Online Intake Best Practices Webinar

Online Intake—Best Practices Moderator: Claudia Johnson, Pro Bono Net

Panelists William Guyton, Legal Services Alabama Jaffe Pickett, Legal Services Alabama Dina Nikitaides CATJ/A2J Author Craige Harrison, Utah Legal Services

Some terminology Intake –the process a legal non profit (including a pro bono project) uses to accepting or rejecting clients based on articulated criteria. It includes data collection, review, acceptance or denial, notification to the applicant, and referrals for all. Online intake= online application tool + online intake system Online intake application— an online form that collects information, it can also be an email. It refers to an application that is received using some online tool and travels through the internet. Online intake system —the online application and all the other components/resources that are required to process the application. It could include staff, a data base, a staging area not integrated into regular case management system, a call back queue, web chat to support the application, etc. Triage- once a case is deemed eligible how the case is prioritized for services and legal resources by a program. Depending on the context, sometimes triage comes before intake.

Some Assumptions All legal non-profits do intake—because they have limited resources and their funders may require it. Intake is generally perceived by most funders as an Administrative function covered by the overhead of a program. Online intake is another “door” to the program, it can supplement phone intake, in person intake, remote location intake.

Standard 4.1 A provider should strive, therefore, to offer multiple avenues for persons to seek assistance, or should actively participate in a delivery system that provides such opportunities.

Best Practices For Illinois Standard 2.2 Centralized telephone intake and the provision of legal advice and limited intervention by phone can increase the provider's capacity to reach otherwise isolated clients. Advances in technology can help overcome some of the limitations of serving clients remotely by telephone, particularly with regard to the transfer of documents important to a case.

SCLAID Standards Standard 2.3 on Participation in Statewide and Regional Systems Providers and others should work together to establish support systems that will expand the capacity of the system to respond to those who are not receiving services. Providers, in cooperation with others, may establish delivery mechanisms, such as centralized telephone intake to increase the capacity of people who are isolated geographically to gain access to needed help.

SCLAID Standards STANDARD 4.1 ON THE PROVIDER’S INTAKE SYSTEM A provider should design and operate an intake system that treats all persons seeking assistance with respect, accurately identifies their legal needs and promptly determines the assistance to be offered.

Standard 4.1 Persons seeking assistance from a provider will be offered different levels of assistance. Some applicants will be accepted as clients and offered assistance that may range from full representation1 to representation limited to advice or brief service. Others will not be accepted as clients, but will be given legal information about their problem. Still others will be given assistance to represent themselves through pro se clinics and other methods that teach self help. A number will be denied any form of assistance because they are ineligible or seek help in an area that the provider does not handle. Regardless of the service they ultimately receive, all persons seeking services need to be treated respectfully and professionally.

Standard 4.1 Denials of service The provider should strive to preserve good will among those who are denied service. Reasons for rejecting a case should be explained clearly and promptly, and applicants who desire a review of the decision should be given immediate assistance to pursue their grievance.The provider should refer rejected applicants to other sources of assistance, if available. Such referrals should be made as quickly as possible to allow rejected applicants to seek other assistance if necessary to protect their rights .

Intake is a gateway to data/analysis Intake goes beyond picking and choosing clients and cases Intake is a nervous system that can let you detect new problems, new needs To allocate resources effectively And change your delivery system to better serve your communities

LSC Performance Criteria 1 What screening for other types of problems is done at intake? What systematic review of intake and intake data is done to identify repetitive problems? The program has systems and approaches reasonably calculated to identify new pressing issues and legal needs, both of individuals and the target population as a whole, including continuing engagement with and input from the low-income population, regular review of intake and case information, monitoring of local, state, and national legal developments, and other appropriate strategies. Such new legal needs may be either short or long term.

Utah’s lessons LSC funded program Elegant handling of: Kennedy Ammendment eligibility Denials Grievance policies Asset valuation

Kennedy Ammendment Eligibility--Utah

Verifying the information--Utah Offers two choices Webchat option Or call in option—with priority into a queue

Setting expectations about email

At the end two options are presented

Impact on ULS since implementation Eligibility screening time decreased Queue times: 10 minutes from 12 minutes Anecdotal: As much as half Triage for Eligibility screening (87% vs 55%) Greater availability Urban vs Rural (55/45 vs 63/37) Hard of hearing DV victims Temporarily out of the country, etc.

From Alabama—tips on the application Use plain language itself Provider disclaimers upfront Set up an online intake queue/set aside resources for processing, review, analysis, call back Integrate with your other intake activities

Alabama’s Lessons Transforms Design team

Consideration when planning online intake system--Alabama Pick a design team, a diverse team Look at the tech options from the beginning Do not underestimate the difficulty of data transforms Choose carefully where you store and how you move the data

Online Intake with A2J Author Overview of Online Intake with A2J Author A2J Author Online Intake Training Series States using A2J Author for Online Intake Dina C. Nikitaides Program Coordinator Center for Access to Justice & Technology Chicago-Kent College of Law

Online Intake with A2J Author Petition for Joint Simplified Dissolution of Marriage A2J Author interface collects data from end-user and stores data in an answer file. HotDocs reads the answer file and inserts data in the correct location on the form. The completed document is returned to the end-user for printing or saving. Typical document assembly project with A2J Author Interview Answers (.anx File)

Online Intake with A2J Author Answer File Data in holding area available for review in the Case Management System: conflicts check attorney review processing XSL Transform Interview Answers (.anx File) A2J Guided Interview ® for Intake Transformed Answer Files Case Management System

Online Intake with A2J Author Planning & Preparation Inception – meet with project stakeholders, identify roles, review budget, review other program’s intake interview, determine goals & restrictions Elaboration – draft online intake script (in word processor), rounds of review with stakeholders Construction A2J Guided Interview – using script draft questions and logic in A2J Author Interview Testing & Review – can still easily make changes at this point XSL Transform Development & Testing Implementation Staff Training – train intake workers to process online applications Go Live – success!

Online Intake with A2J Author Time Varies from program to program depending on available staffing resources Suggestion: If completing project in house, estimate high for times when other projects are more demanding Cost Varies from program to program depending on many factors such as current staffing and need for outsourcing Suggestions: Do not reinvent the wheel – start with an interview from another program that is similar to what you would like Partner with other programs that have same CMS and get a basic interview done for the group and then customize to individual program needs

Online Intake with A2J Author A2J Author Online Intake Training Series Part I - Intro to Online Intake: How it works with A2J Author + Benefits & Concerns. Part II - Project Phases & Management: – How to organize an online intake project with time and resource estimates Part III - Make It Your Own: Customization, Reviewing & Editing an Online Intake Script All Things Technical: Hosting (where is your interview going to live) & Transform (how to get collected data into your CMS) – October 20th Guest Speaker: John Mayer, CALI Up and Running: Where does the information go and what happens next? – December 15th Guest Speaker: David Bonebrake, LSC

Online Intake with A2J Author A2J Author Resources A2JAuthor.org Download software & user guide Sign up for monthly trainings Find slides and recordings from past trainings Online Intake Tools & Trainings Sample interviews from other programs Slides and recordings from past trainings

Online Intake with A2J Author Programs using A2J Author for Online Intake 10 programs with online intake projects 35+ programs researching for future online intake projects using A2J Author

Thank you for attending today! Next up: More information at www.lsntap.org

Contact Information Allison McDermott ( [email_address] ) Brian Rowe ( [email_address] ) or via chat on www.lsntap.org Don’t forget to take our survey!

Online Intake Best Practices Webinar

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Online Intake Best Practices Webinar (20)

More from Legal Services National Technology Assistance Project (LSNTAP) (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Online Intake Best Practices Webinar

Editor's Notes