STAGE 4, CONCEPT 5 | Table of Contents

Building and Preserving Eviction RTC Capacity


Legal services providers

The pipeline problem

Exciting new resource! Check out New York Law School’s 2025 report, Building the Housing Justice Pipeline: Law Schools’ Role in the Right to Counsel Movement. It’s got survey data from laws schools in 16 of the 26 RTC jurisdictions about their clinics and approach to housing justice.

To implement eviction RTC, legal services providers will generally need to increase staff, not just line attorneys but also often supervisory staff. In a jurisdiction with a particularly limited eviction RTC such as Minnesota (only public housing tenants being evicted for an alleged breach of lease are covered), this might be less difficult. However, building up the capacity to provide full representation can be challenging, especially when:

  • Long-term or permanent funding is unstable, as providers can be reluctant to staff up without a guarantee that they can keep attorneys on staff past a certain time;

  • Staff need to work in rural areas; and

  • Staff fluent in the dominant language of the area are needed.

Another factor is that there is currently a nationwide shortage of attorneys applying for public interest jobs, not just to do eviction RTC but also family law, domestic violence, and criminal defense. This was caused in part by the pandemic causing many to reevaluate their work priorities, which led to many people in a variety of fields opting to quit or retire.  In some areas, especially rural areas, there are too few attorneys altogether, let alone ones willing to do legal services work. All of this is referred to as the “pipeline problem”.  The shortage of public interest lawyers has roots in systemic issues like rising student loan debt, low pay at legal services programs, a failure of law schools to champion housing law or housing justice, and a shortage of law school eviction defense clinics. And it has a race equity component, as tenants of color are disproportionately feeling the sting of the lack of attorneys.  

New York City’s struggles with building out its eviction RTC program are an indication of all of this, even though NYC advocates planned precisely for this issue by setting up a pipeline working group as part of the organizing around eviction RTC. Unfortunately, advocates could not expect how big the supply/demand issue would be (especially because the pandemic happened as the right was being implemented). 

Pipeline expansion ideas

TIPS AND RESOURCES

Reflection Activity

What are some of the issues your jurisdiction might face as it builds up provider capacity to provide full representation? What do stakeholders in your jurisdiction think about the pipeline problem? What is one way to collaborate with eviction RTC stakeholders to address the problem?

The high turnover problem

In addition to the pipeline problem, there is also the issue of attorney attrition. Eviction RTC attorneys work heavy, crisis-laden caseloads, and often for low pay, and this leads them to stay in these positions for shorter amounts of time. Moreover, word of attorneys being overloaded spreads, which then makes it harder to hire new attorneys. 

Like the pipeline problem, there is no easy solution for this issue. However, there are some ideas to help combat attorney attrition:

  • Reduce caseloads. Reasonable caseloads allow attorneys to invest more in the cases they take on and zealously represent the clients they have. This can lead to greater motivation in and connection to the cases, more attention to systemic issues and patterns, and better outcomes for clients. It is also a demonstration by the organization of commitment to quality representation. As described in Section 2.4, when the eviction RTC campaign launches, legal services providers will be asked to determine how much it will cost. In answering this question, providers can and should make their calculations based on lower caseloads, even if it means the RTC will be more expensive or less broad as a result. But if, after implementation, the caseloads still turn out to be too high, they must be reduced, either by hiring more attorneys or by considering whether the scope of the eviction RTC needs to be scaled back.

  • Ensure there is sufficient training: All eviction defense attorneys should be fully trained in landlord-tenant substantive and procedural law, as well as how to zealously represent clients experiencing significant crises by utilizing a trauma-informed lens. In Los Angeles, one statewide trainer was hired as a mentor for new housing attorneys and to help develop the curriculum for eviction RTC attorneys (in anticipation of passing eviction RTC).

  • Pull attorneys into the eviction RTC movement; inspire! Eviction RTC attorneys and managers must understand the significance of their work on eviction RTC and their connection to the larger movement. They should know about the broader civil right to counsel, housing justice, and tenant rights movements, and the work being done every day to gain more victories. This means that they should be regularly engaged in training on what a right to counsel means, the nature of the relationship between legal services attorneys and organizers, and the importance of addressing broader issues they identify across individual cases. One great idea is to have tenants and tenant organizers speak to the attorneys about the importance of eviction RTC and what it means to them

  • Improve pay. Advocates in civil legal aid have long called for governments to pay attorneys fairly for doing this critical housing justice and racial equity work. We’ve consistently heard that civil legal aid salaries are below those of government attorneys and sometimes even public defenders, meaning people in those positions are unlikely to want to become housing attorneys. Notably, the Legal Services Corporation doesn’t put a limit on what attorneys can be paid with its funding. But there may be issues for providers that seek to pay RTC attorneys more than non-RTC attorneys, particularly if the provider is unionized and there are obligations under a collective bargaining agreement. 

  • Improve benefits. Updating or expanding benefits can be a draw for attorneys. Legal services providers might consider special student loan repayment programs, increased paid time off, and improved health benefits.

The need for legal aid supervisors

Having enough well-trained supervisors is just as important as having well-trained line attorneys.  But finding attorneys with experience in eviction defense and experience supervising can be hard to find. Many programs will advance line attorneys to supervisory roles based on seniority, but in eviction RTC this advancement can occur too quickly where the number of new line attorneys increases quickly and puts pressure on the need for supervisors. 

Some tips on preparing to have effective supervision:

  • Have a plan for promoting attorneys to supervisors that is not too aggressive such that the supervisors are not ready to supervise. NYC has developed a Housing Justice Leadership Institute, which was created specifically to “help supervising attorneys lead, manage, and support delivery of the highest-quality legal assistance to tenants facing eviction.” Another program has used “junior supervisors” who only supervise 2-3 attorneys and carry a half caseload.

  • Recruit from other areas of law. Connecticut has proposed recruiting seasoned attorneys from other practice areas, such as retired public defenders. 

  • Provide supervisor-specific training. NYC has been a leader on this front with the Housing Justice Leadership Institute (run in partnership with New York Law School and the Shriver Center).  HJLI’s main goals are to teach hard skills to supervise well; to provide root training in eviction RTC and NYC community activism; to inform trainees with a set of values, including grounding the work in racial justice; and to create a supportive community among supervisors.  

The need for legal services support staff

Eviction RTC requires not only attorneys, but also social workers, paralegals, administrative staff, outreach workers, and intake support. Staffing these roles helps relieve pressure on the line attorneys. 

Social work staff, paralegal staff, and support staff can be critical to effective advocacy. One lawyer estimated that 40% of the work in an eviction case can wind up being social work.  In Philadelphia, the plan has been to hire attorney-paralegal teams. The paralegals are responsible for intake, case workup, and handling issues outside of court as well as administrative hearings, while attorneys primarily handle the in-court advocacy.  In addition to paralegals and social work staff, staff members also include peer tenant support leaders that help people navigate eviction court.

Tenant organizing groups

In addition to building legal services provider capacity, jurisdictions that enact eviction RTC need to commit funding for tenant organizing groups to:

  • assist with continued advocacy throughout implementation; 

  • engage in tenant education and outreach campaigns to raise awareness and increase tenant take-up of legal representation; and 

  • assist with thorough evaluations of the program to ensure it is reaching and helping tenants. 

LA County and NYC have funding in place for tenant organizing to support eviction RTC outreach and tenant rights education.

External Partners

In addition to building out capacity within the legal services providers and tenant organizing groups, there needs to be a plan to build out the eviction RTC’s external support network. This includes training on the nature of the eviction RTC program for:

  • Courts, including messaging that eviction defense attorneys deserve time to prepare just like landlords attorneys.

  • Other stakeholders that regularly come in contact with tenants. These stakeholders can include government agencies, local public housing authorities, medical providers, schools, shelters for unhoused people, local departments of social services, etc. These stakeholders can help educate tenants on their rights, relieving the pressure on legal services providers to conduct on-the-spot education / training on eviction RTC for tenants who come into contact with them.