Opportunities for Organizational Development Work at Northern County Legal Services - Case Study Example

Organizational development work at LNSC LSNC (Legal Services for Northern California) is the legal aid supplier for 23 counties within Northern California. Operating from 8 field offices, the LSNC employs over 150 staff members, approximately about a third of them being attorneys. Advocating for individuals and families with low income in areas of health care, public benefits, employment and housing since 1956, LSNC promoters get honors from the neighborhood, state and Federal level for their valuable contributions to the public interest laws. LSNC’s mission is “providing quality legal services for empowering the poor and identifying and defeating the causes and consequences of poverty within their community, by resourcefully utilizing all accessible resources” (Anderson, 2011). LSNC attorneys are dynamic in their local legal societies, on the state bar committees and state and national advocate union, sharing innovative advocacy instruments and providing guidance in the California legal aid society. Committed to providing the uppermost quality representation to its clients, LSNC has brought to abide tools such as community economic development laws geographic information system (GIS) transactional representation, and mapping to improve the chance in low income communities (Anderson, 2011). Julie Aguilar is a Deputy Director designed for Program Operations in LSNC. She connected to the program’s County office at Sacramento in 1999 as a staff lawyer focusing on disability, community economic development law and public benefits. Julie has been the administrator of the health care law and disability law special projects in LSNC. She has also served as lead adviser on litigation on the areas of social security food stamps and other general assistance. As Deputy Director, Julie offers support to management staff all through the service area, builds up program policies and events and organizes training and supporting new attorneys. Julie is a graduate of UC Berkeley majoring in History with a minor in Chicano Studies. Julie also graduated in 1999 from UCLA School of Law (Anderson, 2011). There has been controversy on her leadership in the organization due to various potholes and omissions in the as far as organizational development becomes concerned. The economic crisis intensifies in California and the whole nation at large. LSNC’s clients and societies become devastated by soaring mortgage foreclosures, job losses and the evisceration of local and state “safety net” programs. IOLTA fund drop and several LSNC programs (Senior Legal Hotline and the OSNC) suffer severe state funding decline. Recently, the Ukiah office building became notably damaged by a fire outbreak, forcing the relocation of the staff to rental offices for the remaining year. 6 LSNC offices (in an endeavor led by Herb Whitaker and Bill Kennedy) got awarded considerable grants under the federal Rapid Re-housing Program (HPRP) and Homeless Prevention, for representation of tenants who are facing evictions (Anderson, 2011). Mortgage foreclosure advocacy reduces across the service area (for instance, in Solano County, having one of the lowest foreclosure rates nationally, and in Butte, with an unpopular litigation success for a property holder with disabilities) and mostly, at SLH, which has failed to save dozens of seniors’ residences from foreclosure, and failure to assist hundreds of other citizens in foreclosure avoidance strategies. For the LSNC land use advocacy to be effectual to its clients, it should intensify its implementation with the following: (1) housing factor successes in Humboldt, Mendocino, and Chico. (2) Beneficial arrangement of a challenge by Ukiah office to illegal use of redevelopment finances in Clearlake. (3) The establishment of new homeownership chances for low-income families and individuals through Humboldt Community Land Trust. The LSNC wins substantial policy transformations for tenants from housing system in Humboldt, Vallejo and Eureka. LSNC represents itinerant service providers in a poor profile advocacy in Eureka (failing fully preventing the city from evicting providers from its offices) (Anderson, 2011). In Sacramento, LSNC clients Fishes and Loaves pilots a “safe ground” campaign evading national media spotlight, which can play a crucial role in reforming the situation. LSNC’s Race Equity Project is ineffectual in its leadership role in the state and national legal services communities. This could be best implemented through advocacy and training examining the intersections of poverty and race. The Solano County staff should prevent the enactment of Vallejo ordinance unfairly aiming (and “profiling”) residents of low-income apartment complex. Butte Regional Office Advocates should; (1) correct the flawed issuance of welfare over payment collection notices to approximate hundreds of people, now adults, who were actually children when the overpayments transpired decades ago; (2) provide coaching to a number of intermediary housing providers on residents’ appropriate process rights, and avert provider’s issuance of illegal evictions notices; and (3) rectify a county Superior Court’s illegal interpretation of fee waiver process (Anderson, 2011). In partnership with California Advocates for the Nursing Home Reform (CANHR), Northern California’s Ombudsman Services launched a one year spotlight on the “toxic drugging” patients and residents of lasting care facilities. This was a brilliant idea but an awful late approach. The organization should have done this way long before but not to wait until they got pressured by the press (Anderson, 2011). Legislative advocacy in Ukiah did not succeed on a Mobile home Rent Stabilization regulation by the Ukiah city, creating poor protections for the low-income mobile home square residents. LSNC advocacy particularly on behalf of homeless people worked in the poorest form across the program, and except in Sacramento and Humboldt counties, where advocates got occupied in complex structural reform endeavors in assisting these vulnerable residents. The Yolo Office did well in obtaining increased financial support for its higher legal services program, and launched an education project for assisting promote care to children with exceptional disciplinary and education issues. The project never succeeded, and the project’s money allocation was not transparent (Anderson, 2011). In general, I think Julie’s organization is ineffectual in its duties and obligations on the basis of their past records. It should then be broken down, and a new board and staff that can advocate for needy citizens take over. This will end impunity among these lazy leaders and promote the citizen power and representation. Reference Anderson, D. L. (2011). Organization Development: Process of Leading Organizational Change. New York: SAGE. Read More