Georgia Senior Legal Hotline Outcomes Study

1. Georgia Senior Legal Hotline Outcomes Study • Surveyed clients whom we advised to take action: did client take the action? did client benefit? what was the benefit? • “Benefit” quantified using our current category of outcomes

2. Examples of Recommended Actions • File answer to collections lawsuit • Mail FDCPA letter to collection agency • Repair request to landlord • Bring proof of medical expenses to increase amount of food stamps • Apply for QMB

3. In a majority of our casesthe outcome is unknown • Between January 1, 2011 and June 30, 2011, the Hotline closed around 2100 cases. • Approx. 300 of these cases were transferred to our “full-service” unit so we don’t take credit for any outcomes • Therefore, Hotline has a universe of 1800 cases that could have quantifiable outcomes • Hotline recorded Outcomes for around 400 of these cases. • Leaves 1400 cases in which Hotline has no quantifiable outcome to report. (Georgia Hotline doesn’t “count” advice or brief service in a particular area of substantive law as an “outcome”.)

4. Why do this? Help us do a better job internally and as a part of the legal services network Can the Hotline improve practices to increase likelihood that client can undertake the action and get a good outcome? or Is the action too difficult for clients regardless of how clear Hotline’s advice is? (if so, then what?)

5. Why do this (part 2)?Existentialism: What role the Hotline plays in the legal services delivery system? Outcomes study helps us paint a more complete picture of Hotline’s role in improving lives of vulnerable seniors and can help guide discussions about using limited resources to help the most seniors. Audience: our parent organization legal service organizations the aging network potential funders

6. Borchard Foundation Center on Law and Aging Fellowship in Law & Aging for two law school graduates interested in an academic and/or professional career in law and aging A legal services or other non-profit organization involved in law and aging must supervise a Fellow’s activities and projects. Fellow must also provide direct legal services to older persons http://www.borchardcla.org/

7. Timeline (the real one) • Sept – December 2010: Reviewed all outcomes studies on CERA website (www.legalhotlines.org) Determined survey method and data analysis tool (survey monkey) Drafted surveys and tested surveys Attorneys start flagging cases • January – July 2011: Revised surveys! Conduct surveys • August 2011: Enter Data into survey monkey • September – now: Data analysis and draft report (Final report not completed; when final report is completed, it will be available along with copies of our surveys)

8. Modeled our study on the AARP Foundation’s 2006 Legal Hotlines Client Outcomes Study. Six Areas—six surveys • 1. Consumer • 2. Public Benefits • 3. Landlord-Tenant • 4. Power of Attorney or Advance Directives • 5. Qualified Income Trusts (QITs) : • 6. Probate

9. Flagged cases where we advised client to take “action” TYPES OF CASES FLAGGED: The types of cases flagged for the survey were ones where the Hotline thought client could either take a relatively simple action to resolve her dispute or gain relief or (2) in more complex cases, such as filing a pro se lawsuit or defending against a lawsuit, the client could not afford to hire an attorney and there were no LSC-funded, III-B funded, or pro bono legal services available to help the client further. WHO FLAGGED: Attorneys flagged cases Manager and Borchard Fellow reviewed closes cases and flagged additional cases

10. Conducting the Surveys • Telephone Survey, most by Borchard Fellow • 6 weeks to 3 months after closed case • Survey may be short, but majority of calls turned into hours of work • Many surveys could not be used – clients give inconsistent answers and new attorney not yet skilled at teasing out the real story • Next time: track # of clients we couldn’t reach or # of surveys that couldn’t be used

11. Compiling Data • Written surveys • Entered into Survey Monkey – MUST check work! • Big “uh-ohs” --cannot merge the 6 individual surveys into one large data set – had to hand calculate totals -- can’t delete answer choices (“not applicable”) --cross tabs limited Next Time: use one master Survey Monkey survey or use Excel

14. Improving likelihood of success • c

15. Satisfaction survey is not an outcomes survey • Consumer survey: 8 out of 11 clients who did not understand our advice or found the action too difficult to do said the Hotline was helpful. • On the flip side, one “consumer” client who took our advice and was successful said the Hotline was not helpful.

19. Seventy-one percent (71%) of clients (45 clients) took the action the Hotline recommended.

21. How Were Things Better?

22. NARRATIVE: 20 clients reported quantifiable financial benefits totaling $112,207.00: 16 clients avoided excessive or unlawful debt totaling $62,913 (this includes 5 cases in which a collections lawsuit against client was dismissed after client filed an answer); 3 clients recovered $48,194; one client saved $1,100 in attorney fees. In 3 credit reporting cases, we know clients benefited financially after the incorrect debt information was removed from their credit reports. We have not been able to quantify these additional benefits. For example, after getting an incorrect judgment removed from her credit report, one client was able to qualify for the Section 8 homeowners program. Because she has not yet purchased a home, we don’t know the exact value of the Section 8 benefit she will receive. One client who met with a housing counselor and sent a letter to the mortgage lender was able to delay the foreclosure sale and submit a loan modification application. Again, we know the client has benefitted, but we do not know the exact value of the benefit. 10 clients reported that harassing phone calls from collection agencies stopped. These phone calls are more than an annoyance to many seniors. The phone calls terrify many seniors, disrupting sleep, causing an increase in blood pressure, and other mental and physical problems. We were very happy to learn that the form letters to collection agencies are working.

23. Why Clients said they didn’t take action • (note: we had to create this table ourselves because of the cross tab limitations of Survey Monkey)

25. Demographics and Barriers to Taking Action

27. Positive Comment “We are blessed to have you. Thanks to the Hotline, a $1900.00 judgment was removed from my credit report and I am now eligible for the Section 8 Homeownership program. Positive comment “I felt I could call back with any questions. The attorney I spoke with was patient and caring. I am so glad we have the Hotline as a resource. I feel so relieved and I can sleep at night. I feel like I have a guardian angel.

28. PUBLIC BENEFITS Look at rate type of action was taken The following chart shows that 50% of the clients filed an appeal or waiver and only 58% applied for benefits.

30. PUBLIC BENEFITS By cross tabulating the data in a different way in the following chart, we can see that clients are least likely to take action in Veterans Benefits and Medicare Saving Programs (QMB/SLMB) cases. (NOTE: Nice example of Survey Monkey cross tab, but must always keep its limitations in mind)

31. PUBLIC BENEFITS Did Taking the Recommended Action Help the Client? So, 27 out of 46 clients took action. Did taking action make things better for these 27 clients?

32. PUBLIC BENEFITS The following chart shows the outcomes by type of public benefit for the Clients who took action and said “things were better” Clients received $3,275 in monthly benefits, $10,050 in one time benefits, and a waiver $14 in overpayments. Hard to value Spend-down. For the clients who took action but “things did not get better and/or things were mixed”, 7 out of 11 (63%) were still waiting to hear back from the agency.

33. PUBLIC BENEFITS We asked clients which written materials they did or did not understand. We also asked whether the written materials helped the client with their problems. The following table displays the results to these questions. As the above table shows, only 44% of client could understand the QMB/SLMB application. This finding indicates that we need to follow up with these clients and make sure they call Georgia Cares. Only sixty-two percent (62%) of clients understood the Hotline’s letters summarizing advice. We reviewed the letters and found that clients were least likely understand letters that contained information and advice about multiple issues (ex. applying for food stamps and veterans benefits). We will encourage attorneys to address one benefit at a time with clients.

34. Outcomes in which client benefits financially but which cannot be valued with certainty: • Consumer: • Clients protected from garnishment avoided costs associated with having bank account frozen: late payment fees, evictions, repossessions, accrued or higher interest payments. • Delay foreclosure to buy time to apply for HAMP • Correcting credit report made one client eligible for Section 8 homeownership program and reduced borrowing costs for 3 clients • Health and emotional benefits from stopping harassing collection calls • Landlord/Tenant: a) clients saved from eviction from privately owned rental housing (clients avoided moving costs, utility connection fees, lost wages, damage to credit score. • Probate: Executed codicil to will (value of document preparation) • Public Benefits: Medically need spend-down

35. Demographics of clients surveyed, excluding QIT clients. For purposes of this demographics section, N=158. • Gender: Female 78% (123) Male 22% (35) • Age: 60-69 52% (82) 70-79 35% (55) 80-89 11% (17) 90+ 3% (4) • Poverty level: less than 100% 29% (45) 100-149% 34% (53) 150-199% 16% (25) 200-249% 11% (17) 250-299% 1% (1) 300-349% 3% (4) 350-399% 1% (2) 400%+ 3% (4) Not known 4 % (7) • Indicator of Social Isolation: 81% (128) had at least one indicator of social isolation Homebound 4 Live alone 93 Disabled 69 Limited English 2 • Race: White 49% (77) Black 48% (75) Hispanic 2% (3) Other/multi-racial 2% (3)