community integration are asked of applicants. Focus on these three areas will maximize the use of limited resources by funding strong programs and unduplicated services. LSAC should give particular emphasis to: Service effectiveness Fiscal soundness, including adequate diversification of resources Collaboration and participation in the statewide legal services delivery system The LSAC application should also be reviewed to ensure that support programs are given an opportunity to highlight the work that they do and address the support program effectiveness issues described above. Support organizations that provide centralized training, technology, volunteer coordination, and financial support are critical to having a statewide system that meets the criteria listed above. Support organizations should continue to be funded in the FY12-13 grant cycle. Equity Subcommittee Report Overview The Equity Subcommittee met five times between March 2010 and August 2010. The subcommittee started with a general discussion of how equity should be defined and whether it was an important priority for legal services planning. The subcommittee discussed a variety of issues, including possible inequities based on location, demographics, and language access. Staff was assigned to gather case closed data and demographic data for all LSAC funded organizations and that data, along with the Planning Committee maps of cases closed in 2006, 2007 and 2008, was reviewed by subcommittee members. In discussing whether demographic equity should be part of the Planning Committee recommendations to LSAC, the subcommittee noted two things. First, local programs are in the best position to be aware of the needs of their community. The compiled client demographic data reflects Minnesota’s diverse poverty population and did not reveal any glaring issues that - local priorities are misplaced. Second, the Minnesota Client Access and Barriers Study is designed to try to identify populations that may be underserved. It would be premature to examine issues of demographic equity without those study results. Review of the maps and other data led the subcommittee to focus, for the coming funding cycle, on geographic equity. To inform their discussion, the subcommittee members participated in interviews with multi-county programs covering all regions of the state (see Appendix for notes from all interviews). Staff also reviewed the models for equitable public funding distribution in Washington and Florida. The findings and recommendations in the section of the report reflect the Planning Committee’s judgment about which inequity issues are the most pressing for the upcoming funding cycle. Across time, it will of course be
community integration are asked of applicants. Focus on these three areas will maximize the use of limited resources by funding strong programs and unduplicated services. LSAC should give particular emphasis to: Service effectiveness Fiscal soundness, including adequate diversification of resources Collaboration and participation in the statewide legal services delivery system The LSAC application should also be reviewed to ensure that support programs are given an opportunity to highlight the work that they do and address the support program effectiveness issues described above. Support organizations that provide centralized training, technology, volunteer coordination, and financial support are critical to having a statewide system that meets the criteria listed above. Support organizations should continue to be funded in the FY12-13 grant cycle. Equity Subcommittee Report Overview The Equity Subcommittee met five times between March 2010 and August 2010. The subcommittee started with a general discussion of how equity should be defined and whether it was an important priority for legal services planning. The subcommittee discussed a variety of issues, including possible inequities based on location, demographics, and language access. Staff was assigned to gather case closed data and demographic data for all LSAC funded organizations and that data, along with the Planning Committee maps of cases closed in 2006, 2007 and 2008, was reviewed by subcommittee members. In discussing whether demographic equity should be part of the Planning Committee recommendations to LSAC, the subcommittee noted two things. First, local programs are in the best position to be aware of the needs of their community. The compiled client demographic data reflects Minnesota’s diverse poverty population and did not reveal any glaring issues that - local priorities are misplaced. Second, the Minnesota Client Access and Barriers Study is designed to try to identify populations that may be underserved. It would be premature to examine issues of demographic equity without those study results. Review of the maps and other data led the subcommittee to focus, for the coming funding cycle, on geographic equity. To inform their discussion, the subcommittee members participated in interviews with multi-county programs covering all regions of the state (see Appendix for notes from all interviews). Staff also reviewed the models for equitable public funding distribution in Washington and Florida. The findings and recommendations in the section of the report reflect the Planning Committee’s judgment about which inequity issues are the most pressing for the upcoming funding cycle. Across time, it will of course be