Local authorities reflect on CLACs, CLANs and their alternatives
A new report (1) considers the implications for local authorities of the Legal Services Commission’s proposal to develop community legal advice centres and networks (CLAC/Ns).
The report, which was commissioned by the Local Government Association and the Improvement and Development Agency, identifies:
- The options available to local authorities who wish to make changes to the current provision of advice in their area and the impact they have on advice providers (the CLAC/N option is just one of three)
- Key lessons for local authorities that can be drawn from experiences of developing CLAC/Ns
- Any wider implications, risks and dilemmas for local authorities moving to commission other services where voluntary sector providers currently play a prominent role.
These include the following:
- The "key wider implication" identified is that councils should not feel that moving to competitive tendering is appropriate in all cases, particularly where voluntary and community organisations (VCOs) already provide quality services in a way that the market would struggle to provide.
- Competitive tendering is not the only option available to local authorities in order to comply with EU procurement regulations although whichever funding option councils choose they will have to demonstrate that it provides best value.
- The risk to VCOs may not be as great as reported, as they should be in a highly competitive position if they can demonstrate an ability to work with other organisations. The risk can be reduced if commissioners understand the full range of services VCOs provide and ensure these are taken into account in the commissioning process.
- The long-term sustainability of CLAC/Ns is not clear as contracts may not be sufficiently large to cover the number of cases that need to be dealt with and private providers may not be able to make sufficient, stable profit.
- The decision to change legal advice provision and the choice of funding option are political decisions that can have a significant impact on the wellbeing of local people. Jointly commissioning CLAC/Ns with the LSC can become a divisive issue in particular where it places existing VCOs at risk. Ensuring political support at the start reduces the possibility of a CLAC/N being rejected at a later date.
- The LSC’s objectives differ from council objectives and do not include the need for generalist advice and legal advice for those above the threshold for legal aid. They are also not aligned to wider local government commitments to create an environment for a thriving third sector and increase volunteering.
- The LSC has a set process and contract specification for CLAC/Ns which are tailored to meet its own objectives. Councils need to influence the process and specification in order to ensure their own objectives are also met and they have been able to do so where they have invested significant time and resource to the process. Even in these cases the contracts have tended to be highly detailed with set funding arrangements that are not easily changed to meet unanticipated demand.
