Executive Director

Defeat Poverty DC has reached out to every candidate running for local office and asked them to say what they will do to end poverty.  Defeat Poverty DC is focusing on three questions:  what will the candidate do to make work pay, make work possible and make basic needs affordable?  The candidates were asked to complete a questionnaire.  Both Mayor Fenty and Council Chair Gray have submitted responses which are posted on the Defeat Poverty DC web page.

They are worth a read, not only for what they say, but what they don’t say.  There are some important commitments at a very high level of generality, but precious few details or specifics.  When the candidates come knocking on constituent doors or appear at a debate or forum, let’s hope that pointed questions will draw out precise commitments to programs, policies and initiatives.  We need those commitments to hold the candidates accountable after the election.

It has not always been so hard to get candidates to talk about the issue.  Check out the great blog on Bobby Kennedy’s campaign that was posted this morning on the Washington Post web page.

Jonathan Smith, Executive Director

On August 11, 2000, President Clinton issued an executive order requiring that all agencies who receive federal funds become accessible to persons who have limited or no English.   As a result of federal grants and other funding, virtually every courthouse in the nation is covered by this requirement.  Sadly, implementation has been spotty at best.   A study completed last year by Laura Abel of the Brennan Center found that in the 35 state court systems researched:

1.  46% fail to require that interpreters be provided in all civil cases;
2.  80% fail to guarantee that the courts will pay for the interpreters they provide, with the result that many people who need interpreters do not in fact receive them; and
3.  37% fail to require the use of credentialed interpreters, even when such interpreters are available.

In response to the continued need for state courts to improve language accessibility, on August 17, Deputy Attorney General for Civil Rights Tom Perez wrote to the state chief judges.  In his letter he recognized the complexity of the issue and the pressures created by the recession on court budgets, but concluded:

Language services expenses should be treated as a basic and essential operating expense, not as an ancillary cost… Budgeting adequate funds to ensure language access is fundamental to the business of the courts.

We recognize that most state and local courts are struggling with unusual budgetary constraints that have slowed the pace of progress in this area… Fiscal pressures, however, do not provide an exemption from civil rights requirements.

The judicial process means nothing if a participant cannot obtain information about a case or the process, understand the proceedings or make herself heard.   From the door of the courthouse to the issuance of a final order, language barriers for limited English speakers can be insurmountable.   While essential, it is not enough to have an interpreter in the courtroom.  A litigant cannot get a fair result if she or he cannot file a complaint or understand the summons that came in the mail.   Thing as simple as the security screen at the front door, the information desk or directional signs are barriers if they are not accessible.

The good news is that there is progress in the District of Columbia.   Last year, Superior Court Chief Judge Satterfield issued an Administrative Order improving access to interpreters and he has agreed to work with the D.C. Access to Justice Commission to extend language access to Court operations beyond the courtroom.   In addition, Mary Walker, Chief Judge of the Office of Administrative Hearings, the District’s administrative court, has agreed that her agency is covered by the Language Access Act and has taken important steps to implement its terms.  While there is a long way to go for these Courts to be fully accessible, these are important developments and we are grateful to the Chief Judges for their actions.

Jonathan Smith, Executive Director

“What is really at stake is nothing less than the legitimacy of our legal system and the rule of law.” This is what David Reiser had printed in the program book when the American Bar Association awarded him its Pro Bono Publico Award. The presentation took place on August 9 at the ABA annual meeting in San Francisco. We heartily congratulate David for this well deserved honor.

David is an important part of the Legal Aid team. He joined us as a volunteer in 2004 as we were developing the Appellate Advocacy Project. He worked closely with Barbara McDowell, the first Project director, to help her build the program to be a respected voice on poverty law issues in the D.C. Court of Appeals. David was instrumental in keeping the project going after Barbara’s death in early 2009 and has continued to support and partner with our current Appellate Director, Bonnie Robin-Vergeer. He has dedicated thousands of hours to the project.

David Reiser

David’s contribution has extended far beyond our Appellate work. He has mentored staff on complex trials and been wise counsel on policy issues. But the thing we value most is his commitment to ensuring equal justice for people living in poverty. He is relentless and uncompromising in his advocacy that the Courts must protect the substance of justice – a fair process is not enough. This point was best made in the acceptance essay David wrote for the program book (he was not permitted a speech at the luncheon):

It is a misconception that the legal problems of poor people are easier to solve than those of businesses or wealthy individuals, or that poor people have less need of skillful and experienced lawyers. Although the representation of poor people is sometimes a matter of routine, that is because a lack of resources sometimes makes creativity impossible, not because creativity is any less needed or desired. In the six years of work on the appellate project, we have consistently found that the skills of experienced and highly trained appellate lawyers make a difference in the outcome of cases….

[P]ro bono service is not merely an ethical requirement – a quid pro quo for a bar license – it is a moral imperative because without it the law systematically aids the wealthy and disadvantages the poor, becoming a system of coercion rather than one than honors individual autonomy and choice.

The importance and complexity of the work done for poor clients should not be measured in dollars. For a poor family, the foreclosure of a $100,000 townhouse is every bit as momentous as a $100 million bankruptcy, and may present just as many cutting-edge legal issues. Without the best lawyering, a parent’s connection to a child can needlessly be severed with a penstroke. That is something hard to price…

The ABA prepared a video on David’s work. It can be viewed HERE.

David’s efforts would not be possible without the generous support of Zuckerman Spaeder where he is a counsel.   The firm encourages not only David, but other lawyers to work with Legal Aid.  The firm has taken cases pro bono and helped in innumerable ways.

We are pleased to present the D.C. Bar Pro Bono Program’s new training video: “Representing Your SSI/SSDI Client on Appeal,” co-sponsored by The Legal Aid Society of D.C., Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless and Whitman-Walker Clinic, with financial support from the D.C. Bar Health Law Section.

This 2-hour tutorial is posted on www.probono.net/dc/benefits. You must be a member of the practice area to view the video, which is in the Social Security Disability Programs folder of the Library. Any legal services or pro bono attorney is eligible for a free membership. To register, go to http://www.probono.net/dc/benefits and click “Join this Area.” Your application will be approved within 1 business day.

The table of contents for the video includes:

Introduction

Chapter 1: SSI & SSDI Overview: Eligibility, Sequential Evaluation, and Summary of Benefits

Chapter 2: Overview of the Application & Appeals Process

Chapter 3: Handling Cases & Advocacy Practice
3a. Interviewing Your Client
3b. Developing the Medical Evidence
3c. Writing the Brief
3d. Presenting Your Client’s Case
3e. The Medical-Vocational Guidelines
3f. Miscellaneous Eligibility Issues 

Chapter 4: Mock Hearing (Vocational Expert)

Closing Remarks and Resources

The supporting documents include:
SSA Best Practices
Local SSA Contact Information 2010
ODAR Logistics Sheet
Appointment of Representative Form
ALJ Hearing Form
Physical Records Release Form
Mental Health Records Release Form
Psychiatric Review Technique
Residual Physical Functional Capacity Assessment
Mental Residual Functional Capacity Assessment
Important Links

Thanks so much to Erin Loubier, Scott McNeilly, Jennifer Mezey and my colleague Sabrina Wear for their incredible work on this project. We hope this will provide tremendous support for all your good work in representing your SSI/SSDI client on appeal.

Jodi Feldman,
Director of Pro Bono & Intake Programs

At the Legal Aid Society of DC, we have an intern program that attracts some of the most talented and committed students from across the country.  The students are drawn to Legal Aid because they want to learn practical skills and have a hands-on experience working with clients to solve their legal problems.  Of course, the students bring with them energy and enthusiasm for our work that helps remind us every day that there is a next generation of lawyers motivated to  make justice real for individuals and communities living in poverty. 

 In their own words …

Brenda Harkavy and Erica McKnight: This summer we have had the opportunity to draft pleadings, write research memoranda, interview prospective clients (in Spanish and English), participate in client meetings, assist with trial preparation, and observe court hearings in child support, domestic violence, and child custody cases.  Knowing that our work had an immediate impact on the clients made our experiences so much more rewarding.  We have learned a lot during our time at Legal Aid and are grateful to have had the opportunity to work with such smart, talented, and committed attorneys.  We feel truly blessed to know what it is like to enjoy going to work every day and equally saddened to know that our time here is ending.  Legal Aid’s Domestic Violence and Family Law Unit acts not only as a team, but as friends, in aiding their clients and one another.  Not only is this organization one of a kind in its undying commitment to serving individuals in need, but it is also unique because of its amazingly dedicated and supportive staff.

2010 Summer Interns
Back Row: Sophie Shames, Michael Sabet, Erica McKnight, Lucia Rich
Front Row: Jenifer Frey, Teresa Yeh, Danielle Angeli
Not Pictured: Brenda Harkavy, Brendan McTaggert, Patrick Eagan-Van Meter

Sophie Shames: Before the summer began, I knew that I wanted to work for a direct client service organization that not only helped people resolve their immediate legal problems, but also a group with the capacity to translate administrative and courtroom successes into broader solutions through policy and legislative advocacy. I feel fortunate to have had the opportunity for ten weeks this summer to do exactly that. As an intern in Legal Aid’s Public Benefits Unit, I assisted low-income clients in navigating a complex array of public benefits, including those experiencing denials or other problems with Social Security disability, Medicaid, Medicare Part D, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), or Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as  Food Stamps.)  

In addition to the primary goal of working to resolve our clients’ benefits issues, we also use evidence of the obstacles our clients face to advocate for systemic changes for all low-income DC residents. This summer I attended a DC City Council Meeting during which my supervisor, Jen Mezey, presented a list of principles to guide health care reform implementation in the District. One suggestion that particularly resonated with me was the need to streamline eligibility rules and processes for public insurance programs and invest in improved electronic systems. Many of our clients have suffered unnecessarily because of miscommunication between DC and Federal agencies, and improved information channels and efficient application and recertification procedures would reduce errors in the long run. Legal Aid attorneys and legal advocates across the city improve the lives of vulnerable residents every day, and I’m grateful to have had this summer internship to work with such a dedicated and intelligent staff. 

Jennifer Frey and Brendan McTaggart: We interned with Legal Aid’s Housing Law Unit this summer, working with clients who were facing eviction and the loss of housing-related benefits.   While our time at Legal Aid helped us to develop many legal skills, from drafting motions to conducting interviews, we both agree that a surprisingly rewarding experience was accompanying clients seeking to restore wrongfully terminated housing benefits to appointments at the D.C. Housing Authority. While this may seem like a mundane task, we were amazed at the difference our mere presence could make for our clients. The public housing and voucher programs are notoriously difficult to understand.  People who lose their housing benefits even due to an obvious mistake by their landlord or the Housing Authority face tremendous bureaucratic difficulties in reinstating their benefits.   Families can literally be forced into homelessness because of such an error. 

Remedying the problem requires many visits to the Housing Authority: visits that require clients to miss work and that pose particular difficulties for clients with disabilities.  Accompanying our clients to these appointments helped ensure that the clients received detailed and accurate instructions from the Housing Authority regarding their recertification process, and that their questions and concerns would not be ignored. 

These visits showed us how important it is for our clients to have a lawyer, or even just a law student, on their side.  It is a shame that so many people in our city are forced to navigate the system without the help of an advocate.

Michael Sabet: My experience as an intern in Legal Aid’s Consumer Law unit was excellent.  I was exposed to a variety of legal issues, many of which involved foreclosure defense, loan rescue scams, and other related areas.  I enjoyed working in a legal area where finance, real estate, and consumer law all merge together.  Most of my work focused on research and writing, and I benefitted greatly from the feedback I received from my supervising attorney.  Overall, I was very happy to have had the opportunity to work in such a collegial environment with people who are truly committed to assisting the under-served individuals and communities in D.C

Director of Development

For some, the summer is a time for vacations, time with family, getting outdoors and maybe just working a few extra hours less each week. At Legal Aid, the summer is time for our Generous Associates Campaign, the fundraising campaign run by associates from law firms all across Washington, D.C.

I am happy to announce that after eight weeks of some of the most intense efforts seen to date, the Generous Associates Campaign successfully raised $678,000! Not only did our volunteer fundraisers beat Legal Aid’s budget goal, they exceeded last year’s announced total. Congratulations to all the Firm Coordinators for their efforts, the Co-Chairs for their leadership, and to Michele Roberts of Akin Gump who took on the role of Honorary Chair and provided great inspiration.

Over 50% of the participating firms exceeded their fundraising amounts for 2009, with several setting new records. Competition is a wonderful motivator in the law firm arena, so we always hold a competition for firms by their size category. Check out the final results here.

When the Campaign launched in May, I have to admit that signs pointed to a fundraising campaign that could potentially be less successful than last year’s difficult effort. We had a drop of 20% in the number of firms participating, summer associate programs were reduced or canceled, and associates had additional pressures due to the ever changing legal environment that has been the norm for the past few years.

Despite these challenges, Washington’s legal community rose to the occasion and once again demonstrated that the tenet of justice for all should not be compromised. Generous associates, indeed. And generous partners, counsel, staff attorney, administrative professionals, etc.

Each year I am amazed at what this Campaign accomplishes. Washington’s hard working associates certainly have earned the right to focus more on the joys and distractions that summer can bring. Despite this, scores take on the responsibility of raising money for Legal Aid so that we can continue to make a difference in the lives of those living in poverty in the District.

Supervising Attorney

Councilmember David Catania and his staff are developing proposals that would address several important issues, including unmet children’s mental health needs, truancy and disconnection from supportive services.  One of many proposals that Councilmember Catania will consider, as reported in The Washington Post, is sanctioning (or reducing) benefits for District Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients if their children have repeated unexcused absences from school.

Although we share the Councilmember’s underlying concerns and strongly support his efforts to improve the delivery of mental health services to children through schools and other public and private entities, we believe that the TANF sanction proposal will not improve school attendance and will harm some of the very families he is trying to help:

*   Sanctioning TANF families with truant kids does not lead to increased school attendance among TANF recipients’ kids.

*   Sanctioning TANF families with truant kids will merely punish families who are already struggling with significant challenges.

*   The proposed policies will increase the material hardship for sanctioned families which could make it harder for them to support their children’s education.

*   Children suffer when their parents are sanctioned.

*   The District could better engage families and improve school attendance outcomes by improving services for vulnerable families.

Please see the  fact sheet prepared by the DC Fiscal Policy Institute, Legal Aid and the Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless describing in more detail why we urge Councilmember Catania not to include this proposal in any package of legislative and other proposals to address the important issues of truancy and children’s mental health.

Executive Director

TANF. The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program is scheduled to be re-authorized this year.  TANF was the centerpiece of the mid-1990’s changes to the public systems of support for low-income families dubbed “welfare reform.”  The stated idea behind TANF was that it would give a short term cash benefit while parents were assisted to move into the workforce.  The result is that TANF participation has decreased and the percentage of people eligible for benefits who actually receive them has declined.  Legal Momentum found that the decline in participation has, remarkably, continued throughout the recession.

Network, a group of Catholic social justice leaders, recently completed and published a report on the effectiveness of the TANF program during the recession.  TANF Tested: Lives of Families in Poverty during the Recession .   There are real questions about whether TANF’s focus on work made a difference during the boom years immediately following welfare reform.   Only a very small percentage of people leaving TANF for work secured employment with an adequate wage to lift them out of poverty.  During a recession, where official unemployment rates have climbed to nearly 10% nationally, the notion that work is the answer for most families living in poverty is absurd.

Driven by the results of the study, Network has made a number of important recommendations for the reauthorization bill.  The most important being that the basic measure of success be shifted from whether TANF caseloads are reduced to whether TANF recipients and those who leave TANF move out of poverty.

What the Federal Government Should Do Next to Reduce Poverty. Important provisions of the Stimulus Package provided support to state and local governments to continue and expand safety-net programs.   Key aspects of these programs are set to expire, despite that unemployment remains very high and communities are in distress.

The Urban Institute issued a briefing paper in July (Co-Authored by DC Access to Justice Commission Chair and Georgetown Law Professor Peter Edelman) with recommendation for short and long term measures that the federal government should take to reduce poverty and increase economic security.  Reducing Poverty and Economic:  Distress after ARRA: Next Steps for Short-Term Recovery and Long-Term Economic Security.  The paper looks at the immediate need for income support and job creation, but also looks forward to the next crisis in the job market and measures that might be taken to create long term economic stability.

Impact of the Recession on the Courts. We have previously written in this blog about the crisis in equal justice.  A new American Bar Association report examines the question from the perspective of the bench.  The ABA surveyed 1200 judges from across the country on the effects of the recession on representation in the courts.  The study found that self-representation is, not surprisingly, on the increase.  More significantly, however, the judges admit that self representation yields unjust results.  The report concluded:  “The most important issue with regard to self representation is what is its effect. The table below shows that while 37% of the judges say that it is not problematic, 62% say that individuals are negatively impacted. Only a very few say that there is a positive impact… Also troubling to 26% of the justices is that the court allows an injustice to occur when one of the parties is not able to properly present the valid claims or defense that they might have.”

Executive Director

DC Council – Committee Report on Access to Justice: When the District of Columbia Counsel took up the 2011 funding request for the Access to Justice Program, it took the extraordinary step of issuing a separate Committee Report.   Access to Justice funding supports direct legal assistance, language access and poverty lawyer loan forgiveness.   During the last three budget considerations, the Attorney General had sought major cuts to the program.   On each occasion, the Council, led by Public Safety Committee Chair Phil Mendelson, saved the program.   The Committee report urges:  “The District of Columbia, as our nation’s capital and the seat of democracy, should serve as a model in the provision of legal services and ensure all residents have equal access to the justice system.”  It is well worth a read.

ABA Model Act on Access to Justice: In 2006, the ABA adopted a resolution supporting the expansion of the right to council in civil cases.  “RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association urges federal, state, and territorial governments to provide legal counsel as a matter of right at public expense to low income persons in those categories of adversarial proceedings where basic human needs are at stake, such as those involving shelter, sustenance, safety, health or child custody, as determined by each jurisdiction.”

During its upcoming August meeting, the House of Delegates will consider two further resolutions designed to take a big step towards implementation of these goals – a model right to counsel act and a statement of Basic Principles of a Right to Counsel in Civil Legal Proceedings.  We are grateful for the work of the ABA on these important resolutions.