Research Strategy Group. 25 March 2014

Transcription

1 Research Strategy Group 25 March 2014

2 Agenda LSB staff changes Research update November-March Research plans Dissemination AOB 2

3 LSB staff changes Alex Roy, Head of Development & Research, leaving April 14 Caroline Wallace joining as Strategy Director, May 14 3

4 LSB Research update: November 13 - March 14 Published: December - Understanding barriers to entry, exit and changes to the structure of regulated legal firms, Regulatory Policy Institute. Joint funded with Law Society) - Investigating regulation Usage: Ongoing discussions with SRA December Criminal Advocacy services in England & Wales Briefing Pack, in-house analysis Measuring the impacts of reform Usage: Evidence base for LSB submission to the Jeffrey s Review of the Provision of Independent Criminal Advocacy Drafting: An assessment of the most effective methods of supporting consumers to identify and respond to legal problems s experiences of legal services Key Regulatory Objective: increasing public understanding of citizens legal rights and duties; Researcher: Professor John Maule & Linstock Communications Literature review of best practice in health, finance, and legal services, of just-in-time and just-in-case approaches, 8 interviews with a range of organisations. First draft received, final report due April

5 LSB Research update: November 13 - March 14 Drafting (cont.): Learning from the legal services in the Personal Injury market Economic and quantitative analysis on what makes access to justice work better in PI than other markets, and what lessons might be for regulation - Investigating regulation Key Regulatory Objective: improving access to justice Researcher: London Economics. Collation of data from range of surveys, agencies, and economic analysis of changes over time. Supported by small set of interviews with agencies. First draft due end of March How do consumers attitudes and beliefs about the law affect their responses to legal problems? A quantitative analysis s unmet legal needs Key Regulatory Objective: increasing public understanding of citizens legal rights and duties; Researcher: Pleasence and Balmer, statistical analysis of existing legal needs data sets to quantify different drivers. First draft due end of March Commissioned Online divorce and levels of consumer service (in conjunction with LSCP) Investigate the risks and benefits of online service delivery - s experiences of legal services Key Regulatory Objective: promoting competition in the provision of services in the legal sector Researcher: BDRC. Small scale quantitative consumer experience tracking survey, supported with a traditional post experience survey of both offline and online users. Report due in July 5

6 Recap from November: Research plans for Business Plan consultation: Description Policy focus Relevant ROs Survey of non SRA regulated entities (BSB, IPREG, ARs Promote competition CLC, MOF, CLSB) focusing on business aspects, Market Promote professional principles. services provided, and perspectives on regulation Innovation: capabilities and barriers in legal services - Comparative study of the development of innovation and the barriers regulation presents to adoption of innovation in legal services Individual consumer legal needs survey (Updating the 2012 benchmarking survey) Understanding differing views of talent between firms and clients and the impact on diversity Understanding experiences of providing and receiving unbundled services Understanding the consumer experience of online divorce services Impact of current government policy on customer service standards in Legal Services ARS Profession Market Market Market Improve access to justice; Promote competition Encourage an independent, strong, diverse, effective profession; Promote professional principles. Improve access to justice; Promote competition in the provision of legal services; Encourage an independent, strong, diverse, effective legal profession Improve access to justice; Improve access to justice; Promote competition in the provision of legal services; Improve access to justice 6

7 Recap from November: Research plans other possibilities: Possible additional/alternative research projects depending on policy directions/other factors: Sanctions and Appeals dependant on outcomes from review; Quality dependant on outcome of regulators review of progress against Quality KPIs published in 2012; Costs of regulation analysis dependant on MoJ review of regulation Evaluation 14/15 likely to focus on Improving Access to Justice, full evaluation in 15/16. Continue to seek joint working opportunities, ideas welcome 7

8 Business plan consultation responses to research ideas some highlights (1) Cilex: The LSB has been operating long enough now to take forward initiatives that are evidence based and should be in a position to more than just think they would like to research a particular issue, or indeed to rely on terminology that is wholly out of kilter with the 2007 Act. The LSB should use an evidence based approach to determine the focus of resources on research initiatives......it has not always been clear why proposed research projects have been chosen or what the LSB intended to do with any findings. There is a plethora of evidence and research available, and bearing in mind that the LSB is now in its fifth year of operation we would expect it to have a sound evidence base to develop effective regulator policy...moreover, the evaluation and research that the LSB has commissioned has not always generated the outcomes envisaged and in other cases has unnecessarily duplicated research already available. Duplication and overlap result in unnecessary costs to the profession and ultimately the consumer. IPS: The LSB needs to gather and publish more information on market analysis undertaken on specialist and niche sectors of the market. Research should include details of consumer needs and expectations of specialist lawyers. TLS We welcome the review of the costs of regulation. We believe that the approach of the LSB has been to impose significant additional burdens on the market without any obvious countervailing benefits. We hope that the work will be carried out by suitably independent researchers and that there will be full consultation over methodology and the substance of the research. The Law Society will be happy to help with these discussions...we believe that the LSB could significantly reduce its research work further 8

9 Business plan consultation responses to research ideas some highlights (2) SRA: We agree that it is sensible to defer a full update to the market evaluation of the impacts of regulation until 2015/16 in order to allow time for regulatory reforms to settle and to improve the evidence base. A number of research proposals are put forward. We suggest that priority should be given to the legal services benchmarking survey and research entities regulated by the smaller approved regulators. Bar Council: We would be interested to understand better the role of the Research Strategy Group, in particular its composition and the arrangements for reporting and the accountability of this group. We hope these can be explained fully in the final version of the Business Plan. We have an on-going concern about the risk of duplication of research work which the frontline regulators (or others, such as the MoJ) are undertaking or planning to do, for example in relation to the effects of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act It is not sufficiently clear why any of the six initial research proposals identified in paragraph 60 have been proposed or indeed at this stage in their development their relevance to those who use the services of barristers or who practise at the Bar. City of London Law Society: The CLLS firms pay some 25m annually towards the regulatory and 'permitted purposes' costs of the legal sector....the combination of your draft Business Plan for 2013/14, and your stakeholder meetings held to prioritise the 20 13/14 research activities, confirmed that your work to study the Cost and Complexity of Regulation would be usefully informed by your two proposed research projects on the risks of General Legal Advice and on Mapping the Unregulated Market. At some stage thereafter, the research project on Mapping the Unregulated Market was evidently dropped, as it failed to appear in the final Business Plan for 2013/14. No mention of this descoping appears either in your Annual report for 2012/13 or in your latest draft Business Plan for 2014/15. Nor are there any new research proposals relevant to our concerns about the level of the City's regulatory costs. 9

10 Prioritising research areas: Prioritisation on the basis of: 1. LSB and LSCP work plan for 14/15, and in house survey of priorities; 2. Gaps in knowledge identified in the Regulatory Information Review; 3. Evidence needs highlighted in the LSA market impacts baseline to support future evaluation market work; 4. Consultation responses; 5. Planned research activity by ARs e.g. QASA review; 6. Planned research activity by Reps e.g. TLS firms survey; 7. Planned research activity by academics e.g. Understanding differing views of talent between firms and clients and the impact on diversity; 8. Available budget for externally commissioned research, areas of expertise required, and estimated costs of each project; 9. Available in house resources for research and gaps in expertise; 10. Assessment of the potential for joint funding of projects. 10

11 Proposed in scope projects for 14/15 (1) Description Policy focus Start - end dates Understanding the consumer experience of online divorce January 14 July services (started 13/14) (external) 14 Innovation: capabilities and barriers in legal services - Profession, Comparative study of the development of innovation and the May 14 ARS, Market, barriers regulation presents to adoption of innovation in legal March 15 services (external) Understanding experiences of providing and receiving unbundled services (external) Cost of regulation analysis of unit costs, total financial, compliance and opportunity costs imposed by regulators and representative arms (in house and external) Availability of quality and price information for legal services (external) Open data market impacts case studies (in house) Availability of ADR schemes across legal sector (in house) PhD Student funding (4 year commitment started 2013) Warwick University, focus on professional ethics ARS, Market, ARS, Market, ARS, Market, Market, October 14 April 15 April 14- December 14 June 14 November 14 July 14 November 14 December 14 April 15 Profession

12 Proposed in scope projects for 14/15 (2) Description Policy focus Start - end dates Review and update LSB research web pages content (in house) November 14 April 15 Individual consumer legal needs survey Market January 15 (Updating the 2012 benchmarking survey) (external) June 15 Evaluation: Changes in access to justice (in house) Market March 14 -January 15 Draft list subject to revision in coming months Deliberately ambitious Comments requested Joint funding always welcome 12

13 Proposed out of scope projects for 14/15 Description Trends in decisions overturned by approved regulators, including SDT activity and appeals against ABS applications Professional Ethics measurement analysis Analysis of changes in legal aid solicitor firms use of external advocates Review of investment firms activity in the legal services sector Trends in ARs adopting outcomes focused regulation, rule changes, and the subsequent impacts Mapping the unreserved sector Price indices (basket of legal services) appetite for MDPs Misleading cost information Small business legal needs update Impact of current government policy on customer service standards in Legal Services Analysis and of First Tier Complaints Description Diversity of profession, judiciary - Judicial Appointments Commission Diversity reports Court service user survey findings Analysis of proportion of Cracked trials Analysis of trends in litigants in person Analysis of changes in hourly rates achieved for solicitors firms Number of ABS firms and mix of services offered by ABS firms Solicitors High street survey update Survey of non SRA regulated entities (BSB, IPREG, CLC, MOF, CLSB) focusing on business aspects, services provided, and perspectives on regulation Understanding differing views of talent between firms and clients and the impact on diversity Analysis of QASA applications and assessments Evaluation: Full update of 2012 Market Impacts baseline 13

14 Dissemination LSB presenting papers at the following legal services research conferences in 14/15: Socio-Legal Studies Association, April Opportunities for legal education post education and training review 2. Market challenges to regulating legal services 3. How alternative are ABS? UCL International Conference on Access to Justice and Legal Services, June Balancing entry and ethics: challenges ahead 14

15 AOB Any issues that we haven t covered? Date of next meeting? October

16 Victoria House Southampton Row London WC1B 4AD Follow LSB_EngandWal