National Survey of Legal Assistance for the
Elderly:
Results and Implications
In light of recent funding cuts in Legal Services Corporation (LSC) funding, restrictions placed on activities of LSC providers, many of whom also provide services under the Older Americans Act (OAA), and the uncertainty of legal as a priority service in the reauthorization of the OAA, The Center for Social Gerontology (TCSG) conducted a national mail survey in Spring 1997 to assess the status of legal assistance for older persons.
From among the survey findings, TCSG has identified the following five findings as areas of particular concern regarding the delivery of legal assistance for older persons.
1. Survey data indicate that in general, the aging and legal networks do not work together as effectively as they might to maximize the limited resources available for the delivery of legal assistance to older persons in social and economic need, raising serious concerns as to whether needs of older persons are being adequately considered in these times of change.
Over 25% of Title IIIB and Title IIIB/LSC providers are not involved in planning and discussions with the Area Agency on Aging (AAA) that funds them.
Although over 85% of AAAs consider legal assistance extremely or fairly important, 55% of AAAs surveyed indicated that if legal assistance were removed as a priority from the OAA, they expected funding for legal assistance in their state to decrease.
58% of Title IIIB providers who are not in LSC programs indicated they are not involved in discussions with the local LSC legal services provider.
Over 88% of AAAs and 66% of state legal services developers indicated that they had not been involved in the LSC state planning process.
2. The survey data indicate a shift towards increased use of technology in both intake systems and the delivery of legal assistance. Such a shift raises concerns about whether channels through which the most vulnerable older persons can obtain necessary legal assistance are being preserved.
Over 70% of Title IIIB/LSC providers with new intake systems indicated that their new system was a hotline or phone intake system.
Over 50% of Title IIIB providers who are not in LSC programs and who have new intake systems indicated that their new system was a hotline or phone intake system.
Over 80% of LSC providers who do not have Title IIIB money and who have new intake systems indicated that their new system was a hotline or phone intake system.
3. The data indicate that only limited efforts are made to seek additional funding or to pursue all possible funding sources to assist in the delivery of civil legal assistance for older persons.
Only 45% of Title IIIB providers not in LSC programs indicated that they had sought funds in addition to OAA for legal assistance for older persons.
Only 50% of Title IIIB/LSC providers indicated that they had sought additional non-OAA funds for legal services for older persons.
Only 40% of LSC providers indicated they had sought additional funds specifically for legal services for older persons.
Private foundations, the United Way, and IOLTA programs were the most common sources approached for alternative funds for legal assistance for older persons.
4. The data indicate that there has been an increase in the provision of brief service and phone advice, creating a concern that vulnerable older persons needing in-depth legal assistance may not be receiving needed service.
Over 50% of Title IIIB/LSC providers indicated an increase in the level of phone/brief advice provided to older clients.
Over 33% of Title IIIB providers not in LSC programs indicated an increase in the level of phone/ brief advice provided to older clients.
Over 21% of LSC providers indicated an increase in the level of phone/brief advice provided to older clients.
5. The data indicate that the majority of Title IIIB providers that do not receive LSC funds and are therefore not subject to LSC restrictions on activities have not increased the level of their impact and elder rights advocacy work. As a result, there may be an overall decrease in impact/elder rights advocacy work on behalf of vulnerable elders given the restricted ability, confirmed by the LSC-funded respondents, of LSC providers to perform impact work.
Approximately 67% of Title IIIB non-LSC providers indicated that they have not changed the level of impact work they provide for older persons.
At least 7% of Title IIIB non-LSC providers indicated a decrease in all types of impact work specified (legislative advocacy, administrative reform and class actions).
Acknowledgments & Introduction | Methodology | Highlights of Findings & Implications for Action | Discussion of Survey Highlights | Report of Survey Findings by Respondent Type | Conclusion