Exciting Triage Progress at TIG Conference

I am pleased to report that our sessions at the TIG Conference on Intake, Triage, and Technology were very successful.

One session reviewed where we are now, with a focus on how court self-help centers decide who gets what help, and how legal aid programs and hotlines are moving to online intake.

The second session, moderated by Karen Lash of DOJ’s Access Initiative, looked at what an integrated intake and triage system might look like in 10 years.  It included extensive discussion of the role of research in establishing decision protocols for such a process, as well as research perspectives from Prof Jim Greiner of Harvard, and Susan Ledray from the Minnesota Courts Self-Help system.

A small group then met to start to integrate the ideas raised in those two sessions.  Here, however are some thoughts that struck me most powerfully.

  • We need a system that is used by everybody to find and get to the help that they need to obtain access to justice.
  • The system should provide actual help to everybody.
  • The system should be user-friendly, user-oriented, and user controlled (it is to meet their needs, not those of the organizations participating.)
  • The system should include user support systems such as online chat.
  • The system should actually get people to the resource they need including passing data into intake or information systems and tools — its not just a referral system.
  • The system should include such access to all service mechanisms, including courts, legal aid, unbundling, informational websites, document assembly, online chat, pro bono and private lawyer referral systems.
  • The system should get people to the highest level of assistance that is available to them, consistent with cost effectiveness.
  • The system should use research to be able to ask sufficient questions to make sure that the range of a persons issues are identified and responded to.
  • The system should have built into it the case-acceptance criteria, so that there are few “dead” hand-offs.
  • The system should be “self-learning” so that it gets better as there is more experience, and the acceptance criteria should be informed by research.

I made brief comments at the session on the 2012 TIG round about what we had talked about.  Maybe there will be some TIG grant applications in this area!

Thanks to all for their great ideas in this important discussion.  I think this is one of the things that we just have to get right if we are to have a 100% access system.

Please do share more ideas for such a system in the comments.


About richardzorza

I am deeply involved in access to justice and the patient voice movement.
This entry was posted in Legal Aid, Research and Evalation, Self-Help Services, Systematic Change, Technology, Triage. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Exciting Triage Progress at TIG Conference

  1. Pingback: A New Cut at Triage Principles | Richard Zorza's Access to Justice Blog

  2. After attending the LSC TIG conference, I wrote a blog post that summarized the feedback from the session I co-hosted with Marc Lauritsen related to elawyering. After reading your post above, it would appear that these objectives are closely tied to a few of these ideas raised above from your session on triage. After the conference, I also took an informal survey of solos on the ABA’s Solosez and asked them what technology they would like to see in place that would encourage them to provide more volunteer services. Here is a link to the elawyering session summary with some ideas from other solos on ways to collaborate with legal services organizations through the use of technology: http://alturl.com/t4phv

  3. Claudia Johnson says:

    I hope some court state systems are also considering these opportunities of collocated triage between courts and legal aid, and are looking at the SJI funding streams to cover their ramp up costs. It is very exciting that there is some interest in the legal aid community to start moving to this collocation in brick and cyber spaces, and I hope that courts join not only in the TIG projects, but with projects that also support those innovations, in particular in helping w/the costs and data to evaluate the impact of triage on all the systems involved regardless of location or affiliation (court vs. legal aid vs. Bar pro bono project or law school clinic).

  4. Pingback: Exciting Triage Progress at TIG Conference | Richard Zorza’s Access to Justice Blog | Law Practice Strategy

  5. Pingback: Exciting Triage Progress at TIG Conference | Richard Zorza's Access to Justice Blog | The Future of Law | Scoop.it

Comments are closed.