MINUTES Present: Thomas Difiore (BALS); Andrea Ellison (LSGMI); Regina D. Lucas (FLS); Linda Moore (HOFLA); Cathy Perry (FBF); Anita Scott (CFLS); Peter Sleasman (SLC); Deborah Schroth (FLS) - by phone Margaret Zehren (LSGMI) Absent: Larry Goodwin (BALS); Mattie Inman (FRLS); Ali Vazquez (TRLS) Welcome & Introductions: Desired Outcomes and Agenda were reviewed. Committee members introduced themselves and explained why this work is important to them. Group norms of confidentiality and voting were decided. Overview of Planning Process: Linda Moore gave an overview of the statewide planning process, timeline, structure and goals. The term "Energetic Affirmative Advocacy" was discussed and emphasized. The Committee's role and goals were reviewed and discussed. Overview of Current Statewide Training System: Regina Lucas gave an overview of the Training Plan Advisory Group (TPAG), what training is currently available, and the current process to deliver statewide training. TPAG suggested training for 2000: 2/24 Consumer Bankruptcy and General Consumer Law 2/25 Bankruptcy as applied to Private and Public Housing April Negotiation (2 days) Fall Use of Expert Witnesses in Cases Involving Children Regina Lucas described how Florida Legal Services assists TPAG in identifying needed training, conducts a needs assessment survey, conducts training through the work groups, and coordinates participation in the Basic Lawyer Skills Training and Florida Bar training. Vision of Success: The Committee discussed what an ideal training and technical assistance model should be available to support Energetic Affirmative Advocacy if there were no barriers. The following is a list of the Committee's initial ideas: A VISION OF SUCCESS A. Training & Technical Assistant Topics B. Training & Technical Assistant Methods Perception of and Defining the Problem: The Committee discussed what they thought were the problems/barriers that hindered achieving their Vision of Success discussed earlier. The problems/barriers discussed are as follows: BARRIERS / PROBLEMS 1. Resource Problem a. Limited Resources/funding DEFINING THE PROBLEM Technical Assistance equals substance and procedural expertise (co-counseling, use of private attorneys, pleading banks) Next Steps: 1. Linda Moore and Margaret Zehren will organize the
sheets of paper taped to the walls and put them in the minutes and work on drafting a
"Problem Statement" based on what points this Committee had at this meeting to
discuss and revise at the next meeting. Meeting Wrap-up and Evaluation: The group discussed various dates in March and April to schedule the next meetings in Tampa. Linda Moore is to coordinate dates and send out notice to all committee members. The group commented on how they liked the openness at the meeting and the good interaction.
MINUTES Present: Thomas DiFiore (BALS) Andrea Ellison (LSGMI) Larry Goodwin (BALS) Regina Lucas (FLS) Jerome Major (FRLS) Substituting for Mattie Inman Linda Moore (HOFLA) Deborah Schroth (FLS) Peter Sleasman (SLC) Ali Vasquez (TRLS) Margaret Zehren (LSGMI) Pat Vail (FLS-Pro Bono) Absent: Anita Scott (CFLS), Cathy Perry (FBF) Welcome & Introductions: Committee members introduced themselves and spoke about memorable trainings they've attended.. Linda Moore advised that Cathy Perry is on medical leave and most likely will not be returning to the Committee. Jerome Majors, of Florida Rural is substituting for Mattie Inman. Review Vision of Success: The Committee discussed its task for the day in making recommendations for solutions/ideas to improve its outcomes, including: Identification of problems and opportunities Hearing reports on training evaluation To identify solutions, including their implementation and measurement of their effectiveness The Committee's final report is due to the Coordinating Committee on May 5, 2000. Linda Moore reviewed the group norm, which is making decisions unanimously, to the extent possible. Linda then asked the Committee to review the Survey, Items 9, Page 10 [Changes Needed to be an Energetic Affirmative Advocate] and Item 6, Page 12 [Ideas on How to Provide Technical Assistance] of the survey as background. Margaret Zehren related that Ellen Hemley, the consultant for the process, would also like the Committee to draft a vision statement. Deborah volunteered to do this. The Committee discussed additions and changes to the "Vision of Success" created at the first meeting. The following specifics were discussed: Include mentoring and follow up to ensure trainees implement what they learn from trainings Training to be tied to program goals All members of the Legal Services community are to benefit from trainings All employees, including director, attorneys, paralegals, support staff, pro bono attorneys, and others Board members Clients Trainings should be evaluated for effectiveness and subsequent modifications made based on evaluations The committee engaged in lively discussion concerning a number of issues, including: A protocol for trainees to distribute learned information to other personnel within their own programs, to maximize the use of outside training Mentoring must take place on a local level The Equal Justice Network has done extensive work on the topic of training and has published a paper. We are "recreating the wheel" with our work. We should produce trainings to train our clients to disseminate information within the community on client rights and pitfalls. We should also produce trainings to teach those with substantive expertise in poverty law areas to be able to train others effectively Review of Barriers, Survey and Problem Statement. Linda asked us to review the problem statement, to make any necessary changes to finalize the document. There was a disagreement raised as to the stated role of FLS in the minutes and draft Problem Statement. The minutes of the January 20, 2000 meeting were corrected to show that FLS' sponsored trainings are not repetitive. Regina will look at past 5 years of trainings by FLS. Regina pointed out that the TPAG does request input from field program staff as to their identification of priorities for upcoming trainings, but little information is received from the field. We need to develop a mechanism to get any requests for information directly to the staff in the field, and get past the desk of the program person to whom the survey is sent for dissemination within that program. Concerning the workgroup problem, a committee member requested that the problem reflects the diminution of the workgroups' effectiveness since implementation of the LSC restrictions. The group also discussed: Training techniques need to be taught to all potential trainers. A member noted that there is a course to certify someone as a trainer. A central technology person is needed to convert all training materials into appropriate and effective audio-visuals. Report on other state models for training. Peter Sleasman reported on the Project for the Future of Equal Justice. Their web site is located at www.equaljustice.org. A copy of his notes for his presentation is attached to these minutes. Peter reported that he had accessed the training calendars of other states, and that they are very similar to ours. The Project for the Future of Justice, which is a collaboration between NLADA and the Center for Law and Social Policy, has recognized that legal services programs are in a morass due to the effects of the LSC restrictions, and they are looking for ways to make a "sea change." One concept that project discusses is that of "life-long" training. That is, legal services attorneys should be trained throughout their careers, beginning with their introduction to the legal services culture and values. This concept of life-long training recognized that training is a critical priority and is directly tied to the quality of client services. Peter reviewed a 1998 paper on national training which identified problems and provided suggestions to resolve those problems, including: underfunding isolation creation of an effective training infrastructure from the local to the national level. This could include a national training web site with calendars and links to each state; subject matter list-serves; etc. a need to find a way to recreate the back-up centers providing a clearinghouse of training materials - this would require paid staff creation of best practices models and standards internet-based self-study courses developing new leadership in the new generation of attorneys; providing career development skills developing a state-wide curriculum paying trainers to improve quality another model is the New England Training Consortium Report on Technology Options. Tom DiFiore reported on his discussions with Ron Wilhoite, vice-chair of the Technology Committee, concerning the inter-face of our two committees. His report is appended to these minutes. Please reference this report for a full presentation of the various uses of current technology. Tom's report generated the following discussion: There is presently no mechanism to alert staff of emerging and emergency issues in the substantive law. Technological assistance is more valuable in "real" time. Can use e-groups to disseminate legal updates, provided people would be responsible for posting new developments to the e-groups. Report on Methods of Training Evaluation. Margaret Zehren spoke of the research she's done concerning how to evaluate trainings. There is a great deal of scientific research which has been done in this area. This includes information on the five steps to producing a training, and the four levels of evaluating training: 1. reaction [immediate feedback from the trainees] 2. evaluation of the learning that occurred [testing] 3. behavior changes in trainees [use of learning] 4. results [the benefits to the organization] What you evaluate demonstrates what you value in the training. Margaret also presented information on designing a training to meet each of the evaluation levels: 1. Voluntary attendance; breaks; entertainment 2. Highly-focused course content; teach to the test 3. High-demand; high-priority skills; train intact groups; provide plenty of on-the-job practice when trainee returns to work; supervisory support and follow-up 4. Incorporate all characteristics of levels 1 - 3, but target only mission-critical skills; continually evaluate goals and objectives. For any training, the training should be designed with particular results in mind, and with an awareness of the history and structure of the organization being trained. Narrowing the Problem. Linda asked the group to identify critical problems in the problem statement, using the "Barriers/Problems" outline on page 3 of last meeting's minutes. 1. "Resource problem." The discussion focused on the fact that we cannot change the limited nature of existing resources. Therefore, within this context, the problem becomes one of priority: recast this problem to read "Training is too low on the priority list state-wide." The group also agreed to define "training" broadly to include the in-house staff development work of mentoring, coaching, supervisory follow-up, etc. The solution to this problem is to develop effective trainings and then demonstrate this effectiveness to the project directors and staff, making the trainings demand-driven. To accomplish this, the "survey" or training inventory document needs to be changed, to avoid the distribution problem and so that people don't censure themselves when completing it, based on pre-conceived notions of the types of training that will be offered in response to the survey data. Long-terms solutions that were discussed include: The project directors must commit to creating a learning plan for their staff. This to include a statement of the commitment, a training plan and a directive within each program for each staff member. To make the commitment tangible, PD's should include budget increases for training. Mentoring and job coaching to also be provided by private attorneys and law firms, as part of their pro-bono commitment. This can include invitations to attend private firm in-house trainings. The creation of a training relationship with governmental and community entities, with a designated person to develop this relationship and to disseminate information about available training. Partnering with law schools, for professors to provide training. To combat staff apathy, i.e., not wanting to develop new areas of expertise, not wanting to leave their "comfort zone", must make training at all levels more accessible. Disseminate information so that staff can attend in-house trainings put on by other programs; sponsor regional trainings. Use technology at every level in developing trainings. Create and maintain a state-wide pleading bank on substantive issues, to be accessible on-line. Emphasize skills building, and not just substance, in trainings, to overcome the perception that training is not relevant to client services. Use someone professionally trained to create a comprehensive training needs assessment and inventory of training skills and abilities. Discussion of accessibility problem. Not all training takes place outside the office Put trainings on video tape Create satellite trainings to regional centers, with facilitators at these regional centers. Query: Would the ABA support this financially? Develop a protocol for trained staff to disseminate learning to others upon their return from trainings. FLS to put its own training materials on-line Create a national training calendar PD's should encourage professional memberships [with trainings offered within such groups] for support staff. Discussion of the apathy problem. Provide opportunities for senior advocates to develop new areas of practice. State-wide plan for training new attorneys. Create a state-wide protocol of minimum standards for training new staff. [LSGMI and GA Legal Services currently have such plans in place]. Provide leadership training. This would include training the trainers, mentors, coaches, supervisors.
MINUTES Present: Thomas DiFiore (BALS) Andrea Ellison (LSGMI) Larry Goodwin (BALS) Regina Lucas (FLS) Linda Moore (HOFLA) Anita Scott (CFLS) Peter Sleasman (SLC) Margaret Zehren (LSGMI) Absent: Jerome Major (FRLS), Deborah Schroth (FLS), Ali Vasquez (TRLS) Vision Statement: The Committee discussed the Draft of the Vision Statement and agreed to the content with a few additions and sentence structure changes. Emphasis on "promoting excellence in representation of clients". Margaret Zehren will amend the Vision Statement to include the changes agreed by the committee members and e-mail for everyone's review prior to the April 28, 2000 in-person Committee Meeting in Tampa. Problems and Solutions: Linda Moore explained that in order to assist in the process she had tried to categorize and group the solutions into specific areas. Discussion was had as to whether we had managed to cover everything. The thought was that we were lacking in the area of technical assistance. The Committee discussed and reviewed the Problem and Solution Outline emailed to the committee prior to the phone conference which grouped the committee's solutions under Problem Specific/Root Causes identified by the committee in their Problem Statement. The following are agreed upon changes and additions to the outline and groupings: 1. Have introductory paragraph including new definition of training, and language emphasizing positive outcomes for clients. 2. Solutions in #2: a. can be grouped into 3 sub-groups resources technology other training options b. Change 2(i) to read, Have "access to" National training calendar because Equal Justice Website already has information. It just needs to be updated. Also could include in FLS website. c. Add -Encourage professional memberships for entire staff (attorneys, paralegals and support). d. Add -Program promote cross-training e. Add – Self Study courses 3. Solutions in #3: a. Mentoring and its definition and value were discussed. b. Addition of a core curriculum for training entire staff (standards of training). c. Training for new staff should include history, mission, values and goals - not just skills and substantive knowledge. d. Individual professional development plans. 4. Solutions in #4: a. Change whole to "support" staff. Support staff skills training to include: computers, client relations, time management and stress management. b. Add (b) – promote and support statewide network for training and technical assistance for support staff. c. Add (c) – encourage professional memberships for support staff 5. Solutions in #5: -because of problems in this category the committee decided to add another Problem Specific/Root Cause which follows below as #7. -the solutions for Problem Specific #5 are now: train to be presenter find qualified presenters (certified) have trainers use technology more effectively in trainings 6. Solutions in #6: a. Brief and Pleading Banks would need to be protected by membership password. Add- Utilization of E-groups for specific areas / work groups Inter-Intra program co-counseling Better coordination with companion delivery system Interprogram communication, support, and information sharing Create a Best Practices Manual Share information with E-groups composed of those with same legal specialty 7. Add new category #7 – Problem – Training definition too narrow (need broader view of training) -coaching and mentoring (in-house and local level) -Leadership training -train and support staff to be mentors A committee member brought up the idea of implementing a Certification program within Legal Aid/Services for recognition of expertise in certain areas. The committee discussed the pros and cons and agreed that it should be further explored and set out separately in our recommendations to highlight this controversial solution. Linda Moore will attempt to put committee's solutions into required written recommendation format based on the committee's discussions and email them to the committee for review and comment prior to the April 28th meeting. The April 28th meeting will be utilized to work on the written draft of the recommendations with emphasis on implementation of the solutions. Although outcome measurements are no longer required to be formally included in the committee's recommendations, they will be discussed at the next meeting. Next meeting (in-person) – Friday, April 28th at the Tampa Airport Marriott – Florida Bar Conference Room "A"
TRAINING &
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ACTION COMMITTEE I. Description of Committee Purpose and Vision Statement: The purpose of the Training and Technical Assistance Action Committee is to study the problems and opportunities in the training and technical assistance area and develop recommendations for training and technical assistance that will encourage and support energetic affirmative advocacy. Vision Statement: To further the goal of excellence in client services, to encourage energetic affirmative advocacy, and to promote professional development and life-long learning, training and technical assistance will be available to all members of the Legal Services community. These goals will be achieved through a re-definition of training so as to embrace all available learning and teaching tools. This will include supervision, mentoring, co-counseling, professional memberships, sharing of information through technology, and formal training events. Formal training events will consist of in-house, local, regional, state-wide and national events. Existing and emerging technologies will be utilized to promote accessibility to training resources. II. Committee Members: Thomas DiFiore, Deborah Schroth, Andrea Ellison, Anita Scott, Larry Goodwin, Peter Sleasman, Regina Lucas, Ali Vazquez, Jerome Major, Margaret Zehren, Linda Moore III. Description of Problems/Opportunities: A. Current Situation In Florida there is an insufficient structure to provide comprehensive, meaningful, and accessible training and technical assistance to all segments of the Legal Services/Legal Aid community (attorneys, support staff, board members, clients, pro bono attorneys, and volunteers) to effectuate energetic affirmative advocacy on behalf of clients. Training is generally perceived to be a group of individuals gathered in one place to listen to a lecture with no ongoing follow up or team work by the participants. Florida Legal Services' role in providing training is limited to conducting an annual survey of training needs and coordinating the presentation of about 5 annual statewide trainings based on the survey results, and usually targeted to relatively inexperienced lawyers. FLS also conducts trainings on an as requested basis. Trainings are not evaluated effectively to determine their role in enhancing the quality of services delivered to clients or their impact on improved networking, morale and employee retention as a result of the trainees' participation in the training. Since the LSC restrictions came into effect in 1996 the work groups play a minimal role in the identification of training needs, the delivery of training to their members, and the provision of ongoing technical assistance and support to advocates. There never was a mechanism in place to meet similar needs of support staff. Individual programs are responsible for providing the balance of the training and technical assistance provided to staff. There is no mechanism in place for the identification and delivery of training to aid lawyers and staffs in responding to quickly developing issues. Additionally, the current training system does not take the opportunity to imbue new staff and rekindle in experienced staff a sense of the history, mission, and goals of Legal Services to promote access to justice and fairness for all members of our society. Little if any use is made of emerging training technologies such as on-line learning or video-conferencing. B. Impact of the Problem Situation Both legal and support staff members do not receive the quantity and quality of training and technical assistance that is necessary to promote a sense of mission and purpose, the delivery of high quality legal services, and efficiency in the practice of law. Staff members do not have an opportunity to adequately network with other practitioners and experts in their fields so as to promote professionalism, camaraderie and excitement about their work and the legal profession. C. Problem Specifics/Root Causes Program management and staff do not make training a priority because (1) there is a perception that training does not result in positive outcomes for clients; (2) training is difficult to access due to travel, time and financial constraints; (3) training is frequently not responsive to the training needs of the staff due to the failure to conduct a comprehensive needs assessment, offer advanced training, training in rapidly emerging areas of the law, and effective skills training; (4) training offered to non-attorney staff does not effectively address the critical need for computer training and client relations, and there is no coordinated system for providing support staff with technical assistance; and (5) trainers are not properly trained to be trainers, and as a result training is frequently presented in an uninteresting or ineffective manner which detracts from the substance of the presentation. Qualified trainers are not identified, and therefore are not invited or asked to be trainers. Furthermore, with the loss of the national back up centers, and the diminished activity of the work groups, there is no ongoing, comprehensive and coordinated system for providing technical assistance, co-counseling, mentoring, the maintenance of pleading banks, and the sharing of legal developments, and other pertinent information. D. Research The Training and Technical Assistance Action Committee (Committee) reviewed information obtained from the Project for the Future of Equal Justice website which is a joint initiative of the NLADA and the Center for Law and Social Policy. Their website is located at www.equaljustice.org. The Project for the Future of Equal Justice organized a Training Resources and Information Network (TRAIN) to address the ongoing learning and training needs of the civil advocacy community. The Committee also reviewed information about the New England Regional Training Consortium and the Committee on Regional Training (CORT). The New England Regional Training Consortium consists of twenty-two legal service programs in New England who have gathered their resources to fund design and delivery of training programs specifically for the legal services programs. The Committee on Regional Training (CORT) is a cooperative effort of legal services programs in Michigan, Ohio and Virginia created to provide quality training to their legal services staff. CORT has a website that contains information such as a brief bank, a training calendar, issue alerts and other helpful information. Their website is located at www.mplp.org/cort.htm. Different ideas for technology solutions were discussed with members of the Technology Action Committee. Additionally, the Committee reviewed research done concerning how to evaluate trainings. A large amount of scientific research is available on the five steps to producing a training and the four levels of training evaluation. IV. Summary of Recommendations: A. Introduction Each program must make training and technical assistance a higher priority. Training cost must be included in individual program budgets, and staff must be given the appropriate time and support to effectively participate in training and technical assistance. The recommendations set forth below are solutions to existing problems in the training and technical assistance area that if effectively implemented can support energetic affirmative advocacy, and change the perception that training and technical assistance do not result in positive outcomes for clients. Training embraces all learning and teaching tools. These include supervision, mentoring, coaching, co-counseling, professional memberships, sharing of information through technology, and formal training events. Formal training events include in-house, local, regional, state-wide and national events. Programs must have requirements for coaching and mentoring for all staff members. This can be accomplished within local programs, and by private attorneys as part of their pro bono commitment. Leadership training must also be provided on a state-wide basis. This includes training the trainers, mentors, coaches and supervisors. A State-wide Training and Technical Assistance Coordinator (hereinafter "Coordinator") position must be created. The Coordinator shall be responsible for the implementation and evaluation of the Training and Technical Assistance Action Committee recommendations. The Coordinator shall be a full-time employee of Florida Legal Services with appropriate staff assigned to assist in the performance of job duties. This person must be knowledgeable in the special needs of Legal Services and Legal Aid organizations. The Coordinator shall work with a State-wide Training and Technical Assistance Coordinating Committee (hereinafter "Coordinating Committee"). The Coordinating Committee shall be comprised of representatives from the legal services community, not just attorneys. The Coordinating Committee must prioritize the Training and Technical Assistance Action Committee's recommendations, make policies and protocols for implementing the recommendations, and assign responsibilities for implementation of the recommendations. Each legal services and legal aid program shall assign at least one staff member who is interested in training and technical assistance to be the program's Training Responsible Person. The Training Responsible Person shall be responsible for: 1) facilitating communication between program staff, the State-wide Coordinator and the State-wide Coordinating Committee; 2) coordinating their program's implementation of state-wide training plans and policies; 3) assisting in the coordination of regional training and technical assistance as appropriate; and 4) generating excitement and involvement by program staff in training and technical assistance. This person may be their program's representative on the State-wide Coordinating Committee. However, that position may be filled by another member of the organization. The recommendations below that refer to programs and staff include all segments of the legal services community (e.g. attorneys, paralegals, support staff, board members, clients, pro bono attorneys, and volunteers). B. Recommendations 1. Recommendations to address the problem that training is difficult to access due to travel, time and financial constraints: a. Use of Technology: 1. Programs must have access to a national training calendar on a website. This can be accomplished by the State-wide Coordinator providing updated information to the Equal Justice Website for training, or the FLS website may provide current training information (national, regional, state and local). 2. Trainings must be available by video and audio tape. FLS training materials must be available on-line. The State-wide Coordinator shall be responsible for ensuring these materials are accessible and current. 3. Trainings by video-conferencing, audio-conferencing and satellite training to regional centers with facilitators at these regional centers must be utilized. 4. Self-study courses in certain substantive areas of law should be available on the FLS website. 5. All current state-wide training and technical assistance information must be included on the FLS website in a section devoted to training. b. Resources: 1. Develop a training scholarship program to allow staff to either attend trainings at no cost, or to provide a match of funds to assist staff to attend trainings that would not be financially feasible. A possible resource would be the Florida Bar Foundation. 2. Develop a protocol to require staff who attend trainings to disseminate learned information to others upon their return from the trainings. c. Other Training Forums: 1. Seek trainings by private law firms, government agencies, and law schools at no or low cost. Negotiate rates with private training organizations. 2. Programs should encourage the entire staff (attorneys, paralegals and support staff) to become members of professional organizations that provide trainings and technical assistance that enhance the staffs' professional skills and abilities. 3. Programs need to support and encourage cross training within their programs and nearby programs. 2. Recommendations to address the problem that training is frequently not responsive to the training needs of the staff due to the failure to conduct a comprehensive needs assessment, and to offer advanced training, training in rapidly emerging areas of law, and effective skills training: a. Develop and administer a more comprehensive and effective training needs assessment which contemplates training as broadly defined by these recommendations. The State-wide Coordinator shall be responsible for creating a comprehensive training needs assessment and inventory of training skills and abilities. Programs need to implement a better system to ensure all staff receive the needs assessment surveys. The survey could be sent via email to all staff members. b. Evaluate all trainings to measure the effectiveness of the trainings to determine how to improve future trainings. c. Develop and implement a state-wide protocol for training new staff members. The state-wide protocol must include a minimum set of standards for training new staff members over at least the first year. The training for new staff must include the history, mission and goals of legal service providers along with client relations, stress and time management skills. d. Develop and implement a statewide core curriculum at all levels of proficiency and experience for all staff members, not just new staff members. e. Each program must also supplement the statewide training protocol with an individual professional development plan for each staff member. The individual professional development plan shall include annual goals, a statement of commitment, and a training plan. Progress towards achieving the professional development plan goals must be included in the staff members individual performance reviews. f. Develop and implement a Legal Services Masters Program to structure and focus training efforts, and to recognize achievement and mastery of various areas of poverty law. This Program would include certain criteria that must be met to obtain certification including participation in substantive and skills training, co-counseling, handling of various cases, and successful completion of an examination. Although, the concept of the Masters Program is similar to the Florida Bar Board Certifications, this program would only be for Legal Services attorneys and paralegals. g. Skills building for the entire staff, not just substantive law, must be emphasized in trainings. This must include effective communication with clients, and training clients to disseminate information to their communities. h. Programs must support and provide opportunities for staff to expand areas of expertise and practice, especially senior staff to rejuvenate them. 3. Recommendations to address the problem that training offered to non-attorney staff does not effectively address the critical need for computer training and client relations, and there is no coordinated system for providing support staff with technical assistance: a. Training for support staff must focus on skills training. The skills training must include computer, client relations, stress and time management training. b. A statewide network for training and technical assistance for support staff must be created. Individual programs must support this effort. c. Programs must encourage support staff to become members of professional organizations that provide trainings and technical assistance that enhance the staffs' skills, abilities and professionalism. 4. Recommendations to address the problem that trainers are not properly trained to be trainers, and as a result training is frequently presented in an uninteresting or ineffective manner which detracts from the substance of the presentation: a. Provide trainings to identified experts to develop effective training techniques. Do not ask just anyone who is an expert in an area of law or subject to be a trainer. Make sure the presenters are trained to be interesting and an effective conduit of information, and who can promote learning. In addition, where appropriate utilize trainers who are certified by professional training organizations which teach presenters effective tools of training. 5. Recommendations to address the problem that there is no ongoing, comprehensive and coordinated system for providing technical assistance, co-counseling, mentoring, the maintenance of pleading banks, and the sharing of legal developments and other pertinent information with the loss of the national back up centers, and the diminished activity of the work groups: a. Develop and maintain brief and pleading banks which would be available on-line. These banks could be accessed from the FLS website. However, a membership password must be required for legal services/legal aid staff members to ensure we are not providing information to opponents. The maintenance of these banks shall be the responsibility of the State-wide Coordinator. b. Utilize substantive law groups to disseminate information quickly such as legal updates and emerging and emergency issues in substantive law through technology methods (e.g. Egroups). Support work groups with a plan and funding to be able to fulfill emerging and emergency needs in a quick and effective manner. c. Create and maintain a best practices manual for all staff members. d. Programs should network on a regional basis to make co-counseling more accessible and acceptable by improving cooperation with the companion delivery system and enhancing interprogram communication. A data bank of attorneys willing to co-counsel by subject area should be created and made available on the FLS website. V. Implication of Recommendations on Other Committees The recommendations set forth above will primarily overlap with the Technology Action Committee and Collaboration Action Committee. Many of the Training and Technical Assistance Action Committee recommendations require the training and use of technology such as egroups, websites, video-conferencing, etc. Other training and technical assistance recommendations utilizing work groups and the companion delivery system will be affected by the Collaboration committee's recommendations. VI. Implementation of Recommendations Within Current Delivery System All of the Training and Technical Assistance Action Committee's recommendations can be implemented within the current delivery system except that more technology and financial resources are needed to do so. |