The recent post on the law professor’s quantitative boot camp got me thinking about the need for something similar for access to justice professionals. (see the mention in my post introducing the Empirical Legal Studies Blog.

We need to find a way to enhance the statistical and data analysis skills in the access to justice practitioner community.  This would help us do our own studies, help us participate in a more informed way in the increasing debates about the meanings of studies conducted by academics and others.  (One obvious example of such debates is the one triggered by the paper by Jim Greiner and Cassandra Wolos Pattanayak.  (e.g Concurring Opinions blog, as well as others previously cited in this blog).

How might such a “boot camp” be organized?  Here are some ideas:

• As a pre-conference to the Equal Justice Conference
• As a pre-conference to the LSC TIG Conference
• In association with a National Association for Court Management Conference

In particular, I would like to see Civil Gideon and Self-Represented Innovation experts cooperate on such a process.  As both groups engage more, I think we are moving to a more common integrated world view.

In any event, I would hope that various organizations such as SJI, LSC, NAIP, NCSC, NACM, ABA, NLADA would be interested in giving life to this.  It would be a great project for a law school to take on.

There is at least one tool already developed by the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System at the University of Denver and the National Center for State Courts:  A Roadmap for Reform: Measuring Innovation.

This introduces general approaches to measurement, including the kinds of questions that might be asked about innovation, the kinds of data that might be collected, and how it might be collected.

p.s.  The Anne E. Casey Foundation has funded something similar for child welfare administrators.