2.0 Executive Summary
Legal clinics in Canada may provide a variety of services, the most usual being free legal information, summary advice, coaching, and representation to low-income clients who meet certain eligibility criteria. Although one or more of these core services may exist in any given clinic, there is no national mandated model of service (in terms of either type or extent of service) for clinics in Canada. This study describes legal clinics in the country concerning funding and delivery models, profiles of clients and their legal needs, data collection, and measures put in place to serve clients in the context of COVID-19. Three methodologies explore the similarities and differences across the country: a literature review, an on-line scan of clinics, and interviews with key informants in all 13 jurisdictions.
Literature review
The literature review explores typologies of legal clinics, their key philosophies, the primary types of issues and outcomes, service gaps, and the impacts of COVID-19. The clinic model that is most characteristic of clinics described in this study is what Noreau and Pasca call the “juridical counter model” (Noreau and Pasca, 2014: 313)Footnote 1. As described by Abramowicz (2004:73), the community legal clinic characteristics of local community governance, poverty law practice and a broad array of services are critical elements in Ontario. They evolved from recommendations in the 1974 Osler report, and they were given strong provincial and local support. These elements are less consistently developed as a provincial system in other jurisdictions, which have lacked the same high-level impetus.
Legal clinics rarely measure outcomes in a highly developed way. There also tends to be less service reaching rural areas, and a lack of overall funding to develop strategic activities and test cases related to poverty law. The COVID-19 pandemic affected almost every area of law, but labour and employment law are considered the most strongly affected.
Scan and description of clinics in each jurisdiction
Section 5.2 of the report contains a summary of legal clinic structures in Canada, based on the matrices for each of the 13 Canadian jurisdictions in section 8.0. These matrices present data on legal clinic funders, the primary legal focus, the number of clinics, their settings and sub-categories of issues, the extent of service, governance structures, pre-COVID-19 delivery models and adaptations as a result of the pandemic. The matrices show that:
- British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec have the largest number of clinics.
- All jurisdictions have multiple legal clinic funders, most commonly law foundations and legal aid plans.
- Student clinics exist in all jurisdictions that have law schools.
- The range of matters dealt with in clinics varies widely.
- Clinics offered through community associations exist in almost all jurisdictions.
- Pro bono organizations exist in five provinces.
- Almost all clinics offer legal information, and if there is direct supervision by a lawyer, will offer legal advice, assistance with forms and in some cases, help with drafting of documents.
- The maximum duration of assistance is usually 30 minutes, but it can be longer, and/or assistance may involve multiple visits.
- In more than half the clinics reviewed, there was a modification of service due to COVID-19, usually involving virtual (telephone or Zoom) rather than in-person assistance.
Key Informant Interviews
Semi-structured interviews were conducted by telephone or video conference with 24 respondents drawn from all 13 jurisdictions. Several of the themes derived from the matrices and summarized above were also confirmed in these interviews (e.g., concerning who funds the clinics in the jurisdiction). Other themes include:
- Clinics, as a model of service delivery, first emerged in the 1970s, with varying stages of development depending on the jurisdiction.
- Strengths of the legal clinic systems are the provision of service in more legal areas than in the legal aid system, adaptation to community needs and earlier intervention.
- Weaknesses are usually related to funding vulnerability.Footnote 2
- Overall, funding of clinics has not lessened during COVID-19. However, key informants identified several factors that make the funding outlook in the future less positive.
- The informants described numerous innovative service modalities that have been used to serve clients during COVID-19. Almost all involve usage of virtual processes for determining and processing needs of clients. Some of these processes are disadvantageous to clients who lack technological abilities or access.
- The extent of data collection by clinics varies both between and within jurisdictions. The most frequently collected data are gender, income, area of law, and Indigeneity. Data needs are generally determined by the agency itself, not the funder. Needs were identified for data on housing and disability status, homelessness and mental health issues.
- The three areas of legal needs of clinic users most consistently identified were family (child protection, interim orders, child support, guardianship), housing and homelessness, and various forms of provincial and federal income assistance.
- There is currently virtually no reporting of social return on investment (SROI). This is primarily because of the lack of client outcome data that would support SROI analyses.Footnote 3
- Date modified: