Legal assistance organisations are among those relying on data as a tool to design effective legal services.

The Victoria Law Foundation report said that they hoped the findings will strengthen the resolve of organisations across Victoria to improve data quality, so that it can better answer access to justice questions.

“Used well, [good-quality] data can be used to understand legal need, to design services and to analyse what works and what doesn’t,” executive director Lynne Haultain said.

“Our findings show that administrative data in the legal sector is used for many purposes in both useful and innovative ways, however there are challenges to using it system-wide for meaningful comparative analysis. Improving the consistency and accuracy of administrative data will help better answer access to justice questions.”

Principal researcher Dr Hugh McDonald added that building a quality evidence base needs strategic thinking and commitment to drive improved data culture and practice. 

“It is vital that legal assistance funders and service providers develop a shared understanding and vision for the role of and use of data, and that there is greater clarity about what service data will and will not be used for,” she said.

The report revealed that individual organisations were using administrative data for a range of functions, to report to funders, make submissions to government and inquiries, plan services and to evaluate services. 

VIEW ALL

Many participant organisations had a sound understanding of data strengths and weaknesses, and knowledge of how practices varied among organisations.

There was also widespread evidence of administrative data being used in pragmatic and useful ways, including to learn more about clients, services and communities, and to better respond to legal and other needs.

Research director Professor Nigel Balmer said that the movement to measure outcomes places a premium on data consistency and accuracy. 

“Quality data also requires modern, fit for purpose data management systems that reflect the work and needs of services. Getting to quality data also requires leadership, collaboration and coordination. It does not happen on its own,” he said.

On average, participating organisations had nine funding streams with separate reporting requirements. Reporting requirements also changed frequently, creating further challenges.

The data capability of legal assistance organisations varied significantly, often as a function of size of an organisation, with evidence of polarisation in capability.

Further, participating organisations reported that the administrative data currently collected did not fully gauge the value of work, failing to adequately capture the complexity of clients and matters. 

As a result, simple service counts did not capture the relative effort required to meet some clients’ legal needs. 

“There was a broad consensus that measuring the impact of legal assistance services was complex and difficult to achieve with available administrative data,” the report stated.

Although there are clear deficiencies in current data practices and quality, there are also opportunities and strategies for improvement. 

If implemented, they are not only likely to improve the quality of the data collected by the legal assistance sector, but significantly improve its utility for sector-level analysis and learning, according to the report.

“The findings reported here signal a legal assistance sector that has embarked on a data improvement journey and is ripe for strategic support and further investment,” Ms Haultain said.

“Improving the quality of administrative data will enable data-driven and robust analysis of current services and systems.

“This will [help address] critical access to justice questions, with wide-ranging benefits for funders, [policymakers], legal assistance service providers, and ultimately Victorians with civil justice needs.”