney Advisor

Office on Violence Against 

Women

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Naomi Karp

Consumer Financial 

Protection Bureau

Washington, DC

Jenni Katzman

Senior Counsel

Office for Access to Justice

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Kathleen Kim 

Professor of Law 

Loyola Law School 

Los Angeles, CA 

Judith Kozlowski

Senior Advisor for Elder 

Justice

Administration for Community 

Living

U.S. Dept of Health & Human 

Services

Washington, DC

Bharath Krishnamurthy 

Research Associate 

National Center for Medical 

Legal Partnership 

Washington, District of 

Columbia 

Barbara Lacina

Acting Director Division of 

Program Innovation

Office of Child Support 

Enforcement

Administration for Children 

and Families

U.S. Dept of Health & Human 

Services

Washington, DC

Karen Lash

Deputy Director

Office for Access to Justice

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Brant S. Levine

Counsel, Human Trafficking 

Prosecution Unit

Criminal Section, Civil Rights 

Division

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Andy Mao

Assistant Director - Elder 

Justice Initiative Coordinator

Civil Division

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Maureen McGough

Policy Advisor

Office of the Director

National Institute of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Jennifer Park

Senior Statistician

Office of Management and 

Budget 

Washington, DC

Kathrina S. Peterson

Attorney-Advisor

Office for Victims of Crime

Office of Justice Programs

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Patricia Poss

Senior Attorney

Division of Marketing 

Practices

Bureau of Consumer 

Protection

Federal Trade Commission

Washington, DC

Kyle Riggs

Program Examiner, Justice 

Branch

Office of Management and 

Budget

Executive Office of the 

President

William F. Russo

Acting Director

Office of Regulation Policy & 

Management

Office of the General Counsel

U.S. Department of Veterans 

Affairs

Washington, DC

James J. Sandman

President

Legal Services Corporation

Washington, DC

Helena Silverstein

Co-Director

Law and Social Science 

Program

National Science Foundation

Arlington, VA

Amy Solomon

Director of Policy

Office of Justice Programs

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Natalia Sorgente

Senior Counsel 

Office of the Assistant 

Attorney General

Civil Division

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Andrew Stanner

Senior Counsel

Office for Access to Justice

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Suzanne M. Strong

Statistician

Bureau of Justice Statistics

Office of Justice Programs

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

Tricia A. Tingle

Associate Director, Tribal 

Justice Support

Office of Justice Services

Bureau of Indian Affairs

U.S. Department of the 

Interior

Washington, DC
Appendix B: List of Participants 51

Vicki Turetsky

Commissioner

Office of Child Support 

Enforcement

Administration for Children 

and Families

U.S. Dept of Health & Human 

Services

Washington, DC

Monica Vaca

Assistant Director

Division of Marketing 

Practices Federal Trade 

Commission

Washington, DC

Gregory Willis

Workforce Development 

Specialist

Office of Workforce 

Investment – Division of 

Youth Services

Employment and Training 

Administration

U.S. Department of Labor

Washington, DC

Allie Yang-Green

Counsel

Office for Access to Justice 

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, DC

53 Appendix C: Presidential Memorandum --

Establishment of the White House Legal Aid Interagency Roundtable

APPENDIX C: PRESIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM --

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE WHITE HOUSE LEGAL AID INTERAGENCY ROUNDTABLE

September 24, 2015

MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES

SUBJECT: Establishment of the White House Legal Aid Interagency Roundtable

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of 

America, and in order to increase the availability of meaningful access to justice for individuals and 

families and thereby improve the outcomes of an array of Federal programs, it is hereby ordered as 

follows:

Section 1. Policy. This Nation was founded in part on the promise of justice for all. Equal access to 

justice helps individuals and families receive health services, housing, education, and employment; 

enhances family stability and public safety; and secures the public's faith in the American justice 

system. Equal access to justice also advances the missions of an array of Federal programs, 

particularly those designed to lift Americans out of poverty or to keep them securely in the middle class. 

But gaps in the availability of legal aid -- including legal representation, advice, community education, 

and self-help and technology tools -- for America's poor and middle class threaten to undermine the 

promise of justice for all and constitute a crisis worthy of action by the Federal Government.

The majority of Americans who come to court do so without legal aid. They may be left by their 

economic circumstances to face life-altering events -- such as losing a home or custody of children, or 

escaping domestic violence or elder abuse -- on their own. More than 50 million Americans qualify for 

federally funded civil legal aid, but over half of those who seek assistance are turned away from legal 

aid organizations, which lack the funds and staff to meet the demand.

When people come into contact with or leave the criminal justice system, they are likely to face a range 

of legal issues. A victim of abuse may need a protective order, or a formerly incarcerated individual 

may need a driver's license reinstated in order to get a job. Access to legal aid can help put people on 

a path to self-sufficiency, lead to better outcomes in the civil and criminal justice systems, and enhance 

the safety and strength of our communities. Increased legal resources in a community can also help 

courts process cases more effectively and more efficiently, saving time and money.

Federal programs that are designed to help the most vulnerable and underserved among us may more 

readily achieve their goals if they include legal aid among the range of services they provide.

By encouraging Federal departments and agencies to collaborate, share best practices, and consider 

the impact of legal services on the success of their programs, the Federal Government can enhance 

access to justice in our communities.
54 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

Sec. 2. Establishment. There is established the White House Legal Aid Interagency Roundtable 

(LAIR).

Sec. 3. Membership. (a) The Attorney General and the Director of the Domestic Policy Council, or 

their designees, shall serve as the Co-Chairs of LAIR, which shall also include a representative from 

each of the following executive departments, agencies, and offices:

(i) the Department of State;

(ii) the Department of the Treasury;

(iii) the Department of Justice;

(iv) the Department of the Interior;

(v) the Department of Agriculture;

(vi) the Department of Labor;

(vii) the Department of Health and Human Services;

(viii) the Department of Housing and Urban Development;

(ix) the Department of Education;

(x) the Department of Veterans Affairs;

(xi) the Department of Homeland Security;

(xii) the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission;

(xiii) the Corporation for National and Community Service;

(xiv) the Office of Management and Budget;

(xv) the United States Agency for International Development;

(xvi) the Administrative Conference of the United States;

(xvii) the National Science Foundation; and

(xviii) such other executive departments, agencies, and offices as the Co-Chairs may, from time 

to time, designate.

(b) The Co-Chairs shall invite the participation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Federal 

Trade Commission, Legal Services Corporation, and Social Security Administration, to the extent 

consistent with their respective statutory authorities and legal obligations.

Sec. 4. Mission and Function. (a) The LAIR shall work across executive departments, agencies, and 

offices to:

(i) improve coordination among Federal programs that help the vulnerable and underserved, so 

that those programs are more efficient and produce better outcomes by including, where 

appropriate, legal services among the range of supportive services provided;

(ii) increase the availability of meaningful access to justice for individuals and families, 

regardless of wealth or status;

(iii) develop policy recommendations that improve access to justice in Federal, State, local, 
55 Appendix C: Presidential Memorandum --

Establishment of the White House Legal Aid Interagency Roundtable

tribal, and international jurisdictions;

(iv) assist the United States with implementation of Goal 16 of the United Nation's 2030 Agenda 

for Sustainable Development; and

(v) advance relevant evidence-based research, data collection, and analysis of civil legal aid and 

indigent defense, and promulgate best practices to support the activities detailed in section 

4(a)(i)-(iv).

(b) The LAIR shall report annually to the President on its success in achieving its mission, consistent 

with the United Nation's 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The report shall include data from 

participating members on the deployment of Federal resources that foster LAIR's mission.

Sec. 5. Administration. (a) The LAIR shall hold meetings at least three times a year and engage with 

Federal, State, local, tribal, and international officials, technical advisors, and nongovernmental 

organizations, among others, as necessary to carry out its mission.

(b) The Director of the Office for Access to Justice in the Department of Justice, or his or her designee, 

shall serve as Executive Director of LAIR and shall, as directed by the Co-Chairs, convene regular 

meetings of LAIR and supervise its work. The Office for Access to Justice staff shall serve as the staff 

of LAIR.

(c) The Department of Justice shall, to the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of 

appropriations, provide administrative services, funds, facilities, staff, equipment, and other support 

services as may be necessary for LAIR to carry out its mission.

(d) The LAIR members are encouraged to provide support, including by detailing personnel, to LAIR.

(e) Members of LAIR shall serve without any additional compensation for their work.

Sec. 6. General Provisions. (a) This memorandum shall be implemented consistent with applicable 

law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(b) Nothing in this memorandum shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, 

administrative, or legislative proposals.

(c) This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or 

procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, 

agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

Appendix D: Existing Federal Research and Capacity 57

APPENDIX D: EXISTING FEDERAL RESEARCH AND CAPACITY 

Federally Funded Research on Civil Legal Aid

The following list represents research and program evaluations that WH-LAIR agencies conducted or had 

available relating to civil legal aid since 2009. Symbols are used to indicate whether the research was 

conducted internally (I) or externally (E).

1. (E) An Evaluation of Court System Best Practices for Domestic Violence Protective Orders

(ongoing) – funded by DOJ, National Institute for Justice

2. (E) Evaluation of the Office for Victims of Crime Wraparound Victim Legal Assistance Network 

Demonstration Project (ongoing) - Funded by DOJ, National Institute for Justice

3. (E) The Long-Term Effects of Civil Legal Services on Battered Women (ongoing) - funded by 

DOJ, National Institute for Justice 

4. (E) Impact of Legal Representation on Child Custody Decisions among Families with a History 

of Intimate Partner Violence Study (2015) - funded by DOJ, National Institute for Justice, available 

at https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/248886.pdf. 

5. (E) Evaluation of Face Forward grants (ongoing) – funded by DOL, Office of Evaluation 

6. (E) Accessing Justice in Contemporary America: The Community Needs and Services Study –

funded by NSF, available at

http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1123507&HistoricalAwards=false. 

7. (E) Workshop: Access to Civil Justice: Re-envisioning and Reinvigorating Research, Chicago, 

IL, Fall 2012 (2014) – funded by NSF, available at 

http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1237958&HistoricalAwards=false. 

8. (E) Migration, Workplace Disputes, and the Legal System in the United States (ongoing) –

funded by NSF, available at 

http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1324234&HistoricalAwards=false. 

9. (E) Doctoral Dissertation Research: Accessing Assistance and Citizen Engagement (ongoing) 

– funded by NSF, available at 

http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1324074&HistoricalAwards=false. 

10. (E) Doctoral Dissertation Research: Bureaucratic Decision making Concerning Families and 

Social Services (ongoing) – funded by NSF, available at 

http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1323916&HistoricalAwards=false. 

11. (E) Workshop: Quality Legal Representation: Definition, Measurement, Theory and Practice

(ongoing) – funded by NSF, available at 

http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1550942&HistoricalAwards=false. 

12. (E) RAPID: Measuring the Effect of Defense Counsel Funding: A Natural Experiment in 

Louisiana (ongoing) – funded by NSF, available at 

https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1545620&HistoricalAwards=false. 

13. (E) Comparative and Longitudinal Study of Experiences with Court Systems (ongoing) – funded 

by NSF, available at 

http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1421098&HistoricalAwards=false. 

14. (E) Collaborative Research: Lay Deployment of Professional Knowledge (ongoing) – funded by 

NSF, available at 

http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1421410&HistoricalAwards=false. 

15. (E) The Responsibility of Judges to Assure Due Process: Tension Among Neutrality, Rights 

Protection, and Role (ongoing) – funded by NSF, available at 

http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1456772&HistoricalAwards=false. 
58 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

16. (E) Assisting with SSI/SSDI Applications, Case Study of a Program to Help Clients of a 

Homeless Shelter and Supportive Housing Residence with SSI/SSDI Applications (2013) –

funded by SSA, Disability Determination Process Small Grant Program, available at 

http://ddp.policyresearchinc.org/SiteAssets/doc/MacGregor_Final_Report.pdf. 

17. (E) Justice-Involved Adults with Serious Mental Illness (SMI) and the Disability Determination 

Process (2013) – funded by SSA, Disability Determination Process Small Grant Program, available 

at http://ddp.policyresearchinc.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Telford_Final_Report.pdf. 

18. (E) The TANF-SSI Transition (2013) – funded by SSA, Disability Determination Process Small 

Grant Program, available at http://ddp.policyresearchinc.org/SiteAssets/doc/Sogar_Final_Report.pdf. 

19. (E) The Child SSI Program and the Changing Safety Net (2015) – funded by HHS, Office of 

Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, available at https://aspe.hhs.gov/pdfreport/changing-role-child-ssi-program-safety-net. 

Federal Research Capacity

This section outlines WH-LAIR agencies’ research capacity that could potentially support WH-LAIR-related 

research activities. Symbols are used to indicate whether the agency’s research capacity is through 

research or evaluation conducted internally (I) or externally (E).

(I / E) Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) 

ACUS conducts research to promote improvements in the efficiency, adequacy, and fairness of the 

procedures by which federal agencies conduct regulatory programs, administer grants and benefits, and 

perform related governmental functions. The research is conducted both in-house and through contracts 

with outside entities. 

(I / E) Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)

CFPB’s Office of Research is mandated to research, analyze and report on various issues, including 

experiences of traditionally underserved consumers. The Office of Research both conducts research inhouse and funds research through contracts with outside entities.

CFPB’s Offices in the Consumer Education and Engagement Division also conduct research related 

to financial education and the impact of programs on consumers, including programs that serve lowincome and economically vulnerable consumers. The Offices in the Consumer Education and 

Engagement division typically procure outside entities to conduct research and evaluations.

(I / E) Department of Agriculture (USDA)

USDA conducts and funds research on a wide variety of subjects regarding agriculture, forestry, 

bioenergy, and nutrition issues. USDA’s Research, Education, and Economics Mission Area oversees 

intermural and extramural research through the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, the 

Economic Research Service, and the Agricultural Research Service. USDA also conducts dietary 

research reviews and activities through the Center for Nutrition Policy Promotion and conducts other 

nutrition research through the Food and Nutrition Service. USDA does intermural and extramural 

research and funds program evaluations through grants and contracts with outside entities.

(I / E) Department of Justice (DOJ) 

DOJ Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) provides services in grant administration and criminal justice 

policy development to support local, state, and tribal justice strategies to achieve safer communities. BJA 

funds research and/or program evaluation through grants/cooperative agreements with outside entities.

National Institute of Justice (NIJ) is DOJ’s research, development and evaluation agency, dedicated to 

improving knowledge and understanding of crime and justice issues through science. NIJ has six 

operating offices, three of which are responsible for scientific inquiries into criminal justice matters. They 

are: Office of Research and Evaluation, Office of Science and Technology, and Office of Investigative and 

Forensic Sciences. NIJ primarily funds research and program evaluation through grants, cooperative 
Appendix D: Existing Federal Research and Capacity 59

agreements and contracts. However, NIJ is moving to a model where its staff will become increasingly 

involved with in-house research activities.

DOJ Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) conducts research and

evaluation, and undertakes statistical analyses on a wide range of juvenile justice matters through its 

Division of Research and Innovation. OJJDP primarily funds research, program evaluation, and statistical 

data collection through grants, cooperative agreements, and inter-agency agreements.

DOJ Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) does not directly conduct or fund research and 

evaluation at present, but on an ad hoc basis transfers funds to NIJ to fund specific research and 

evaluation projects. OVW collaborates with NIJ to see that funds for research and evaluation are targeted 

in ways that are useful and relevant to OVW and its grantees.

(I / E) Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)

HHS Administration for Children and Families (ACF)’s Office of Planning, Research and 

Evaluation (OPRE) studies ACF programs and the populations they serve through rigorous research and 

evaluation projects. These include evaluations of existing programs, evaluations of innovative approaches 

to helping low-income children and families, research syntheses, and descriptive and exploratory studies.

ACF OPRE primarily conducts research and program evaluation through contracts and grants with 

outside entities. Additionally, grants for demonstrations or services typically also require grantees to 

conduct evaluations or performance measurement. ACF Office of Child Support Enforcement program 

demonstration grants also require, administer, and fund research and evaluation through outside entities.

HHS’s Office of Research and Evaluation (ORE) within Health Resources and Services 

Administration (HRSA)’s Office of Planning, Analysis, and Evaluation, serves as HRSA’s primary 

source for research and evaluation by conducting internal evaluation and research studies of HRSA 

public health programs. Their work informs agency program and policy-making and provides consultation, 

technical assistance and review services to HRSA’s offices and bureaus regarding their evaluation and 

research protocols, tools and activities. ORE conducts most of its research and program evaluation 

activities in-house.

Other Bureaus and Offices at HRSA also have divisions and branches conducting research and 

evaluation activities both in-house and through grants or contracts with outside entities, focusing on 

specific programs that fall under their purview.

HHS Office of Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) is HHS’s lead on research 

and evaluation issues, and conducts a variety of policy analysis, research and evaluation through a 

combination of intramural activity and extramural funding through contracts and grants.

In HHS Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), the Quality, 

Evaluation, and Performance Branch (QEP Branch) provides evaluation expertise in domains such as 

underage substance abuse prevention (Center for Substance Abuse Prevention), the integration and/or 

colocation of behavioral health care with primary care or HIV care (Center for Substance Abuse 

Prevention, Center for Mental Health Services, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, and the Office of 

Policy, Planning and Innovation), and increasing access to mental health services (Center for Mental 

Health Services). 

In addition, the Analytic and Services Research Branch is involved in a number of ongoing analyses 

looking at critical issues related to prevention, treatment, recovery, the impact of the Affordable Care Act, 

and evidence-based and practice-based research issues.

SAMHSA does a combination of a few small in-house evaluations and carries out larger evaluations 

through contracts. Over time, more of the evaluations will be shifted to the evaluation unit in the Center 

for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality.
60 Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

(I / E) Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)

The Office of Research, Evaluation, and Monitoring conducts research, evaluation, and monitoring 

efforts for a wide variety of HUD programs and activities. This office is comprised of the following three 

divisions: (1) The Program Evaluation Division is responsible for conducting and overseeing systematic 

and rigorous research on programs and experimental demonstrations operated by HUD. (2) The 

Program Monitoring and Research Division conducts research and carries out a variety of efforts 

designed to support and enhance HUD-wide program monitoring. (3) The Affordable Housing Research 

and Technology Division conducts studies and provides research assistance on issues related to 

building codes, standards, and technologies; land use planning and housing issues related to “green” 

construction and energy efficiency; disaster preparedness and resilient construction, and housing and 

community planning addressing the needs of multiple age, income, and accessibility groups.

Research and evaluations are done primarily through grants and contracts with outside entities with some 

in-house research or evaluations.

(E) Department of Labor (DOL)

DOL Office of Evaluation funds research through grants and contracts. 

(I) Federal Trade Commission (FTC)

The Bureau of Economics (BE) conducts in-house research and helps the FTC evaluate the economic 

impact of its actions. To do so, BE provides economic analysis and support to antitrust and consumer 

protection investigations and rulemakings.

The Office of Policy Planning, in collaboration with other FTC offices, organizes public workshops and 

issues reports on cutting-edge competition and consumer protection topics, addressing questions of 

substantive antitrust law, industry-specific practices, and significant national and international policy 

debates. This office’s research work is done in-house.

(E) National Science Foundation (NSF)

The Law and Social Sciences Program within the Division of Social and Economic Sciences in 

NSF considers proposals that “address social scientific studies of law and law-like systems of rules.” The 

NSF funds research through grants to outside entities. 

(I / E) Social Security Administration (SSA)

SSA Office of Retirement and Disability Policy (ORDP) manages the planning, development, 

issuance, and evaluation of operational policies, standards, and instructions for programs administered by

SSA, including: retirement and survivors insurance; disability insurance; supplemental security income 

and other SSA programs.

Within SSA ORDP, Office of Research, Demonstration, and Employment Support provides broad 

program analysis and development in support of the Social Security Disability Insurance and 

Supplemental Security Income programs. Also under SSA ORDP, Office of Research, Evaluation & 

Statistics provides statistical data on SSA programs and conducts policy research and evaluation.
Appendix E: Indicator Formation Process for Global Goal 16 61

APPENDIX E: INDICATOR FORMATION PROCESS FOR GLOBAL GOAL 16

On September 24, 2015, the United Nations unanimously adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable 

Development, which includes 17 Global Goals to end extreme poverty. 

Global Goal 16 states: Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide 

access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels 

16.1 Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere 

16.2 End abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms of violence against and torture of children 

16.3 Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to 

justice for all 

16.4 By 2030, significantly reduce illicit financial and arms flows, strengthen the recovery and return of 

stolen assets and combat all forms of organized crime 

16.5 Substantially reduce corruption and bribery in all their forms 

16.6 Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels 

16.7 Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels 

16.8 Broaden and strengthen the participation of developing countries in the institutions of global 

governance 

16.9 By 2030, provide legal identity for all, including birth registration 

16.10 Ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with 

national legislation and international agreements 

16.a Strengthen relevant national institutions, including through international cooperation, for building 

capacity at all levels, in particular in developing countries, to prevent violence and combat terrorism and 

crime 

16.b Promote and enforce non-discriminatory laws and policies for sustainable development

The Agenda states:

75. The Goals and targets will be followed-up and reviewed using a set of global indicators. 

These will be complemented by indicators at the regional and national levels which will be 

developed by member states, in addition to the outcomes of work undertaken for the 

development of the baselines for those targets where national and global baseline data does 

not yet exist. The global indicator framework, to be developed by the Inter Agency and Expert 

Group on SDG Indicators, will be agreed by the UN Statistical Commission by March 2016 

and adopted thereafter by the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly, in line 

with existing mandates. This framework will be simple yet robust, address all SDGs and 

targets including for means of implementation, and preserve the political balance, integration 

and ambition contained therein.

The White House Legal Aid Interagency Roundtable will participate in the development of national level 

indicators for the United States. As of the printing of this report, that timeframe was still being finalized.
White House Legal Aid Interagency Roundtable:

Civil Legal Aid Research Workshop Report

www.justice.gov/lair