首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law >Just a phone call away: is telephone advice enough?
【24h】

Just a phone call away: is telephone advice enough?

机译:只需打个电话即可:电话咨询足够了吗?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Over the last two decades the public sector has embraced new modes of service delivery, with a shift away from traditional face-to-face provision towards Internet and telephone based advice and information. While telephone provision has played an increasingly significant role in overall provision of legal advice in recent years, there has been limited empirical research which compares telephone to face-to-face services. Utilising administrative data from the Legal Services Commission (LSC) on legal aid services for housing problems, this paper explores the similarities and differences between the two delivery modes. We examine the client groups and matter types which tend toward particular channels of advice, the relationship between mode of advice and the outcome of cases for clients and the relationship between mode of advice and advice time. We find that there are significant differences in mode of advice among clients with particular demographic characteristics, with clients under the age of 18 and clients living with an illness or disability more likely to use face-to-face services. Our findings also suggest differences among the types of problems being addressed by telephone based services. On the surface there are small differences between modes of advice and the proportion of cases which lead to a substantive benefit outcome. However, once we disaggregate the data and investigate specific outcomes, there are pronounced differences in the outcomes achieved. Having controlled for key variables such as client demographics, case type and particularly stage reached, we find that telephone advice takes, on average, 14 minutes longer than face-to-face advice (compared to an hour less when examining the raw data). The implications of these findings for the future development of telephone based services in light of current policy in legal services are discussed.View full textDownload full textKeywordslegal aid, mode of access, housing problems, telephone advice, civil justiceRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2012.675465
机译:在过去的二十年中,公共部门已经接受了新的服务提供模式,从传统的面对面提供转向了基于Internet和电话的建议和信息。尽管近年来电话提供在总体法律咨询中起着越来越重要的作用,但是将电话与面对面服务进行比较的实证研究很少。利用法律服务委员会(LSC)提供的有关住房问题法律援助服务的行政数据,本文探讨了两种交付方式之间的异同。我们研究倾向于特定建议渠道的客户群体和问题类型,建议模式与客户案件结局之间的关系以及建议模式与建议时间之间的关系。我们发现,在具有特定人口特征的客户中,18岁以下的客户和患病或残障的客户更可能使用面对面的服务,其咨询方式存在很大差异。我们的发现还表明,基于电话的服务所解决的问题类型之间存在差异。从表面上看,咨询的方式与案件的比例之间存在很小的差异,导致实质性的收益结果。但是,一旦我们分解数据并调查特定的结果,则所实现的结果会有明显的差异。在控制了诸如客户人口统计,案例类型以及特别是阶段等关键变量之后,我们发现电话咨询平均比面对面咨询要花费14分钟的时间(相比之下,检查原始数据要少一个小时)。根据法律服务中的现行政策,讨论了这些发现对电话服务未来发展的意义。查看全文下载全文关键字法律援助,交通方式,住房问题,电话咨询,民事司法相关var addthis_config = {ui_cobrand:“泰勒和弗朗西斯在线”,services_compact:“ citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,更多”,发布号:“ ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b”};添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2012.675465

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号