HC Deb 17 July 1997 vol 298 cc328-9W
Dr. Cable

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what are the 10 transaction criteria questions in audits of legal aid firms which most often result in non-compliance; and what proportion of firms fail to comply with each. [8118]

Mr. Hoon

This information is not available and could be derived only at disproportionate cost.

Dr. Cable

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many auditors the Legal Aid Board currently employs to carry out transaction criteria audits on legal aid firms; what was the estimated cost of employing(a) these auditors and (b) all Board staff concerned with franchising, including auditors and liaison managers in 1996–97; and what are the projected costs for 1997–98. [7908]

Mr. Hoon

The Legal Aid Board currently employs the full-time equivalent of 39.38 quality Auditors to carry out franchise related duties, including transaction criteria audits, with a current annual budget of approximately £600,000. In 1996–97, the cost of all aspects of franchising to the Legal Aid Board was approximately £4,000,000.

Planned expenditure for the maintenance and expansion of franchising in 1997–98 is £5,000,000.

Dr. Cable

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department in how many instances the results of transaction criteria audits on legal aid firms have led to quality concerns being registered against the firm. [8119]

Mr. Hoon

The Legal Aid Board uses transaction criteria as the process measure of service delivery in a specific case or proceeding type, and would use evidence of systematic omissions of information recorded, advice given, or steps taken, to raise quality concerns with the organisation, with a view to improving service provision. Since 1 April 1995 (when a new system was installed to provide details of all non-compliancies) 86 major (d) non-compliancies (this is where the organisation is not able to comply with one of number of mandatory franchise requirements) have been recorded as a result of transaction criteria audits.

Dr. Cable

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many transaction audits have been conducted for each of the Legal Aid Board's franchise categories; what is(a) the average number of files read and (b) the average number of person hours spent in respect of each audit; in how many instances the raw data have revealed a compliance rate below the minimum compliance rate established by the Legal Aid Board; and in how many instances the compliance rate has fallen below the established minima once the appropriate statistical significance test has been applied. [7905]

Mr. Hoon

(a) The Legal Aid Board has informed me that during the financial year 1996–97, the relevant information was as follows:

Franchise category Audits conducted Average number of files audited
Consumer and general conduct 300 2.3
Crime 958 5.2
Debt 266 2.8
Employment 235 2.7
Housing 382 3.2
Immigration 55 3.0
Matrimonial and family 1,498 5.1
Personal injury 1,279 4.5
Welfare benefits 95 2.7

(b) The average length of time spent auditing case files against the transaction criteria was 9.6 hours per audit. This was the time taken to conduct the actual transaction criteria audit only, and did not include selection of files, recording results, producing reports, providing feedback to the organisation, or any other time which is associated with the audit.

In 691 audits, the average compliance rate of the sample of case files was found to fall below the standard compliance for that franchise category.

Following the application of the statistical technique used during the transaction criteria audit, 70 audits were found to have a compliance range which the upper confidence interval fell below the standard compliance rate for that franchise category.