September 23, 1999
In the Matter of:
Westchester/Putnam Legal Services, Inc.Complainant:
4 Cromwell Place
White Plains, New York 10601
National Legal and Policy Center
1309 Vincent Place, Suite 1000
McLean, VA 22101
This complaint alleges that Westchester/Putnam Legal Services, Inc., a program funded by the Legal Services Corporation (LSC), apparently followed a routine practice of misrepresenting telephone calls by non-lawyers on its staff as legal cases in its case service reports to LSC. The purpose of the misrepresentation was to deceive LSC and its other funding sources as to the volume of service it was rendering.
The allegations about this fraudulent practice were revealed in a June 18, 1999 letter to the editor of InvestorÕs Business Daily, a prominent national business news paper which had previously published an opinion article entitled ÒThe Legal Services FraudÓ on May 28, 1999. The letter was submitted by John T. Hand and is attached as Exhibit A.
Mr. HandÕs letter stated:
ÒFor more than 20 years I worked in a small Legal Services Corporation-funded program and the work was immensely rewarding. But in 1996, when I was the programÕs litigation director, I quit due to the many practices and policies - at the local and national levels - which, to my mind, had all but destroyed the programÕs ability to render competent legal assistance to people unable to afford counsel.
One of these practices was the counting of virtually every telephone call as a ÒcaseÓ in order to build up numbers to report to the LSC and other funding sources. Consequently, hundreds, if not thousands, of reported cases were nothing more than referrals or other responses given by paralegals or secretaries.ÓThe legal services program which employed John T. Hand and engaged in the practices described in his letter was Westchester/Putnam Legal Services, Inc. of White Plains, N.Y.
On its face, the practice described by Mr. Hand represents a violation of the grant agreement entered into each year by Westchester/Putnam Legal Services, Inc. and LSC. Legal services programs are required under the LSC Act, LSC regulations and the contractual relationship with LSC to provide truthful information regarding the expenditure of LSC funds.
Specifically Section 1008 (a) of the LSC Act authorizes LSC Òto require such reports as it deems necessary from any grantee, contractor, or person or entity receiving financial assistance under this title regarding activities carried out pursuant to this title.Ó
LSC has never had any policy, guideline, or regulation which allowed a telephone call by a non-lawyer to count as a legal case. Specifically, the Case Service Report instructions, whether those in effect in 1996 and earlier or those in effect currently, have never, by any interpretation, provided that a secretaryÕs telephone call could be counted as a legal case.
Moreover, to the extent that any such telephone call was considered a case, it represents provision of Òlegal servicesÓ to individuals where there has not been appropriate qualifying of the eligibility of the client applicant.
Mr. HandÕs letter clearly stated that the purpose of the practice of counting Òvirtually every telephone call as a ÔcaseÕ Ò was Òin order to build up numbers to report to the LSC and other funders.Ó In short, the purpose of misrepresenting those telephone calls by secretaries as cases was to deceive the funders of Westchester/Putnam Legal Services, including LSC.
This practice was apparently so entrenched and egregious as to be a motivating factor in John T. HandÕs decision to quit legal services after more than 20 yearsÕ service. Indeed, he stated that hundreds, if not thousands, of telephone calls were misrepresented as cases as part of this practice of deception.
To the extent that this knowing deception in case counting influenced any party from not competing with Westchester/Putnam Legal Services for its LSC grant, it represents an undermining of the Congressional requirement that there be fair and open competition for grants. Such competition is not possible if the incumbent program has been systematically inflating its case numbers with bogus cases.
Also, the stated purpose of the practice being to Òbuild up the numbersÓ for LSC and other funders raises the issue of whether the program received state or private funds from funders which relied on the false, exaggerated case totals. Providing case totals known to be false to obtain grants is more than improper, itÕs fraudulent.
National Legal and Policy Center will be contacting funders of Westchester/Putnam Legal Services to determine if they were provided with case numbers which differ from those provided to LSC. Many private foundations have grant agreements similar to the LSC grant agreement in that there is a requirement that the information provided is truthful. Similarly, state law routinely requires that recipients of state funds not misrepresent important information provided in order to obtain state funds.
When a veteran of more than 20 years service as a legal services lawyer quits, citing a practice of falsifying case information as a contributing reason, that allegation should be taken seriously and be fully investigated.
When the provision of false case information by legal services programs to Congress is already a national scandal, the duty to investigate such allegations is especially important.
This case starkly illustrates that phony case statistics may not be just Òbookkeeping errorsÓ or confusion over what constitutes a case. Knowingly misrepresenting telephone calls by secretaries to be legal cases - the key allegation here - constitutes deception which should not be ignored by LSC.
Legal Services Accountability Project Page