1. National Data Consistency Project
CLCQ WEBINAR SERIES:
National Data Consistency Project, main areas of inconsistency, and new and revised service types
18 July 2019
Presented by Polly Porteous, NACLC,
with much thanks to Carly Hanson, CLCQ,

2. Acknowledgement of country
NACLC acknowledges the Traditional Owners of the lands across Australia on which we are located.
Here in Sydney I pay respect to the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation, traditional owners of the land on which the NACLC office is situated.
I also pay deep respect to Elders past, present and emerging, and to any and all Aboriginal people attending this webinar.

3. Webinar Housekeeping Facilitator: Recording:
Carly Hanson, Community Legal Centres Queensland
Recording:
This webinar is being recorded and will be available on the Staff Training page of CLCQ website as well as in the Resources section of NACLC’s Data Consistency Guide
PowerPoint / webinar materials:
ed prior to today’s session
Available to download from Handouts section of GTW control panel
Questions:
Questions will be addressed at the end
Type your questions/comments into question box on GTW control panel OR
Raise your hand and we will unmute your microphone
Technical help: or use question box in GTW

4. To inform and update CLCs and FVPLSs about the National Data Consistency Project
To discuss the main areas of controversy / inconsistency and feedback received about draft Data Consistency Guide
To provide overview of proposed changes to main service types
To provide overview of resources available
To set out timeline of What's Next
Aim of this webinar

5. Data consistency project – history and purpose
Commenced July 2018
NACLC funding from from AGD and Legal Aid NSW
Joint project between NACLC (Polly) and CLCQ (Carly), with input from Victorian Federation of CLCs (Kieran)
Purpose:
Centres collect, understand and use accurate and consistent data and information about the services they deliver, to inform their service planning and service provision decisions.
State, territory and national governments have reliable Centre data to use for the purposes of NPA as well as reporting and service planning (local, regional, and jurisdictional).
Data consistency project – history and purpose

6. Data Consistency Project Timeline
July Legal Aid NSW and AGD provided funding for Data Consistency Project
Jul-Aug NACLC (Polly), Carly (CLCQ) and Kieran (Vic Fed) scoped project
July-Nov Polly, Carly and Kieran interviewed 40 CLCs and FVPLS across Aust to identify inconsistencies
August workshop at National Conference
Sept-Dec internal analysis of inconsistencies and possible solutions
Jan Provided DSWG with comments about National Data Standards
Jan-March Drafted National Data Consistency Guide
March-April CLASS training across Aust included training/ discussion on data standards
March Data Consistency Guide live for consultation
May-July Finalising Guide, prepare training and other resources
July Training to be available through CLASS Training schedule
July-Sept Ongoing discussions with DSWG and funding bodies about data definitions
August Training on data consistency at National CLC Conference
Sept 2019 – Feb 2020 changes to RMG
Ongoing - feedback loop to inform further clarity on National Data Consistency Guide

7. Why is consistency in data recording important?
Analyse emerging trends and policy issues
What services are community legal centres, family violence prevention legal services, ATSILS providing, and to whom?
Is this difference between Centre X and Centre Y because of service delivery or because of their different interpretation of data definitions?
Understand our service delivery model/s
Is the community legal centre model different to FVPLS? To ATSILS? To Legal Aid Commissions?
Are specialist and generalist Centres different?
Reporting to funding bodies:
NPA requires state governments to report using data standards
State govts require targets and reports
PMC and AGD requirements for FVPLS & ATSILS
Advocating for improved funding:
Peak bodies use the data
Why is consistency in data recording important?

8. CLASS data: proportion of legal service types – Australia-wide change over time

9. All states – proportion of services 2017-18

10. Individual Centres in one state – proportion of services in each Centre 2017-18

11. Project identified five solutions to improve consistency
Data Consistency Guide – online at - cross-refers to CLASS Documentation
Changes to CLASS - New Ongoing Legal Support Service, changes to Reports, new fields in some service types
CLASS Training and Helpdesk – webinars, training through National Conference and Quarterlies, one-on-one support
National Data Standards – advocating to National Data Standards Working Group for changes eg Ongoing Legal Support Service
Risk Management Guide – to be updated in line with new service type definitions
Project identified five solutions to improve consistency

12. Data Consistency Guide consultation process
Draft Guide released for consultation March 2019
Based on Data Standards Manual but with more detail and case studies
Asked questions about some areas, particularly how best to handle work done with a client who is self-representing
Feedback closed mid-May 2019
Data Consistency Guide consultation process

13. Data Consistency Guide – Services Overview

14. Data Consistency Guide – Services … cont’d

15. Minor issues and clarifications
Discrete Services – now defined according to a clearly defined piece of work / output, not defined based on how long the work took (eg if in one day)
Information Service - requires direct interaction between Centre and Service User (so not chat bots or downloading websites)
Referrals – in CLASS, referrals made during other services are currently counted in CLASS reports
Reasons for Referrals – in CLASS, needs reworking to encourage Centres to use
Duty Lawyer – difference between non-legal court support (or friend of the court) and work of duty lawyer or advocate
Non-legal support - not defined solely by whether staff member is a non-lawyer - eg non-lawyer completes ADVO application – this is Legal Task as needs oversight by lawyer
Community Projects - needs more work, particularly working closely with FVPLS
Minor issues and clarifications

16. Key issues 1. Ongoing legal support
2. Secondary consultations – Record as Information Service? Legal Advice?
3. Legal Advice – Different problem types, Other Parties, funding categories = separate Advices?
4. Legal Advice v Legal Task – Extensive review of client docs or legal research: Advice or Task?
5. Legal Task – How many Legal Tasks? When does one stop and another begin?
6. Court/Tribunal Representation - when to open ("commenced" in court/tribunal) and what to do if Other Rep open when matter commences in court/tribunal.
Key issues

17. Key Issue 1. Ongoing legal support that is not representation
Problem identified:
National Data Standards says if not acting for the client then not a Representation Service = need to record multiple Legal Advices / Tasks
In CLSIS all ongoing matters were either minor, medium or major based on number of hours – the relationship between client and solicitor irrelevant
In practice, any legal practice would have one matter file containing filenotes and advice sheets
In CLASS it is hard to see what is happening with client as no easy way to group or view services as one “matter”
Range of ways Centres currently record these:
Multiple Legal Advices and Legal Tasks
One Legal Task with multiple Actions over long period of time
Opening Other Rep Service
Key Issue 1. Ongoing legal support that is not representation

18. … cont’d Feedback from sector:
About 2/3 of the Centres providing feedback wanted a new Ongoing Legal Support Service
Second preferred option was to redefine Other Representation Service to “Other Representation and Ongoing Legal Services” with sub-categories differentiating between Other Representation Service and Ongoing legal Support Service
Only a few centres said they wanted things to remain as they were: either because they simply didn’t have a model of service provision of providing support to self-represented clients, OR they wanted things to stay simple.
… cont’d

19. Solution:
Create a new stand-alone service type called Ongoing Legal Support Service, defined as follows:
In an Ongoing Legal Support Service, a Centre makes an up-front commitment to a client to provide them with ongoing support in their own efforts to resolve a legal matter. The Centre does not act for or represent the client, and does not take carriage of the legal matter. Any communications by the Centre with the client or with third parties about the legal matter make it clear that the Centre is not representing the client
From 1 August 2019, Centres encouraged to use the new service type for new services only (no need to change existing or closed services)
Work with National Data Standards Working Group to get this new type of service recognised
CLASS will create the new Ongoing Legal Support Service now, but NPA reports will map them back to Other Representation, until advised otherwise.
… cont’d

20. Key Issue 2. Secondary consultations
Problem identified:
Some Centres record these as Legal Advices with the client being the organization seeking advice on behalf of a client
Some record as Information Service
Some have a separate database / spreadsheet to record these as required by funders
Feedback:
Several Centres pointed out that it’s not legal advice if you don’t have the name of the client – has to be Information
Additional fields within CLASS Information Service might allow these to be captured accurately
Alternatively a new Service Type called Secondary Consultation would be good
Solution:
Create some new fields within Information Service which allow the identification of that Information Service as a Secondary Consultation
Currently being explored by the CLASS Team
Key Issue 2. Secondary consultations

21. Problems identified:
How to record a Legal Advice when a Centre provide a legal advice to one client in one session which involves:
Multiple legal issues across Civil Law, Family Law and/or Criminal Law, and/or
Multiple Other Parties, and/or
Different funding categories.
National Data Standards clearly state these are to be counted only as one legal advice
Creates difficulties in CLASS with future conflict checks and accurately capturing work across the Civil/Family/Criminal Law spectrum
Range of ways Centres currently recording:
Faithful to National Data Standards
Entering Legal Advice with 3 problem types = 3 separate advices
entering different Advices for different Other Parties
Key Issue 3. Legal Advice -different Other Parties or crosses Civil / Criminal / Family Law

22. Solution:
Use CLASS to record separate Advices but then change reporting back-end in CLASS to align Legal Advice counts with National Data Standards
Recording of Legal Advices by the Centre (in CLASS, can use Copy-A-Service):
Record separate Legal Advices for each legal problem type involving different Other Parties
If a Legal Advice has the same Other Parties but crosses Family / Civil / Criminal Law, record as separate Legal Advices
If a Legal Advice crosses two different funding categories, record separate Legal Advices.
CLASS Reporting: NACLC is now investigating changing back- end of CLASS reporting (NPA Reports) so that records of several Advices given by same solicitor on same day = one count of Legal Advice
Data Standards: NACLC talking to DSWG to check if room to move on changing counting rules for Legal Advices
… cont’d

23. Key Issue 4. Legal Advice v Legal Task
Problems identified:
Where a Legal Advice includes substantial time – eg hours or even days – reviewing a client’s documents and/or researching the law, some Centres record this as a Legal Task
In CLASS, Legal Advice doesn’t have field to record time spent
Feedback from sector:
Some Centres firmly of view that a complex legal advice should be recorded as Legal Task soas to reflect effort of Centre
Other Centres clear that a Legal Task is different to a Legal Advice because involves interaction with 3rd party and/or preparation of documents
Solution:
CLASS to include a field in Legal Advice to record time spent
Data Consistency Guide to include greater clarity about difference between Legal Advice and Legal Task:
Reviewing a client’s documents and researching the law to prepare legal advice for the client is all part of a Legal Advice, regardless of the length of time spent or complexity of the legal matters, so long as it does not involve any interaction with a third party or preparing documents for a client to use in legal proceedings. In CLASS, these activities can be recorded in the Legal Advice as Actions.
Key Issue 4. Legal Advice v Legal Task

24. Key Issue 5: How many Legal Tasks?
Problem identified:
Legal Task not a concept Centres were familiar with
CLASS allows an end date for Legal Task
Inconsistencies in how some Centres were recording Legal Tasks:
Some recording every interaction with a 3rd party as a new Legal Task
Some recording new Legal Tasks if work undertaken on different days
Feedback
Not useful to define Legal Task as being moment-in-time
Link Legal Task to a clearly defined piece of work
Solutions – introduce Ongoing legal Support Service, plus clearer definition of Legal Task:
A Legal Task is where a Centre undertakes a discrete, clearly- defined, one­-off piece of legal work to assist a Service User in their own efforts to resolve a legal problem, with no commitment to support the Service User beyond the completion of that piece of work. The two main types of work in a Legal Task are reviewing or preparing particular documents for a Service User to use in their legal proceedings; or a limited instance of interacting with a third party to help progress a Service User’s legal matter. A Legal Task can include multiple activities (Actions in CLASS) to finalise the piece of work.
Key Issue 5: How many Legal Tasks?

25. Key Issue 6: Court/Tribunal Representation
Problem identified:
When a Centre is acting for a client in Other Rep, what to do when court/tribunal action starts?
Inconsistencies: some Centres were
Changing their existing service from Other Rep to Court/Tribunal
Closing existing Other Rep and opening a new Court/Tribunal Rep service
Feedback:
Reasonably evenly split as to best course of action
Solution
Close Other Rep and open new Court/Tribunal based on clarified definition of Court/Tribunal Rep:
A Court/Tribunal Representation Service is where a Centre provides ongoing representation for a matter that has commenced in a court, tribunal or inquiry, where the Centre provides legal representation to the Service user and takes carriage of the matter in an ongoing, representative capacity.
“Commenced” in this context means the matter has been filed in court, lodged in a Tribunal, or accepted for inquiry by a forum such as a Royal Commission.
Key Issue 6: Court/Tribunal Representation

26. Summary: What will change for my Centre?
More clarity for your staff and volunteers particularly about Legal Tasks and Ongoing Legal Support Services
For those Centres that don’t do much work assisting self-represented clients – eg Centres with an “Advice and Representation” model – not much will change
For those Centres that do a lot of work that falls short of representation, you should have less difficulty figuring out how to record and count particular bits of work
Community Projects – work still needed – we may seek sector’s input
Summary: What will change for my Centre?

27. Tools and resources to support you https://naclc
Case Studies
Ready Reckoner
Matrix of Services
Flowchart
Training
CLASS Helpdesk

28. Tool 1 – Case- studies
Available in Resources section of Data Consistency Guide
New Case Studies are being constantly added to as people provide tricky cases for us to advise on
Please use the case studies and if you think they’re wrong – let us know

29. Tool 2 - Ready Reckoner

30. Tool 3 - Matrix: what service is this?
Centre requires Service User’s name and identifying details
Centre reviews Service User’s documents and conducts legal research but does not communicate with 3rd parties
Service User gives Centre Authority to Obtain Info from 3rd parties
Centre has committed to help Service User in an ongoing way
Centre acts for / represents the Service user
Matter involves Service User being party to proceedings in a court, tribunal or inquiry
Matter involves mediation or other alternative dispute resolution
Information
 (sometimes)
Referral
Legal Advice 
Legal Task
Duty Lawyer
Non-legal support – discrete
 (sometimes 
Non-legal support – ongoing
  (sometimes
Court/Tribunal Representation
Dispute Resolution Representation
Other Representation
Ongoing Legal Support Service
Facilitated Dispute Resolution Service

31. Tool 4 - Flowchart Under development
Will take people through decision-trees
Starts with initial visit or phone call from Service User, through to determining if a particular interaction is an Information, Referral, Legal Advice, Legal Task, Non-Legal Support then through to the various ongoing services
Which Service and how many – decision trees help identify when an additional Service needs to be recorded
It will need some tinkering, so once the first draft is available, NACLC will welcome advice about how it might be improved
The aim is that people could download it and edit it (eg taking out stages that are irrelevant to the Centre)
Stay tuned!

32. Tools 5 and 6 – Training & CLASS Helpdesk
CLASS Team will incorporate Data Consistency webinars in their schedule of online training
This webinar and powerpoint will be available online – through CLCQ website, through NACLC website and via the “Resources” section of the Data Consistency Guide
CLASS will provide advice and help on data definitions via the CLASS Helpdesk
Phone
CLASS Training at National Conference and Quarterlies (in discussion with state peaks and funding bodies)
Centre-based training – please discuss with CLASS Helpdesk

33. What’s next? Revised Data Consistency Guide
Revised Guide available online, in Word and PDF
All resources revised and released
Ongoing training and Helpdesk support
Data Standards Working Group
NACLC asking for DSWG to agree to new service type Ongoing Legal Support Service
If DSWG says no, we will still introduce it in CLASS but map it back to Other Representation, or service type as approved by AGD/ funding bodies
Discussion with funding bodies
NACLC to train state and territory funding bodies on Data Consistency Guide
NACLC to discuss implications for targets
Risk Management Guide
Consult with National PII network
Draft changes to RMG to bring in revised service type definitions and new service type Ongoing Legal Support Service
What’s next?

34. Data Consistency Project Timeline
July Legal Aid NSW and AGD provided funding for Data Consistency Project
Jul-Aug NACLC (Polly), Carly (CLCQ) and Kieran (Vic Fed) scoped project
July-Nov Polly, Carly and Kieran interviewed 40 CLCs and FVPLS across Aust to identify inconsistencies
August workshop at National Conference
Sept-Dec internal analysis of inconsistencies and possible solutions
Jan Provided DSWG with comments about National Data Standards
Jan-March Drafted National Data Consistency Guide
March-April CLASS training across Aust included training/ discussion on data standards
March Data Consistency Guide live for consultation
May-July Finalising Guide, prepare training and other resources
July Training to be available through CLASS Training schedule
July-Sept Ongoing discussions with DSWG and funding bodies about data definitions
August Training on data consistency at National CLC Conference
Sept 2019 – Feb 2020 changes to RMG
Ongoing - feedback loop to inform further clarity on National Data Consistency Guide

35. Thankyou! Contact NACLC for advice or feedback:
General CLASS questions or requests for training, call Helpdesk on or
For data consistency,
Participate in forums accessible through