This is a direct reproduction of the peer-review criteria published by the Legal Aid Agency, for use by members of the independent peer review panel. The parts relating solely to non-immigration categories of law have been left out. In the original, this forms an appendix to detailed guidance to reviewers. The non-sequential numbering in this document refers to sections of that guidance. This section contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

Peer-review criteria – civil files

• A. Communication with the Client:

• 1. How well does the adviser appear to have understood the client's problem?

• 2. How effective were the adviser's communication and clienthandling skills?

• 3. How effective were the adviser's fact-and informationgathering skills?

• 4. How effectively was the client informed of:

• a) The merits (or not) of the claim? And

• b) All developments?

• B. The Advice:

• 1. How legally correct was the advice given?

• 2. How appropriate was the advice to the client's instructions?

• 3. How comprehensive was the advice? (For Family, see over.)

• 4. Was the advice given in time/at the right time?

• C. The Work/Assistance:

• 1. If no other work was carried out, was this appropriate?

• 2. If any further fact-finding work was carried out:

• a) How appropriate? And

• b) How efficiently executed was the work?

• 3. If any other work was carried out:

• a) How appropriate was the work? And

• b) How efficiently executed was the work?

• 4. How effective in working towards what the client reasonably wanted/needed was any further work carried out?

• 5. If no disbursements were incurred was this appropriate?

• 6. How appropriate were any disbursements incurred?

• 7. Where this is necessary, did the adviser consider/advise on/act on an effective referral?

• 8. Throughout the file how effectively did the organisation use resources?

• 9. Did the adviser or their work in any way prejudice the client?

• If yes, provide details overleaf.

Immigration:

The following generic criteria should be amplified in immigration cases:

A3. Should include consideration of whether the adviser fully investigated the client's immigration history, status etc. In terms of section A generally, there should be evidence on file that the adviser has ascertained how the client and any dependants are being maintained and accommodated, and that the adviser has addressed, either by action or referral, any issues this raises.