What metrics are generally gathered and assessed in an evaluation?

When evaluating eviction RTC, you must be sure to include key data points. For example, if the tenant’s goal is not known, it is much harder to determine whether the outcome of a represented tenant’s eviction case is a just one.  As mentioned in Section 3.5, some eviction RTC laws spell out the metrics to be analyzed, while others leave that to the implementing entity.  Where they are mentioned, metrics often include:

• Number of cases filed; 

• Types of cases filed (i.e. non-payment, holdover petitions, etc);

• Estimated number of individuals who experienced a type of case covered by the RTC law;

• Takeup rate for RTC (i.e. how many tenants turned down representation after it was offered and, reason offered);

• Statistics on when tenants connected with the RTC program (prior to hearing, at hearing, etc.)

• Number of tenants that received legal representation;

• Number of eligible tenants seeking assistance that could not be served;

• Tenant demographics (example: Denver collected information about the income levels of tenants served and the number of tenants who were denied service due to income);

• Identifying areas with high eviction rates but low RTC utilization;

• Number of cases settled vs. going to trial;

• Outcomes of the proceedings immediately following legal services:

  • Number of tenants receiving rental assistance due to assistance from legal services;

  • Number of tenants who remained in unit;

  • Number of tenants granted extra time to move;

  • Number of tenants where rent arrears reduced, and by what amount;

  • Number of cases where tenant vacated by eviction kept off the tenant’s record;

  • Number of eviction judgments issued; 

  • Number of evictions executed and/or number of warrants of removal served.

• Attorney hours spent on providing legal representation;

• Program expenditures (description of legal representation performed and cost per case);

• Projected budget needs;

• Details on tenant engagement / education efforts.

The enacted eviction RTC matrix contains more information about the metrics required for each RTC jurisdiction and the data collected so far. NOTE: The laws in Minnesota, Seattle, and San Francisco do not require an annual report (though Seattle does require reporting to the lead agency). 

In addition to the traditional information collected about cases, it might be helpful to also collect information about:

• How clients learned of the program and their level of awareness about the program.

• Type of housing (private, subsidized, owner-occupied) involved in a covered proceeding;

• Property conditions;

• Client goals and client satisfaction with an outcome; 

• Long-term effects of representation (i.e. whether tenants who vacated found new housing or became homeless, whether tenants who stayed in home are still in home, etc.)

• Whether other eviction intervention services were utilized;

• The circumstances people are dealing with while facing eviction, including housing cost burden; 

• Reasons for non-payment; 

• Duration of cases including how many and how often cases are being closed; 

• Whether the tenant is aware of any followup proceedings, like debt collection proceedings; and

• Collaborative practices and systems among providers.

However, the need for information must always be balanced against the risk of overburdening the legal services program, which in turn can diminish the effectiveness of the legal services they provide to tenants (especially when they meet a tenant for the first time at the day of the hearing and have to rush to prepare).