accesss to justice self represented divorce

8/2/2019 Accesss to Justice Self Represented Divorce

1/75

Access to Justice: Self-Represented Divorce

Litigants in California

A Best Practices Report

August 2006

By

Rachel A. Rubin and Adam EngelhartUC Hastings College of the Law


2/75

2

Table of Contents

..................................................................................Preface and Summary of Recommendations 3

............................................................................................................................ Needs Assessment

............................................................................................................................Service Delivery 13

..........................................................................................................................Program Outreach 30

.....................................................................................................Access, Language and Literacy 39

.................................................................................................................................Program Staff 43

..........................................................................................................................Quality Assurance 50

...............................................................................................Conclusion and Acknowledgments 54

..........................................................................................Appendix A: Descriptions of Counties 56

.............................................................................................................Appendix B: Intake Forms 66

..............................................................................................Appendix C: Accessible Documents 71

................................................................................................................Annotated Bibliography 73


3/75

3

Preface and Summary of Recommendations

Services for Self-Represented Litigants in California

Over the past twenty years in California, the number of self-represented litigants has

more than tripled. In 1980, approximately 24 percent of litigants in divorce cases self-

represented.1 In 2005, the courts reported that approximately 80 percent of parties in family law

cases represented themselves.2

In response to these growing numbers and their major impact on the California courts, the

state enacted the Family Law Facilitator Program in 1997. California Family Code section 10000

requires each of the states 58 counties to maintain an office of the Family Law Facilitator that

offers services to help with child and spousal support, health insurance, child custody, visitation

and divorce.3 Each county individually assesses its needs and may provide services beyond the

minimum statutory requirements.4 Family Law Facilitators work with one another, with various

state agencies, and with non-profit organizations to improve access to the courts for self-

represented litigants. The California Courts maintain an online self-help center that also works as

a clearinghouse and a resource to direct litigants to services in their counties.

1 Frances Harrison et al., Californias Family Law Facilitator Program: A New Paradigm for the Courts, J. OF THECENTER FORCHILDREN, FAMILIES & THE COURTS, 2000, at 61 [Hereinafter, Harrison].The following terms all refer to litigants who are not represented by legal counsel and who represent themselves;

they are interchangeable: self-represented litigants,pro se litigants, litigants who appearin propria persona.For more information on the resources from which this report was compiled, refer to the Annotated Bibliography

infra.

2 JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF CALIFORNIAADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS, MODEL SELF-HELP PILOT PROGRAM:AREPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE (2005) 1.

3 Family Law Facilitator Act, CAL. FAM. CODE 10003 (1997): This division shall apply to all actions orproceedings for temporary or permanent child support, spousal support, health insurance, child custody, or visitationin a proceeding for dissolution of marriage, nullity of marriage, legal separation, or exclusive child custody, orpursuant to the Uniform Parentage Act (Part 3 (commencing with Section 7600) of Division 12) or the DomesticViolence Prevention Act (Division 10 (commencing with Section 6200)).

4 Family Law Facilitator Act, CAL. FAM. CODE 10004-10005 (1997).


4/75

4

The Judicial Council of California, the Administrative Office of the Courts, Family Law

Facilitators offices and other organizations have published studies on the success of court-based

self help centers and on the best ways to meet the needs of litigants.

Methodology

Over a period of eight weeks in the summer of 2006, we gathered data from the

California Courts, the Judicial Council of California, the Administrative Office of the Courts, and

multiple Family Law Facilitator programs and court-based self-help service centers regarding

access to justice for self-represented litigants. We examined print, online and other media

resources for self-represented litigants, as well as studies, empirical data, program evaluations,

and reports to the California Legislature about court-based self-help programs. In addition, we

conducted telephone and in-person interviews with California Administrative Office of the

Courts staff, Family Law Facilitators, self-help center staff, and self-represented litigants who

used the self-help centers. We examined existing Family Law Facilitator programs and court-

based self-help centers in San Francisco, Placer, Orange, Los Angeles, Fresno, Butte, Glenn, and

Tehama Counties5 to identify the best methods of service delivery, office management, and the

related ethical and practical issues. These counties represent the wide variation in demographics

and needs of self-represented litigants in California. This report is not a comprehensive study of

all 58 county programs.

Though the majority of our research focused on California programs, we also examined

best practice reports and materials from other states and from national conferences.

5 See Appendix A for short descriptions of these counties.


5/75

5

Goals of the Report

The goal of court-based self-help programs is to provide equal access to justice for all

litigants, regardless of location, socioeconomic status, or education. A successful program

educates litigants about the justice system and gives them the tools and support they need to

achieve a just and fair result. 6 We sought to identify the best practices from some of the most

successful and innovative programs in California. For the purposes of this report, we define

success primarily from the point of view of the self-represented litigant: what are the most

efficient and effective ways to help her understand her options, the judicial process, and to reach

a fair resolution of her case? Second, how can court-based self-help centers ease the burden

placed on the court by the increasing number of self-represented litigants? Because of the broad

variety of needs of self-represented litigants, this report primarily addresses the best practices to

assist and improve access for self-represented litigants in divorce proceedings. However, some

best practices will also apply to parties who seek help with other matters, such as child or spousal

support or child custody issues. This report surveys and evaluates services currently available, as

well as recommends future improvements.

We modeled this report after theBest Practices for Programs to Assist Self-Represented

Litigants in Family Law Matters from the Circuit Courts of Maryland Family Divisions &

Family Services Programs Pro Se Best Practices Workgroup report.7 The Maryland report

divided best practices into categories, including Needs Assessment, Service Delivery, Program

6 Harrison at 62.

7 MARYLAND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS, BEST PRACTICES FORPROGRAMS TO ASSIST SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANTS IN FAMILY LAWMATTERS (2005).


6/75

6

Outreach, Access, Language and Literacy, Program Staff, and Quality Assurance. We have

adopted these categories for our report.

We hope that this report will serve as a useful tool for California and other state family

courts to evaluate and implement measures to improve access to justice forpro se litigants.

Recommended Practices

We discuss recommended practices in each area ofpro se assistance in the body of this

report. The following are our principal recommendations by area, along with references to the

pages of the report in which we discuss them:

Needs Assessment

Carefully examine thepro se population to determine which services they use and

require, and reassess the program regularly to ensure it meets customers needs.

Meet with litigants one-on-one to address individual concerns and needs.

Service Delivery

Offer a broad range of services, including one-on-one assistance, workshops, printed

materials and forms, a website, a reference library, and referrals to other organizations.

Operate in a functional, well-designed office with sufficient space and resources to

provide all necessary services.

Provide a childrens waiting area or attended childcare at the courthouse.

Program Outreach

Locate the self-help center at or very near the courthouse. If this is not possible, locate the

center close to major transportation routes and public transit.


7/75

7

Post information about the program where center users can clearly see it, both in the

center and in local libraries, social-service centers, and other court offices.

Access, Language and Literacy

Create versions of handouts and forms that are accessible to customers with low levels of

literacy.

Have a central, statewide program to translate materials to avoid duplication of effort.

Provide multi- or bi-lingual staff.

Provide services accessible to persons with disabilities.

Program Staff

Conform to statutory guidelines, and act in conformance with state, local, and court codes

of ethics;

A licensed attorney with experience in family law oversees the program, manages the

office and oversees program staff;

Provide regular training and educational opportunities for attorneys and program staff,

including

o Formal training process and regular, mandatory training sessions and conferences;

o Staff development and continuing education seminars;

o Access to legal information, studies, and best practice reports about self-help

service providers.

Ensure that attorneys and staff have access to all necessary resources, including a law

library, modern technology, program evaluations, best practices reports, or other studies

on self-help centers;


8/75

8

Ensure that each program has sufficient funds to support at least one attorney and one full

time legal assistant. Programs should have sufficient funding to provide all necessary

services to litigants.

Quality Assurance

Establish a data collection regimen to collect basic data on all litigants and more detailed

data on a randomly selected sample thereof;

Collect narratives of litigants experiences with the system, both in cases where it worked

well and cases where it did not;

Ensure all program materials are consistently correct and up to date;

Establish procedures for dealing with litigants complaints.


9/75

9

Needs Assessment

Needs Assessment is the planning and triage component ofpro se service. Court-based

self-help programs conduct needs assessment on two scales. On the large scale, planning, they

consider the needs of the community and decide which services will best fill those needs within

their funding and resource limitations. On the small scale, triage, they screen litigants in order to

provide each litigant with all necessary information and services.8

Large-Scale: Needs of the Community

Self-represented divorce litigants have a broad range of needs, and self-help centers

should provide adequate services to meet these needs. It is up to each program to identify the

needs of its customers,9 and to continually, meaningfully evaluate the services it provides. The

California Administrative Office of the Courts points out that

although the legal paradigms for family law are based on a divorce model for the

dissolution of a traditional marriage, many families in todays family court no longer fit

this description. Family relationships are far more varied and complex . . .10

Court-based self-help centers respond to these needs and provide service in various ways,

including one-on-one assistance (either in person or over the phone), printed materials like forms

packets, help with completing forms, assistance via video- or teleconferencing equipment,

workshops, and clinics.

8 BEST PRACTICES FORPROGRAMS TO ASSIST SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANTS IN FAMILY LAW MATTERS (2005) 8.

9 Self-help service centers refer to those who use their services as customers and not clients to emphasize thatthey are not in an attorney-client relationship and are stillpro se litigants. We follow this terminology.

10 GREACEN ASSOCIATES, LLC, DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE PRACTICES IN FAMILY LAWCASEFLOW MANAGEMENT: AMANUAL PREPARED FOR THE CALIFORNIAADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS CENTER FORFAMILIES,CHILDREN, AND THE COURTS (2005) 5.


10/75

10

Large-scale needs assessment begins even before the programs are established, to

determine which services the community requires and the most common types of cases in which

litigants self-represent.11 The majority of self-represented litigants need:

Help with forms: Self-help staff can explain how to complete all necessary forms,

including what specific information is necessary and how to present it to the court;

One-on-one services;

Explanation of legal processes: stages of the case, filing deadlines, waiting periods,

how to arrange for service of process, courtroom procedures, etc. 12

In Los Angeles, Sutter, and Fresno counties, data from the 2001-2002 fiscal year

regarding the family law self-help centers showed: 13

70% of customers needed help with a divorce, legal separation, or nullity

about 70% had at least a high-school education14

about 30% had documents reviewed in the center

33% of customers received telephone assistance, and 65% one-on-one assistance

Courts that have not establishedpro se assistance programs can use data gathered from the

generalpro se population to plan the services they will offer. In this case, the data indicate that

the population is mostly fairly well-educated and requires mostly brief consultations about forms

and procedures.

11 JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF CALIFORNIAADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS, EQUAL ACCESS FUND: AREPORT TOTHE CALIFORNIALEGISLATURE (2005) 55.

12Id. at 56.

13 JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF CALIFORNIAADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS, FAMILY LAW INFORMATION CENTERS:AN EVALUATION OF THREE PILOT PROGRAMS (2003) 55. For similar data from 1999-2000 regarding the Family LawFacilitator program, see Harrison at 89-97.

14 This data was not available for Los Angeles county.


11/75

11

Programs should also consider the needs of litigants with limited literacy or language

skills.15

Small-Scale: Individual Litigants (Triage)

Litigants who visit self-help centers generally want to talk with someone one-on-one who

can explain the process, rather than read documents or use interactive technology.16 At the San

Francisco self-help center, an attorney or staff member screens each customer. Customers

eligible for assistance fill out an intake form (possibly with volunteer assistance) with their basic

data and information about their case, and sign a disclosure form that informs them they are only

receiving legal information, not advice or representation.17 Volunteers and staff then provide

appropriate assistance based on the type of case. If the self-help center cannot help the customer,

they provide appropriate referrals.18

15 We address this in the Access, Language and Literacy section infra.

16 FAMILY LAW INFORMATION CENTERS: AN EVALUATION OF THREE PILOT PROGRAMS at 55.

17 Please see the Program Staff section infra for further discussion of the customer-center relationship and relatedethical issues.

18 MODEL SELF-HELP PILOT PROGRAM 120. We discuss referrals in the Service Delivery section infra.


12/75

12

Recommendations

Carefully examine thepro se population to determine which services they use and

require.

Reassess the program regularly to ensure it meets customers needs.

Hold one-on-one meetings with litigants to address individual concerns and needs.

Establish efficient and consistent processes to screen incoming customers.

Have sound knowledge of other programs and services, whether court-based or

independent agencies, to which self-help centers can refer litigants.


13/75

13

Service Delivery

The means of service delivery necessarily vary between centers based on community

needs, staff, space, and funding limitations. Geographic, transportation, and language barriers

impede access to justice, but technology and creative solutions can successfully overcome these

obstacles.

Services Provided

One-on-one Services

The primary mode of service delivery in most centers is one-on-one assistance, though the

type and extent of one-on-one interaction with customers varies. Data collected through

customer satisfaction surveys, anecdotal information, and interviews shows that the

overwhelming majority of customers are most satisfied with service if they receive one-on-one

instruction from an individual staff member rather than a computer or a form. 19 Divorce cases

can be complex and emotional, and a one-on-one interaction is often the most comfortable mode

of service for a litigant. However, the volume of customers makes it extremely difficult for a

center to operate strictly on a one-on-one basis. A center must use a combination of services in

order to meet customer needs. Some of those additional services follow.

19 Interviews with Diane Bras, Placer County Family Law Facilitator, and Placer County clinic participants, inAuburn, Cal. (June 23, 2006) [hereinafter, Diane Bras interview]. MODEL SELF HELP PILOT PROGRAMincludescharts and discussions of customer satisfaction statistics for many county programs. FAMILY LAW INFORMATIONCENTERS: AN EVALUATION OF THREE PILOT PROGRAMS 55.


14/75

14

Clinics

Many self-help centers offer regularly-scheduled clinics. Some operate on a drop-in basis

and others by appointment only. Clinics offer general assistance for all types of family law

cases, though some centers offer clinics for divorce litigants only.

In a drop-in clinic model, customers arrive at the Family Law Facilitators office in the

morning and sign onto a list.20 The staff or volunteers then meet with customers one by one and

asks each to explain why they came to the clinic and where they are in the divorce process. The

staff member then reviews the facts of the case, explains the divorce process and discusses the

customers options. Then the staff member helps the customer fill out the forms, then explains

the filing process and the next steps in the case. If the customers case is more complex or

requires follow-up, the staff member may refer the customer to the Family Law Facilitator

herself or may arrange for an appointment at a later time.

Staff members should be sure to explain other options to the customer, such as mediation,

alternative dispute resolution (ADR), or other social services that are available.

Diane Bras, the Family Law Facilitator for Placer County, notes that it is important to

choose a set time to offer clinics and to stick with it.21 In Placer County, drop-in clinics were

offered certain days of the week in the morning. That schedule changed, and over a year later

litigants would still appear for the originally scheduled clinics. The center would not always be

able to help them, and the litigant would have to return at a later date.

20 It is important that this list is easy to find, and that customers understand the clinic process. See Program Outreachinfra for more on signage.

21 Diane Bras interview.


15/75

15

Workshops

Workshops educate litigants on the legal process and help them prepare case materials.

Many self-help centers provide workshops on various aspects of family law cases such as form

completion, understanding community property, or an overview of the divorce process. Some

hold workshops in the evenings for litigant convenience. Others are available on video or DVD

for purchase or viewing in a center. Los Angeles County offers the Divorce Workshop Series,

which consists of three separate workshops, each lasting about four to five hours, covering all

pleadings required to start and complete a dissolution of marriage.22 In Butte County, an

attorney will hold a workshop that, through the use of real-time videoconferencing, enables self-

represented litigants in Tehama and Glenn Counties to receive simultaneous assistance. However,

a staff member should be available at all locations to which the workshop is broadcast in order to

answer questions in person.

Most workshops include a lecture format and a question and answer period. Participants

in Los Angeles and other counties report that these workshops are most effective when

conducted in small group formats.23 Some centers ask litigants to meet with staff members

before the workshop to fill in as much basic personal information on their forms as possible. In

others, litigants prepare forms as part of the workshop and meet with staff members afterwards to

review their work. This varies depending on the topic of the workshop and needs of the litigant.

Centers can hold workshops on site or at rotating locations around the county. Some

centers hold workshops at other community agencies, which is a good way to coordinate services

with that agency and to reach out to the community it serves.

22 MODEL SELF-HELP PILOT PROGRAM at 180.

23Id. at 76.


16/75

16

Centers should consistently evaluate workshop offerings and curricula to ensure they

continue to meet customer needs.

Videoconferencing

Centers should also take advantage of technology to improve one-on-one assistance.

Videoconferencing workshops is a good way to make efficient use of attorney time and limited

staff resources. This way, one attorney can conduct a videocast workshop that serves groups of

customers in multiple locations at once. Butte, Glenn, and Tehama Counties have used

videoconferencing equipment, which is normally used to broadcast workshops, to conduct one-

on-one sessions as well. If a volunteer at one location is unable to answer a question, she can

reach the staff attorney at the other location who can then use the videoconferencing equipment

to help the customer face-to-face.24

Forms, Instructions, and Other Written Information

Forms and step-by-step instructions allow customers who do not need one-on-one

assistance to find necessary information and to fill out their forms with minimal staff

involvement. It is important that customers are able to take home instructional information,

worksheets, court procedures, and handouts on other services. Litigants should have easy access

to all forms needed to complete any type of divorce, including child or spousal support materials,

as well as checklists and instructional materials that explain how to fill out the forms, where and

how to file the forms, and other basic information. The court in Riverside County includes the

checklist used by court staff to review a litigants materials in the forms packet it provides to

24Id. at 42.


17/75

17

self-represented litigants. Centers should have hard copies of all necessary forms and all

instructional materials that are available online.

Because California divorce law is driven by standardized forms, instructional materials,

document assembly packages and other methods of assisting litigants can be completed

economically.25 The Judicial Council of California and other organizations have developed

instructional materials, though many of these materials were initially designed for attorneys and

judges, and so were not particularly understandable to the average litigant. The Judicial Council,

as well as many court-based self-help centers, continues to work to simplify these forms. They

have adopted plain-language, larger fonts, more graphics, and simplified instructions so the

forms are understandable on a fourth grade reading level.26 Centers should make efforts to

present all material as clearly and simply as possible for litigants.

Written program information should also inform litigants of the neutrality of the office,

particularly that there is no attorney-client relationship between the Facilitator and the litigant,

that Family Law Facilitators provide only legal information and not legal advice, that the center

serves both parties, and that the use of the center does not influence the neutrality of the court.27

Forms, checklists, and instructions should also be available in multiple languages.

In addition to forms and handouts in languages other than English, some centers produce

materials in a medium common in particular cultures. For example, the Spanish-language Centro

25 BONNIE ROSE HOUGH, DESCRIPTION OF CALIFORNIACOURTS PROGRAMS FORSELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANTS(2003) 46, 49 [hereinafter, Hough].

26 See Appendix B for an example. Microsoft Word can calculate a statistic called the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level,which gives an approximation of the level of education that is necessary to understand a document. Many otherprograms can do so as well.

27 Hough at 49.


18/75

18

de Recursos Legales in Los Angeles County produced afoto-novella [sic],28 which is a short

magazine that tells a story with pictures. This one tells the story of a customer getting help from

the center.29

Some centers also maintain a reference library with legal self-help books or videos for

litigants to use on site. There are some excellent instructional books published by Nolo Press,30

which explain the divorce process and include all necessary forms.

Public Workstations

Centers should have public workstations available. The customers can use the

workspaces and written materials at the center to fill out forms, and then have the center staff

check their work. Interviews in Butte, Glenn and Tehama Counties show that these stations are

helpful to customers and enhance the efficiency of the office.31

Public Computers

Access to public computers that are monitored by a staff person, either at the self-help

center or in or near the courthouse, can be very helpful to litigants. Computers provide litigants

with easy access to legal forms and resources and help the centers run more efficiently. A list of

helpful websites, including the California State Courts Self-Help website,32 should be posted at

the computers. Litigants can use the computers to fill out forms using programs such as EZLegal


29Id.

30 e.g., ED SHERMAN, HOW TO DO YOUROWN DIVORCE IN CALIFORNIA (28th ed. 2005).

31MODEL SELF-HELP PILOT PROGRAM at 43.

32 California Courts Self-Help Center, http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp (last visited August 7, 2006).


19/75

19

File, HotDocs, or fillable PDF forms developed by the Administrative Office of the Courts.

These documents can then be printed on site and reviewed by self-help center staff. The

computers should be accessible during all court or center working hours.

Public access computers can also make a self-help center run more efficiently and may

allow the staff to help more people in one day. Litigants can have their forms prepared by the

time they meet with a staff person, who only needs to review them rather than walk the litigant

through the forms line by line.

Centers that maintain public computers should always have a staff person or volunteer

available to answer questions or to assist with technical difficulties. This persons primary

responsibility should be computer aid, particularly if a majority of the populations served are not

experienced computer users. Centro de Recursos Legales, the Spanish-language self-help center

in Fresno County, installed an I-CAN! module33 in its center, but found that it was not a practical

solution because the amount of staff time required to help customers . . . turned out to be

prohibitive.34

Computer workstations and internet sources should not replace one-on-one meetings with

self-help center staff or printed materials available at the center. Though no comprehensive study

regarding self-represented litigants and computer usage has been conducted, anecdotal evidence

shows that many self-represented litigants may not be able to access information via the Web

33 The I-CAN! program is a kiosk and free web-based service developed by the Legal Aid Society of Orange Countyand jointly sponsored by different local, state, and public agencies and organizations. It is designed to provideconvenient access to legal services and information. See ICAN! Legal Self-Help Project, http://lstech.org/projects/tig_2001_37 (last visited August 7, 2006) and California State Plan Update 2003, http://www.pic.org/StatePlan/calupdate.pdf.



20/75

20

site due to low literacy levels, lack of access to computers, or low levels of comfort with using

computers.35

Electronic Document Filing

Customer-friendly electronic document filing and preparation can make it easier for

litigants to file court documents. For example, California courts use a program called

EZLegalFile,36 where users enter the necessary personal information onto a web site, which then

prints properly-formatted PDF court forms.37 Self-represented litigants can prepare these forms

on their own and file them with the court, or they can prepare them at the self-help center and

staff can review the information. This can ease the burden on litigants and staff because, at the

very least, the electronic document generation system ensures the parties names and basic

information is consistent throughout the forms.38 However, it is extremely important that these

systems are user-friendly and are designed from a users perspective, or they may impede, rather

than improve, access to justice. Litigants should be able to access electronic document filing

systems both from the center or the countys website and from public computers available at the

center or courthouse.

35Id. at 148.

36 Some courts also use a similar program called HotDocs.

37 http://www.ezlegalfile.org/.

38 Interview with Bonnie Hough, California Center for Children, Families, and the Courts, in San Francisco, Cal.(June 20, 2006) [hereinafter, Bonnie Hough interview].


21/75

21

Kiosks

Computer-driven kiosks located in courthouses or libraries were a relatively popular

means of service delivery as Family Law Information Centers and Family Law Facilitators

programs developed. Centers would place a standalone kiosk with a computer with Internet

access and a printer in a courthouse, for example, so a litigant could fill out and print his forms.

The problem, however, was that many litigants were uncomfortable using a free-standing

computer to handle a personal legal matter. Others did not know that kiosks were available. If a

kiosk was broken, or if the litigant had a question on a form or on how to use the program, there

was no self-help center staff person available to answer their questions.

The only location in which the kiosk system is consistently used and has received a

positive response is in Orange County, where one kiosk location has a staff member on hand to

answer questions about kiosk use.39 The vast majority of litigants surveyed who used the

attended I-CAN! kiosks in Orange County found them easy to use. However, courts with

unattended kiosks did not find the system effective.40

Also, if the law or forms change, kiosks

need updating, which can demand a significant cost.

If a center does use a kiosk system, the best practice is to have an attendant available to

answer litigant questions and to solve technical problems.

39 Bonnie Hough interview.

40Id.


22/75

22

Web Site

The Judicial Council of California maintains a comprehensive online self-help center at

www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp, which serves as a resource for litigants and attorneys who wish to

learn more about the self-help process or to find service providers. The website provides step-by-

step instructions for common proceedings, and also simple, concise explanations of areas of law.

All of the information on the site is accessible at a 5th grade level. 41 There are thousands of

links to other resources, and the entire site is available in Spanish. Links are added as web pages

are translated into other languages. A litigant can follow the links on the site to locate the Family

Law Facilitator in their county, and to find other free or low-cost legal help.42

Each county should maintain a website for self-represented litigants. This website should

include web links and contact information for all self-help service providers, explanations and

comprehensive lists of services provided, eligibility to use the self-help center, limitations on

services, all necessary forms, where to go for more information, mobile service center schedules,

links to EZ Legal File, fee schedules, etc.43

Family Law Facilitators offices and other court-

based self help programs must be sure that the information available on these sites is correct and

up to date. Centers should review and update these websites at least yearly.

41 Hough at 51.

42 Family Law Facilitator in Your County, http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp/lowcost/flf.htm (last visited August7, 2006).

43 Many local courts have also developed helpful resources for litigants representing themselves. Examples include:Santa Clara: http://www.scselfservice.org/default.htm; Ventura: http://courts.countyofventura.org/venturaMasterFrames5.htm; Los Angeles:http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/familylaw/ and http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/probate/index.asp?selfhelp=1,Sacramento: http://www.saccourt.com/index/family.asp, http://www.saccourt.com/index/ud.asp, andhttp://www.saccourt.com/index/smallclaims.asp; Stanislaus, http://www.stanct.org/courts/familylaw/index.html andShasta: http://www.shastacourts.com/familylaw.shtml. Hough at 52.


23/75

23

Telephone Assistance

Telephone hotlines or available telephone assistance can help overcome geographic or

transportation barriers.44 Telephone assistance facilitates efficient case management for

individuals who may not be able to reach the center because of work, lack of childcare, or a

disability.45 Bi-lingual staff members or volunteers available by phone will help litigants who

may come to the center at times when no one is able to provide services in their language.46 A

hotline may also be a way to conduct triage on a case, screen customers, or to provide basic

information such as office hours, location, directions, and services provided.

Centers can employ the use of volunteers to staff hotlines or to provide telephone

assistance. Some self-help centers provide scripts to handle telephone calls for different legal

issues.47 This ensures consistency and accuracy of service. If a call is too complicated, the

volunteer can arrange for the litigant to come to the center, or can refer the litigant to a trained

staff member.

A telephone hotline can also serve as a referral service to various local social services

organizations. Los Angeles County maintains InfoLine, which provides litigants with referrals

to a wide range of social services.48 The Self-Help Regional Assistance Project (SHARP) in

Butte, Glenn and Tehama Counties serves customers in rural areas who live far from the self-

help centers. The SHARP reports that over 51 percent of contacts are made over the

44 MODEL SELF HELP PILOT PROGRAM at 9.

45Id.

46Id. at 211.

47Id. at 209.

48 DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE PRACTICES IN FAMILY CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT at 53.


24/75

24

telephone.49 Courts outside of California have started to take advantage of telephone services

as well. In Alaska, self-help centers provide services exclusively over the phone.50

Providing telephone assistance requires adequate staffing and has a greater

risk of misunderstanding because people do not always accurately describe their

situation. For example, sometimes people say they received a subpoena when in fact

they were served with a summons. Without seeing the paperwork, the response of the

telephone staff would be vastly different, and most likely incorrect.51

An effective script, good interview techniques, and trained staff can effectively minimize

this problem.

Mobile Access Projects

In some larger counties, Family Law Facilitator offices or Family Law Information

Clinics maintain Mobile Access Projects, which are vans that travels to shelters, prisons, or

libraries in towns that are far from the courthouse, or where litigants may not have easy access to

public transportation or computers.

In Yolo County, court staff travel to the Department of Child Support Services office ina low income housing area to provide assistance to litigants to save them the long

commute to the courthouse. In Santa Clara County, the family law facilitators office

takes the courts CourtMobile [van] to the DCSS office.52


50 THE FUTURE OF SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGATION at 25.

51Id. at 37.

52 DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE PRACTICES IN FAMILY CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT at 116.


25/75

25

Referrals

Family Law Facilitators offices should maintain a strong network of local and state-wide

service providers in order to offer a litigant the full range of services available to her. This range

of options is particularly helpful to those litigants who may have trouble coming into the office

because of work, child care issues, or other reasons. The San Francisco pilot self-help center

referred about 16 percent of its customers to other agencies. The most common referral targets

were lawyer referral services and other legal self-help centers.53

Centers should coordinate a referral system with other court-based programs, non-profits,

bar associations, pro bono or low cost attorney services, unbundled legal service providers, 54

legal referral services, and social services providers.55 Self-help center staff should be familiar

with the referral network and should provide customers with written materials about the service

to which they are referred, including contact information, location, available services, and

eligibility. Los Angeles County, for example, refers customers to InfoLine, a community based

social services referral hotline. San Diego and San Mateo Counties provide customers with a

binder of attorneys who are willing to provide unbundled legal services.

Office Space

A functional, well-designed office space is an extremely useful tool to improve efficiency,

and ease of use for both staff and litigants, and may improve the quality and volume of services

53

MODEL SELF-HELP PILOT PROGRAM 122.54 Unbundled legal services are more affordable, discrete service representation for litigants who do not want orcannot afford an attorney to handle their entire case. Many counties encourage attorneys to provide unbundled legalservices, and encourage self-represented litigants to take advantage of them. For more information on unbundledlegal services, see http://www.unbundledlaw.org/. THE FUTURE OF SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGATION also contains agood discussion of the pros and cons of unbundled legal services throughout.

55 It is important that all other service providers to which court-based self-help centers refer customers are competentand reliable sources of help. Centers should be familiar with the strengths and weaknesses of other local or state-wide programs and inform their customers.


26/75

26

available. Courts and self-help service programs should work together to ensure that centers have

adequate space and resources to provide all necessary services to litigants.

The physical space of the office dictates which services a center can provide. For

example, Diane Bras, the Placer County Family Law Facilitator, began with only a desk and a

small office in which she met with customers one on one. As demand increased, she was no

longer able to handle the volume of customers. She soon enlisted two part-time volunteer

paralegals who were able to screen cases and help customers fill out forms at tables in the

hallway. Customers signed up on a list at one end of the hall and waited for their turn with the

paralegals or Ms. Bras. Demand continued to increase, and soon Ms. Bras was given a few

computers that she put to public use. Five or six customers at a time were able to fill out forms

or learn about the judicial process. Ms. Bras was available to help the customers with the

computers, and then would review their documents. She won the Placer County Individual

Public Service Award for her dedicated efforts. However, a small office and a hallway still did

not efficiently serve the needs of the many litigants, and was a challenge to Ms. Bras and her

volunteers as well.

The Placer County Family Law Facilitators office is now in its own office across the hall

from the court clerks window. Ms. Bras and two full-time paralegals share one end of the space,

and there are multiple public use computers at the other end. On most days when the office holds

a drop-in clinic in the morning, two part-time paralegals also help customers. There is a small

room down the hall that Ms. Bras uses to hold workshops. The Family Law Facilitators office

will soon move to another courthouse that is building a new office space for the program. It will

include a larger waiting area (customers currently wait in a hallway), two larger workshop


27/75

27

rooms, more workspace for the paralegals and Ms. Bras, as well as public computers and

printers. The office will also be equipped with more modern technology and videoconference

equipment so the Placer County Family Law Facilitator customers and staff can view and

broadcast workshops from other locations or counties.

Childcare

Litigants often must bring their children with them to the courthouse because they are not

able to afford or locate appropriate childcare. It is not feasible for litigants to supervise young

children while at the same time pay attention to the court staff and correctly fill out their

paperwork. Unsupervised children create frustration for other court users, court staff, and the

parents. Valuable time is wasted, and safety is compromised.56 Further, children are often not

allowed in courtrooms during a hearing. Without child care, a parent cannot efficiently complete

his or her case. Self-help centers should work with and encourage courts to provide properly

staffed childrens waiting areas in all facilities.57 The San Francisco Family Law Facilitators

office is located in the Superior Court courthouse. There are multiple childrens waiting areas,

stocked with books and toys, some of which have an attendant and some of which do not.

Courts and court-based self-help centers should continue to work together to provide

attended childcare at the courthouse. The California Judicial Council Task Force on Self-

Represented Litigants encourages courts to to provide funding to staff these [childrens] waiting

rooms.58 Suzanne Clark Morlock, the Director of the Self-Help Access Program of Butte,

56 JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF CALIFORNIATASKFORCE ON SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANTS, STATEWIDE ACTION PLAN FORSERVING SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANTS (2003) 26.

57Id.

58Id.


28/75

28

Glenn, and Tehama Counties suggests that centers in courthouses that do not offer child care

should request funding and trained volunteers who could supervise children.59

Because not all courthouses or self-help centers are able to provide childcare, it is

important that staff members and volunteers make parents aware that they must find their own

solution.

Recommendations

Offer a broad range of services, including

o One-on-one assistance, either via drop-in clinics or by appointment, in person or

over the telephone;

o Workshops designed to educate litigants about the various stages of the divorce

process and to help them complete necessary forms;

o Information regarding all types of available assistance, including ADR and

mediation;

o Technological solutions to geographic, transportation, or other barriers, including

real-time videoconferencing capabilities, telephone assistance, information online,

rotating workshop locations, or Mobile Access vans;

o Hard copies of all necessary forms and step-by-step instructions for form

completion, sample completed forms, handouts about the self-help center and

other social service providers;

o Access to a reference library for litigants;

59Id. at 192.


29/75

29

o Websites with links, contact information, and litigant eligibility requirements for

state and local service providers;

o Access to public computers with internet access monitored by a staff person;

o Available electronic document filing, either through the center or court website

o Public workstations where litigants can fill out forms or read materials; and

o A strong referral network of local and state-wide self-help service providers,

attorney referral services, and social service providers.

Ensure that all forms and printed materials are stored in a conspicuous place and well-

labeled so litigants can easily pick up all necessary materials at once.

Offer all services and materials in Spanish or any other non-English language spoken by

a significant portion of center users.

Operate in a functional, well-designed office with sufficient space and resources to

provide all necessary services.

Provide a childrens waiting area or attended childcare at the courthouse.

Make continuous efforts to modernize and improve service delivery.


30/75

30

Program Outreach

Even the best programs will not provide optimum access to justice unless the centers and

program materials are accessible and easy to understand. Usability is the key to an effective

center. Programs for self-represented litigants must constantly evaluate the ease with which

litigants learn of the service and the litigants ability to access available services.

Written Information about the Program

Litigants often come to self-help centers in a time of crisis,60 and the centers give them a

large amount of information. Litigants in crisis may forget part of what they heard, and the many

forms and judicial system may be confusing. It is therefore important that centers provide

litigants with written information about the program.61 This information should include the

centers hours of operation, services provided, limitations on those services, and who is eligible

to participate.62

These materials should be routinely distributed to all litigants who use the centers. Court

clerks should also routinely distribute the material to self-represented litigants. Self-help center

directors or Family Law Facilitators should work directly with court clerks and other court staff

to be sure they understand and can describe the services provided, and that they consistently refer

litigants to the self-help programs.

Centers can post flyers at local libraries, shelters, or other centers with basic program

information.

60 BEST PRACTICES FORPROGRAMS TO ASSIST SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANTS IN FAMILY LAWMATTERS at 11.

61 All program outreach materials should be available in multiple languages depending on the needs of the county.

62Id.


31/75

31

Online Information

As more litigants turn to the internet for information on self-representation, court-based

self-help service centers must take advantage of the internet as an outreach tool. It is important

that self-help sites are easy to locate on a court, state or county webpage. All court-based self-

help programs should ensure their website is linked to related programs. These websites should

appear in national, state, and local directories for self-help service providers, as well as on family

court websites.

Other Outreach63

Self-help centers should reach out to litigants through referrals from other self-help

service centers and non-profit organizations. A strong network of local and state-wide self-help

service providers works to the advantage of the providers and the litigants.64 Centers can work

with local colleges, universities, paralegal schools, and vocational schools to recruit volunteers

and conduct outreach.65

63 Outreach to the community is a very important part of the job of self-help service centers. Centers should make allpossible efforts to build relationships with community organizations and to conduct outreach within the confines of

their limited resources. Some centers have expressed concerns that broader outreach programs will furtheroverburden the staff. This is a legitimate concern, but is more of a funding issue. Centers should continue to engagein basic outreach efforts. Free and low-cost services for self-represented litigants is clearly a large, unmet need inCalifornia.

64 Fresno County points out that coordination with and outreach with other organizations was crucial to thedevelopment of the self-help project. Members of the other organizations could sit on an advisory committee alongwith program and court personnel. This established meaningful relationships within the community. Coordinationwith other organizations may also bring in more volunteers. MODEL SELF HELP PILOT PROGRAMat 84.

65Id.


32/75

32

Self-help centers can work with organizations that serve non-English speaking

populations to help establish trust of the courts and of court-based programs in those

communities.

In rural counties where there are fewer organizations with which to collaborate, some

centers work with church social services programs, or other programs that coordinate juvenile,

family, or criminal matters within the same family.66

Center staff can participate in interviews with local television or radio stations to raise

awareness of the program.67

Location

Self-help centers should be located at or very near the courthouse. This is more

convenient and efficient for the court, for the self-help center staff, and for litigants. A

centralized location not only makes things simpler for the litigant, but may speed the resolution

of the case. First, litigants will be able to find the center more easily if it is located at the

courthouse than in another part of the county. Second, it is often a burden on litigants to make

multiple trips to multiple locations. This location may also improve the completeness of the

litigants materials if she is able to go directly from the self-help center to the filing desk. This

eliminates some possibility of the litigant misplacing documents, and any missing forms can be

obtained easily at the center. Further, if the center is at the courthouse, court personnel will be

more aware of its existence and available services, and may make referrals more easily.68

66 Butte, Glenn and Tehama Counties have been successful with these tactics.Id. at 48.

67 San Francisco County has had some success with this method.Id. at 122.

68Id. at 9.


33/75

33

In 2005,

nearly 60 percent of local action plans reported that self-represented litigants had

serious problems getting to locations where services are available. Most of the large and

medium-size courts proposed geographic solutions such as outpost facilities or mobile

vans. Smaller courts tended to rely more on technological solutions such as telephonehelp lines, videoconferencing, and Web sites.69

Some counties have had attorneys conduct workshops in one location and broadcast that

workshop simultaneously in other locations.70 Programs also record these workshops and make

DVDs or videos available at area libraries.71 Though more and more litigants take advantage of

online filing tools such as EZ Legal File,72 most still file their documents at the courthouse, so it

remains important that the main office of the self-help center is physically located at the

courthouse.

Many self-help centers maintain multiple office locations, depending on the size of the

county, funding, and need.73 Other semi-rural counties, such as Butte, Glenn, and Tehama

Counties, work together on a regional service model.74 The Self-Help Regional Assistance

Program shows how services can be provided to litigants in rural areas through the innovative

69Id. at 19.

70Id. at 6. For further discussion on overcoming transportation or geographic barriers, please see Service Deliveryabove.

71 The Placer County Family Law Facilitators office prepared a DVD for pro se divorce litigants that is available atlocal libraries, domestic violence shelters, other legal service organizations, and can also be ordered through theoffice itself. It contains the same material a litigant would learn if the litigant attended a basic pro se divorceworkshop. DVD: How to do Your Own Divorce (Placer County Family Law Facilitator n.d.) (on file with authors).

72 See Service Delivery above.

73 Multiple locations may raise attorney supervision issues. Often self-help centers have only one attorney on staff,and additional locations are staffed only by paralegals and volunteers. Family Law Facilitators or managingattorneys can work particular days of the week at the various locations. In situations where a self-help center doesnot have a managing attorney and that center is located next to a Family Law Facilitators office, the Family LawFacilitator may take on a supervisory role or make herself available to the center if need be. MODEL SELF HELPPILOT PROGRAMat 71.

74Id. at 22.


34/75

34

use of technology, program coordination, and staff resources.75 Regardless of the number of

locations, it is best if the primary self-help service offices are located at or very near the

courthouse if there are multiple county courthouse locations. If counties have separate self-help

service centers and Family Law Facilitators offices that are both located off-site, it is

advantageous to locate them next to one another. For example, in Fresno County, the Spanish-

language self-help center is located about one mile from the courthouse. It is located across a

courtyard in the same building complex as the Family Law Facilitators office. Litigants can use

the clerks office in the family law facilitators office to file documents so they do not have to

travel to the courthouse.76

In more urban areas such as Contra Costa County where there are five separate self-help

centers, not all services are offered in all centers.77 Though public transportation is quite good in

the San Francisco Bay Area, options are limited outside of major transit corridors, and the

distance between the centers has proven difficult even for litigants with private transportation.78

Limited funds control the availability of services, so it is important that all service centers are

located near a clerks office where litigants can file papers, and that each center is aware of

services provided by the others to facilitate referrals. Court web sites should allow litigants to

find the center most convenient for them, and explain which services are offered at each site.

75Id. at 25.

76

Id. at 61. Fresno county reports that though litigants were initially concerned about the remote location of thecenter, the proximity to the Family Law Facilitators office and the clerk mitigated this concern, particularly forrepeat visitors. In Fresno, the majority of litigants using the self-help center were handling family court cases, somay have been familiar with the location already or were still able to handle all of their court business at once. Thissituation was advantageous for the Family Law Facilitators office and the self-help center, because they couldprovide seamless referrals.Id. However, this referral benefit would exist if the centers were located at the courthouseas well.

77Id. at 137.

78Id.


35/75

35

If the Family Law Facilitators office and/or the self-help center are located away from

the courthouse, it is best if they are located close to a highway or major road, and easily

accessible by public transportation.

As courts modernize, remodel and relocate, it is important that they designate sufficient

office space for a self-help center or a Family Law Facilitators office.79

Security

A benefit to locating court-based self-help centers in the courthouse is security. Divorce

litigants in particular may be in a violent or threatening situation. The peace of mind that comes

with the added security while they fill out forms or get help with their divorces may encourage

more litigants to use centers located in the courthouse. Some litigants who used the Fresno

county remote locations complained about the lack of security for this reason.80

Signs

Most clinics operate on a walk-in basis. It is thus extremely important that directions and

information are posted in places where clinic users will see them.81 These signs should be clear

and readable. They should identify the program, where it is located, the hours of operation,

services provided, who is eligible to participate in the program, and directions to clinic sign-in

79

Currently, the Family Law Facilitators office in Placer County is located in a small office at the Family Court inthe town of Auburn, which is the county seat. The south end of Placer County is currently the fastest developingsection of the country. The family court in Roseville, the major town in south Placer County, is expanding and isconstructing a larger office with workshop space and more modern technology for the Family Law Facilitator. Thiscoordination of effort to improve access to service and to broaden the scope of available services is a testament tothe success of the program as well as the increasing need and numbers of pro se litigants. Diane Bras interview.

80 MODEL SELF HELP PILOT PROGRAMat 61.

81 The ease with which customers located the center may be a question to include on customer servicequestionnaires.


36/75

36

lists, workshop rooms, etc. These signs should be displayed such that litigants can see this

information even when the program is closed.

Signs that clearly articulate program policies, such as who is eligible to use the services,

should be posted in a visible location. Litigants should be able to understand these policies at the

time they seek assistance. Signs should clearly delineate the scope of services provided and the

centers policies on major issues. 82

Programs should also post information and sources litigants can use when the center is

closed or when clinics are full. This information should be posted in a clearly visible place,

preferably near the signs with basic clinic information.83 This includes telephone hotlines,

websites, lawyer referral services, or other programs within the courthouse to which they can

turn.84

Signs should also be in Spanish or another non-English language spoken by any major

percentage of clinic users.

In situations where a self-help center is located in the same building as the Family Law

Facilitators office, it is important that there are adequate signs (in multiple languages if

necessary) to direct users between offices. Though the two offices are located across a courtyard

from one another in Fresno County, signs are limited, which makes access more difficult for

litigants.85 This is a problem that is easily solved, and will greatly improve customer experience

at the centers.

82 BEST PRACTICES FORPROGRAMS TO ASSIST SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANTS IN FAMILY LAWMATTERS 10.

83Id. at 11.

84Id.

85 MODEL SELF HELP PILOT PROGRAMat 61.


37/75

37

Court personnel, particularly security guards or court clerks, should be aware of and able

to direct litigants to the self-help center but should not be relied upon in lieu of adequate signage.

There should also be clear signs directing users to shelves, e.g., with forms, information,

pamphlets of other service organizations, etc.

Recommendations

Locate the self-help center at or very near the courthouse. If this is not possible, locate the

center close to major transportation routes and public transit.

Post information about the program where center users can clearly see it. Programs

should

o Post signs in multiple languages to direct users to the center;

o Provide signs where the program is located to clearly identify it in a manner that

ensures users can identify the program even when it is closed;86

o Post information about where litigants can turn for assistance if the program is

closed or if litigants are not eligible for assistance; and

o Post signs that clearly articulate program policies, as well as instructional

information such as how to sign into a clinic or to sign up for a workshop.

Provide flyers or brochures with basic program information (such as hours of operation

and services provided) to hand out to litigants who may return to the self-help center.

Post information about the self-help center in local libraries, domestic violence shelters,

other self-help organizations, and court-based programs.

86 BEST PRACTICES FORPROGRAMS TO ASSIST SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANTS IN FAMILY LAWMATTERS 11.


38/75

38

Ensure the center or the countys website appears in local and state, and national

directories of self-help providers.

Work with local organizations, church groups, or social service providers to reach out to a

broader community.


39/75

39

Access, Language and Literacy

Programs that successfully address access, language, and literacy needs will be able to

help all customers who approach them. They will remove barriers to justice for customers with

limited reading skills, who cannot speak English, or who are disabled. Recent trends of growth

inpro se activity and increasing diversity throughout the United States make these needs more

prominent than ever.Pro se litigants are less homogeneous than attorneys; they range from well-

educated to only moderately literate in English. 87, 88

Language and Literacy Needs: Materials

Spanish is the most common language spoken by customers who do not speak English in

California. 89 Different geographic areas will have different language needs, as will litigants

with different types of cases. Programs should examine their populations carefully and adjust

their offerings as appropriate. If no data specific to customers is available, census or other

demographic data can serve as an approximation. 90

The Spanish-language self-help program in Fresno County and the multi-lingual program

in San Francisco County found effective ways to address litigant language needs, as well as

possible pitfalls. 91 For example, the Fresno project prepared court materials in simple, accessible

English (approximately a fourth-grade reading level), and then had volunteers translate them into

Spanish. However, the Spanish translations themselves were not prepared in accessible language,

87 Harrison at 77.

88 MODEL SELF-HELP PILOT PROGRAM 104-105.

89Id. at 215.

90 For more on this topic, see Needs Assessmentsupra.

91Id. at 2.


40/75

40

and the center had to get new translation.92 The San Francisco center found that many litigants

whose first language is not English nevertheless prefer to receive legal services in English,93 and

that they were best able to reach out to non-English speaking litigants through collaborations

with other community organizations serving non-English-language speakers.94

A significant portion of thepro se population is not well-educated.95 Therefore, programs

should carefully prepare materials accessible to those with a low level of reading comprehension,

ideally at a fourth- or fifth-grade reading level.96 Translations appropriate to the community

should be available, as should alternative formats such as Braille for commonly-used materials.

Programs should also periodically reassess whether the existing translations adequately serve the

community.

Languages

A multi- or bi-lingual staff is essential to provide services to these customers. Each center

can evaluate the language needs of its customers and should provide bi-lingual staff based on

these needs. Though volunteers are extremely helpful to translate conversations or forms, staff

are often better trained and experienced in the legal system and process and so can explain

complexities or cultural differences between legal systems to the customer. A March 2005

Judicial Council of California Report to the Legislature points out that recruiting bilingual and

92Id. at 78.

93Id. at 111.

94Id. at 133-135.

95Id. at 104-105.

96 An example of such material, from the Placer County Family Law Facilitators Office, is in Appendix C.


41/75

41

bicultural staff should be a priority to provide efficient service and build trust in the

community.97

Language Needs: Interpreters

While it may note be feasible for all programs to provide interpreters for all litigants, they

should make such interpreters available at the least. Some programs provide interpreters for

hearings, but limited staff availability makes this consistently difficult.98 Nonetheless, court-

provided interpreters are preferable to litigants friends or children who may be unaware of court

procedures or unfamiliar with the relevant terminology.99

Disability services

Programs should ensure that their offices, materials, and personnel are accessible to

people with disabilities. In San Francisco, over thirteen percent of the self-help centers

customers had some sort of disability.100 Providing this access may involve making telephone

help available (including TDD help for deaf and hard-of-hearing customers), ensuring full ADA

compliance of offices, and providing materials in alternate formats.101

97Id. at 210.

98 See, e.g.,Id. at 118.

99 For more on this, see Program Staffinfra.

100Id. at 103.

101Id. at 95.


42/75

42

Recommendations

Create versions of handouts and forms that are accessible to customers with minimal

literacy.

Have a central, statewide program to translate materials to avoid duplication of effort.

Provide multi- or bi-lingual staff.

Provide interpretation assistance during hearings if possible.

Provide services accessible to persons with disabilities.


43/75

43

Program Staff

Qualified, knowledgeable staff in Family Law Facilitator offices and in Family Law

Information centers is vital to the success of court-provided self-help services. These staff

members must be consistently up to date on current law and court procedures, and must be able

to convey that information clearly and concisely.102

Staff Qualifications

The best programs are run by a licensed attorney who trains and manages the non-

attorney staff. In California, Family Law Facilitators must be licensed attorneys with experience

in family law. Data shows that other programs managed primarily by attorneys have advantages

over those that are not.103 Because of the amount and complexity of legal information given at a

self-help center, an attorneys ability to understand and explain the law, ability to find relevant

law and understanding of legal rules and ethics are invaluable to the staff.104 Attorney

supervision also ensures that the information given to the public will be reliable and accurate.105

Though volunteers are an integral part of self-help programs, they should not be

exclusively relied upon to perform the central daily operations of the program. Because

volunteers often have high turnover rates, centers will continually need to train new

volunteers.106 It is best that full-time paid staff handle these core operations and volunteers



104Id.

105Id.

106Id. at 7.


44/75

44

support the paid staff. Volunteers can help with intake, basic form preparation or translation, or

translation services107 for customers, for example.

Family Law Facilitators

In 1997, California Family Code section 10002 established an Office of the Family Law

Facilitator in each of Californias 58 counties. Each office should be headed by at least one

attorney licensed in California with mediation or litigation experience, or both, in the field of

family law.108

The Judicial Council has adopted minimum standards for the office of the Family Law

Facilitator.109 All centers should conform to these standards and statutory guidelines.110

The Facilitator should be covered by malpractice insurance, which is ideally paid for as

part of his or her benefits package. This protection will not only encourage attorneys to become a

part of the Family Law Facilitator program, but will protect those who are already a part of it. It

is another way to make the program a viable career path.

The Facilitator is also responsible for explaining the ethical and legal limitations on the

role of non-attorney staff.111 In particular, the Facilitator should be sure the staff understands and

conveys to the customers that no attorney-client relationship exists between the center or the staff

and the litigant.

107 Often self-help service centers find that though volunteer translation services are helpful, they are not an effective

substitute for bi-lingual center staff. However it is certainly a benefit to the center to have bi-lingual volunteers onhand. SeeId. at 9.

108 CAL. FAM. CODE 10002 (2006)

109 CAL. FAM. CODE 10010 (2006), CAL. R. CT. 5.35 (2006)

110 CAL. R. CT. APP. C, DIV. V. (2006).

111 For a more detailed discussion of the issue, see GAY CONROY ET AL., ETHICAL ISSUES FORATTORNEYS WORKINGWITH SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANTS (2002).


45/75

45

Funding

A Family Law Facilitators office can provide the best help to the most customers when it

has funds to support at minimum one attorney and one full-time legal assistant. These funds must

be adequate for the staff to be able to provide direct assistance to customers with form

preparation, document review, and more in-depth appointments or telephone calls. Programs can

work with local law or paralegal schools to recruit student volunteers to conduct intake, prepare

forms, and screen cases.

Becausepro se services are in such high demand, it is important that service providers

have adequate staff to meet the needs of their customers. Nearly all studies conducted regarding

customer service show that customers are most satisfied with one-on-one assistance with a staff

member.112 For example, the Family Law Facilitator and staff in Los Angeles County would

arrive in the morning to find anywhere from five to 100 people waiting to sign up for an

appointment or to participate in the drop-in clinic.113 The appointment list for the drop-in clinic

in San Francisco often fills up in a matter of minutes. Hence it is critical that a center has the

staff capabilities to meet litigant needs.

Programs can be creative in their sources of funding. Diane Bras points out that over half

of the customers served have young children under five.114 Thus any services regarding child

support and child custody are eligible for Proposition 10 funding.115

112 See the various studies conducted in STATEWIDE ACTION PLAN FORSERVING SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANTS.

113 FAMILY LAWINFORMATION CENTERS.

114 Diane Bras interview

115 Proposition 10, passed by California voters in November 1998, added a tax to cigarettes and other tobaccoproducts. The revenues from this tax support information and services to promote early childhood development.http://www.ccfc.ca.gov/prop10facts.htm


46/75

46

Additional funding is available through partnership grants.116

Ethical Issues

The Facilitator must act within the statutory limitations of the program and must inform

litigants of those limitations. Firstly, Facilitators and litigants do nothave an attorney-client

relationship, and Family Code section 10013 requires facilities disclose this fact in a

conspicuous manner. Next, Facilitators are required to inform the customer that their assistance

is also available to the other party. This allows facilitators to provide services to the parties

without compromising the neutrality of the court.117

All court-based self-help programs must ensure that attorney and staff act within ethical

guidelines of the state, county, and court.

Staff Development

To ensure high quality services, it is important that attorneys and staff remain up to date

on changes in the law, have access to legal resources, are able to communicate with other

programs, and have regular training and continuing education opportunities. The job of the

Family Law Facilitator should be a viable and desirable career path, with continuing education

and development. The Facilitator and all staff should complete a formal training process rather

116 The Equal Access Fund was created by the Budget Act of 1999 and has been continued in the Budget Acts of2000, 2001, and 2002. Each of these budgets allocated $10 million to the Judicial Council to be distributed in grantsto legal services providers through the Legal Services Trust Fund Commission of the State Bar (the commission).The budget control language provides for . . . ten percent of the funds remaining after administrative costs are setaside for Partnership Grants to legal services programs for joint projects of courts and legal services programs tomake legal assistance available to pro per litigants. STATEWIDE ACTION PLAN FORSERVING SELF-REPRESENTEDLITIGANTS at 62. See alsoEQUAL ACCESS FUND: AREPORT TO THE CALIFORNIALEGISLATURE at 51 for more onPartnership Grants.

117 See CAL. R. CT. APP. C, DIV. V. (2006).


47/75

47

than a learn as you go process. This does not need to be a long process, but should educate

staff in basic rules, ethics, and conduct.

Continuing Education

Each Family Law Facilitator must attend at least one training session per year provided

by the Judicial Council as required by California Family Code 10010 and Rule 5.35 of the

2006 California Rules of Court.118 These sessions train facilitators in both substantive law as

well as practical strategies for serving self-represented litigants.119 Staff should be encouraged

to participate in local, state, and national conferences and to meet with representatives from

similar programs to discuss program development, best practices, national trends, changes in law

and procedure, and current issues.120 There should also be regular technical training on the use

of new technologies. 121

Because many attorneys come into the Family Law Facilitators office with little

background in management, and working in a court is quite different from most other legal

environments, there should be ongoing training in administration and management throughout

the Facilitators tenure at the court. Also, staff should be trained in office and clinic management

so as to improve efficiency and effectiveness of services rendered.

118 CAL. FAM. CODE 10010 (2006), CAL. R. CT. 5.35 (2006)

119 STATEWIDE ACTION PLAN FORSERVING SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANTS at 51.




48/75

48

Family Law Facilitators and their staff should be trained in mediation and alternative

dispute resolution so they are able to provide and/or explain the full range of services available to

their customers.122

Resources

The best programs will make continuous efforts to modernize their services. This

includes providing staff access to law libraries, best practice reports, program evaluations, and

the latest in research, techniques, and data. All California courts now have the capability to

receive satellite broadcasts, so staff can attend training sessions or meetings without leaving their

court.123 This has been a viable way to provide workshops to customers, and should be included

in the variety of tools available to help staff.124

Each office should have written manuals, guidelines, videos, websites, computer

programs, and referral sources on hand. The materials should include such information as when

and how to refer customers to other support services, office management materials, ethical

responsibilities, or limitations on service.

Referrals and Collaboration with Local Legal Service Organizations, Lawyers

Court-based self-help centers that maintain a strong network with local non-profits,

county services, local bar associations, professional associations, mediation programs, other

community services and attorneys are able to provide the most comprehensive services to


123 BONNIE HOUGH, SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANTS IN CALIFORNIA: HELPING LITIGANTS HELP THEMSELVES (2004).

124 Refer to the discussion on Service Deliverysupra regarding Butte, Tehama, and Glenn Counties use ofvideoconferencing for workshops.


49/75

49

customers. A strong network with non-profits that serve multi-lingual communities, for example,

is particularly beneficial for a small self-help service office with limited funds.

Recommendations

Programs should conform to statutory guidelines, and all program staff should act within

state, local, and court codes of ethics.

A licensed attorney with experience in family law should manage the program and its

staff.

Provide regular training and educational opportunities for attorneys and program staff,

including

o Formal training process and regular, mandatory training sessions and conferences;

o Staff development and continuing education seminars; and

o Access to legal information, studies, and best practice reports about self-help

service providers.

Ensure that the Family Law Facilitator position is a viable career path.

Ensure there are multi- or bi-lingual staff members available to serve non-English

speaking populations.

Ensure attorneys and staff have access to all necessary resources, including a law library,

modern technology, program evaluations, best practices reports, or other studies on self-

help centers.

Ensure that each program has sufficient funds to support at least one attorney and one full

time legal assistant. Programs should have sufficient funding to provide all necessary

services to litigants.


50/75

50

Quality Assurance

Quality-assurance practices gather data on the use of services, customer satisfaction, and

the changing legal environment then use these data to implement new practices when necessary

and to improve old ones.125 The California Administrative Office of the Courts, as well as all of

the court-based self-help services centers studied here, recognize the importance of such

practices:

When self-represented litigants have improved access to the assistance they need, learn

how to navigate the court system, and are better prepared to present their cases, the

system can respond more appropriately to their needs and they will be more satisfied

with their experiences.126

Data Collection

It can be difficult for programs to collect client data, especially in busy, high-traffic

offices, but collecting this data pays great dividends in the future. Good usage data allow

programs to focus their efforts on the most effective methods of service delivery and on the

changing needs of litigants. Client data can also help programs evaluate the means by which they

reach out to underserved communities.

The self-help pilot study in California prepared several data-collection instruments and

required programs to gather client information at intake.127 Other programs have similar

requirements, but there is no unified means of data collection.128 Also, there are problems with

125 MARYLAND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS, BEST PRACTICES FORPROGRAMS TO ASSIST SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANTS IN FAMILY LAWMATTERS (2005)

126 DESCRIPTION OF CALIFORNIACOURTS PROGRAMS FORSELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANTS at 62.




51/75

51

intake and exit surveys, including the fact that customers do not always accurately self-report.129

Furthermore, response rates can be very low. One study found only 31% of customers filled out

the provided surveys.130

Family Law Facilitators and the Administrative Office of the Courts continue to improve

means of statistical data collection. The Administrative Office of the Courts and