Annex B. Illustrative Longer-Form Legal Needs Survey Questionnaire

This annex sets out an illustrative longer-form legal needs survey questionnaire. The questionnaire is not intended to be prescriptive or ideal for a particular implementation but rather provides an example of a legal needs survey questionnaire that addresses the topics set out in earlier sections.

The overall structure is of the broad type discussed in Chapter 2. The questionnaire builds upon the core questions set out in Table ‎3.3, adopting those questions as an initial core question loop for administration to a reasonable sample of identified problems. Follow-up and further questions are then asked concerning a (sub-) sample of problems included in the initial loop. The (maximum) number of problems to be asked about at the core and follow-up level is not specified. In practice, these numbers reflect the priorities of survey stakeholders. The follow-up questions also include further loops of questions concerning sources of help and processes. For the reason just stated, numbers are again not specified.

While primarily designed for CAPI based face-to-face administration scripts, routing has been minimised to facilitate conversion to pen and paper delivery if necessary. Nevertheless, the questionnaire does contain a significant amount of routing, and paper and pen delivery in its current form would be challenging. The questionnaire could also be easily modified for telephone and online delivery.

To simplify its presentation, not all coding options are included, notably “don’t know” and “refused” options.

The form of problem identification questions is not specified, but a longer questionnaire provides opportunity to pose questions covering a greater range of problems. Surveys such as the original Paths to Justice survey used show-cards to present respondents with the details of problem types. As noted above, just over half of past national legal needs surveys posed questions concerning 70 or more problem types. Asking about detailed problem types individually is also possible and the best option for telephone surveys. However, if this approach leaves insufficient time to address issues of central importance to survey stakeholders, then it may be necessary to take the expedited approach adopted by the two most recent New Zealand surveys and 2017 Sierra Leone survey.

Most of the questions concerning justiciable problems are drafted to be appropriate for concluded problems. Some questions are asked only of concluded problems, while others may need to be phrased differently for ongoing problems. Indications of alternate phrasing are included in the text. A small number of questions are asked only of ongoing problems.

The longer-form questionnaire draws upon a significant number of past surveys, particularly repeated and larger-scale surveys. In doing so it includes questions that provide an introduction into the broad range of topics covered. Surveys referenced in this guide can also be a source of reference for measurement planners.

In broad terms, the original Paths to Justice survey questionnaire is a source of detailed questions on technical aspects of support and formal process. However, the technical nature of its questions has been criticised. The 2012 Colombian survey also included a significant number of questions focused on formal process. The English and Welsh Civil and Social Justice Survey and the later English and Welsh Civil and Social Justice Panel Survey are a source of detailed questions on the nature, impact and cost of problems, the nature of advice obtained as part of problem resolution, awareness of law and legal services, and reasons for decisions. The 2015 English and Welsh survey (not an iteration of the English and Welsh Civil and Social Justice Survey) developed substantially upon the last of these in relation to the choice of advisor. The 2014 Canadian survey also included a substantial set of questions focused on the impact and cost of problems. HiiL’s Justice Needs and Satisfaction Survey includes an extensive set of questions focused on the cost and quality of process.

Table ‎B.1. Illustrative longer-form legal needs survey questionnaire
Content	Explanatory notes
Introduction
Good morning/afternoon/evening. My name is … and I am with … who have been commissioned by … to conduct a survey to find out how people deal with a range of issues people can face in everyday life, such as with housing, work, or within families, and the types of help that are needed and used to do this. Your [address/telephone number] has been randomly selected for inclusion in the survey, as one of an intended sample of x [addresses/ telephone numbers across the country], as it is important that we collect information about the experience of a representative group of people. The questions should take about … minutes, and to achieve a fully random sample I would like to ask them of the person at this address who will be the next to have a birthday and is currently y years old or above. Would that be you, and if not, could I speak to that person? [Repeat if necessary] Any answers you give are confidential, and participation in the survey is entirely voluntary. If you agree to participate, you may choose to skip a question or end the interview if you so wish. No information that identifies you will be shared or used in any report of the survey’s findings [Additional text to meet ethical requirements, as required] Do you agree to participate?	An introduction serves to frame a survey, and to ensure that the ethical requirements for personal interviews and collection of personal data are met. An introduction should also engage respondents, motivating them to complete a questionnaire. Thus, text should be added to explain the importance of the survey in a manner likely to resonate with potential respondents. As discussed in Chapter 2, reference to law and the use of technical language should be avoided in the introduction to a legal needs survey, and justiciable problems should be described in lay terms. If incentives are offered for participation in a survey, details should also be included in the introduction.
Initial demographics
[Basic demographics and demographics for routing]	For efficiency, some legal needs survey questions can be filtered by demographics. For example, if business related problems are asked about following Q3, then an initial demographic question could be used to identify who is to be asked.
Problem identification
1. I am going to read you a list of problems and disputes that people commonly experience in everyday life. In each case, can you tell me whether or not you have personally experienced any such problem in the past two years, by which I mean a problem that started since [REFERENCE DATE] or started before then, but continued afterwards? (Please only include problems that you have had yourself, in a private capacity, not problems experienced by a business you run, in the course of self-employment or by your employer, and not situations where you represented or helped somebody else with their problem. Please only mention problems once. Since [DATE] have you had any problems or disputes to do with … [Detailed problem types presented on show-cards or individually, grouped by Table ‎3.1 categories]	This is the most important question in the questionnaire. It determines the scope of the survey. If the question is poorly worded, then out-of-scope problems will be followed-up and/or in-scope problems will be missed. The greater and more accurate the detail of problem descriptions, the more effective the question will be. The question is the first asked, as all other questions rely upon data obtained from it. If respondents have experienced problems in a category, then Q2 and Q3 should be asked immediately, for efficiency purposes. If Q2 > 1, then Q3 should be looped for up to x number of problems.
2. [For each Q1 problem category reported, ASK IMMEDIATELY (i.e. do not wait until all Q1 categories have been asked about)] How many such problems have you experienced in the past two years? Please count problems of the same type, where the other party remains the same, as one problem.
3. [For each Q1 problem category reported, ASK IMMEDIATELY for all / up to x number of problems. If Q2 > 1 ask about problems in order of recency, starting with the most recent] Thinking about the problem as a whole, consider a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 represents the least serious type of problem you could face and 10 represents the most serious. To provide some examples, a score of 9 might be [ANCHOR 1] and a score of 2 might be [ANCHOR 2]. What number best represents the seriousness of your problem?	This question is asked at this early point in the questionnaire as the data it generates will be used to identify the pool of problems sufficiently serious for follow-up. Data generated by this question is also of broader interest. It can contribute to measuring unmet legal need using the framework set out in Figure ‎2.1, enable the relative seriousness of problems to be investigated, and explored as a predictor of strategy choices, etc.
Core question loop
[Randomly select y number of problems from the pool of identified problems with seriousness scores of 3 or more. For each selected problem, ask Q4 to Q23. If there are no such problems, go to Q81]	If there is interest in including business related problems, then one of the strategies outlined in Chapter 2 should be adopted. Either business problems can be asked about separately, following completion of initial problem identification, or the text excluding business problems can be removed (or modified, along the lines of the 2017-18 Nepalese survey, to include “problems experienced through a business that provides you with self-employment (but not an enterprise providing employment to others)”) and respondents asked whether problems were faced in a personal or business capacity during follow-up.
I am now going to ask you some questions about [PROBLEM 1, etc.] 4a. What was the problem about? [Code to detailed Table ‎2.1 categories] 4b. Did you share this particular problem with other people, neighbours, or other members of your community (as in the case of some problems concerning, for example, the environment or communal land)? 4c. [If 4(b) = Yes] Who did you share it with? a) Household member(s) b) Other friend(s) or family member(s) c) Work colleague(s) d) Neighbour(s) e) Community f) Other	Question 4(a), (b) and (c) check Q3 data, provide examples of problem detail for reporting, and further define the nature of the problems reported. Questions 4(b) and 4(c) identify whether problems are shared. They provide indication of the extent to which justiciable problems are experienced across populations.
5. Did you obtain any information from the Internet, an app, a video, printed material or the media to help you better understand or resolve the problem? a) A website or “app” b) A leaflet, book or self-help guide c) Newspapers or magazines d) Television, video or radio
6. (Apart from anything you have told me about already) Did you, or someone acting on your behalf, obtain information, advice or representation from any of the following people or organisations to help you better understand or resolve the problem? Please exclude any help provided by the other party. [ASK EACH SEPARATELY] a) Family, friends or acquaintances (excluding people whose job is to advise on problems such as these; please mention these people in their professional capacity) b) A lawyer, professional advisor, advice service or advice helpline, such as [examples] (SPECIFY) c) A court [or tribunal] or other dispute resolution organisation (such as [examples]) or the police (SPECIFY) d) A national, regional or municipal government department, agency, council or a politician (SPECIFY) e) Your employer, a trade union or professional association, or a trade association (such as [examples]) (SPECIFY) f) A health, welfare, financial services or other professional (SPECIFY) g) A community or religious leader or organisation, an [NGO/charity], or trusted person or organisation (SPECIFY) h) Any other person or organisation (SPECIFY)	Further specification is included in the question to enable coding to a detailed set of categories based on the Table ‎2.2 taxonomy. An open form of this question could also be used here: Apart from anything you have told me about already) did you or someone acting on your behalf obtain information, advice or representation from any person or organisation to help you better understand or resolve the problem? For example, from family or friends; a lawyer, professional advisor or advice service; a court, government body, or the police; a health or welfare professional; a trade union or employer; a religious or community leader or organisation; an [NGO/charity], a trusted person or organisation or anybody else? [PROBE] If Q6 (particularly in its open form) is asked ahead of Q5, there is a risk that information obtained via mass communication channels will be reported in Q6, preventing a clear distinction between this and help received personally.
7. (Apart from anything you have told me about already) Did any of the following things happen as part of [PROBLEM 1, etc.] or sorting it out? When I say “you” here, I mean you or somebody acting on your behalf. [ASK EACH SEPARATELY] a) You communicated with the other party b) You or the other party made a claim to, or made use of, a court (or tribunal) c) [If applicable] You or the other party made a claim to, or made use of, an [Indigenous/ customary] dispute resolution process (e.g. [examples]) d) [PROBLEM 1, etc.] was reported to the police (or other prosecution authority) e) You or the other party turned to, or action was taken by, a formal designated authority or agency, such as [examples, e.g. Ombudsman, regulator (e.g. [example]) or enforcement authority (e.g. consumer protection authority)] f) You or the other party turned to, or action was taken by, another state authority (e.g. [examples]) g) You or the other party turned to, or action was taken by, a religious authority h) You or the other party turned to, or action was taken by, a community leader or organisation (e.g. [example]) i) You participated in formal mediation, conciliation or arbitration (e.g. [examples]) j) You or the other party made use of a formal appeals process operated by the other party or independently k) You, the other party or somebody else turned to, or action was taken by, another third party for adjudication, mediation or intervention l) There was no negotiation or third party involvement	As with Q6, an open form of this question could also be used here: Did you, somebody acting on your behalf, the other party or anybody else, make a claim to a court (or tribunal), or turn to any other third-party individual or organisation such as [institutional examples] or to a community or religious leader [or respected family member] to adjudicate, mediate or intervene to help resolve [PROBLEM 1, etc.]? [PROBE] Process is asked about separately to help, as respondents will not necessarily choose, or even engage with, processes. Thus, it is distinct from help seeking and other problem-solving behaviours.
8. [For each positive Q7 response for a to k] Who initiated this action? [READ OUT ONLY IF NECESSARY] a) The respondent b) The other party c) The third party responsible for the process d) Another third party.	For efficiency, Q8 should be asked of each process type the moment it is reported. Likewise, Q9 should immediately follow all instances of Q8.
9. [If the respondent did not initiate processes b to h or j and k] Did you respond to this action?
10. Did you, or somebody acting on your behalf, do anything else to help you better understand or resolve the problem, such as communicate with the other party, obtain or organise evidence, or make an insurance claim? [OPEN] a) Communicated with the other party b) Obtained or organised evidence c) Made an insurance claim d) Other (SPECIFY)	Without this “catch-all” question, it is not possible to be certain whether respondents took no action to try to understand or resolve reported problems.
11. Is the problem ongoing or done with? By “done with” I mean that the problem is either resolved or that it persists, but you and everybody else have given up all efforts to resolve it further. [PROBE] a ) Ongoing b) Too early to say c) Done with - problem persists, but all have given up trying to resolve it further d) Done with - problem resolved	This is an essential question for enabling coherent data analysis. Problems that are ongoing and problems that are concluded are not equivalent. For example, unmet needs within ongoing problems may go on to be met. The wording used here is careful to suggest finality.
12. [If Q11 = c OR d, otherwise go to Q17] Which of the following statements best reflects how the problem outcome was ultimately brought about? The problem outcome was ultimately brought about by … [ASK EACH SEPARATELY] a) a court (or tribunal) judgment b) a decision or intervention by another formal authority c) mediation, conciliation or arbitration d) action by another third party e) agreement between you and the other party f) the other party independently doing what you wanted g) you independently doing what the other party wanted h) the problem sorting itself out i) your moving away from the problem (e.g. moving home, changing job) j) [Only if Q10 = c] … you and/or all other parties giving up trying to resolve the problem	It is important not to conflate process (as asked about in previous questions) with the manner in which problems conclude. They are linked, but distinct.
13. Do you feel the outcome of this problem was basically fair to everybody concerned? a) Fair to everybody concerned b) Not fair to everybody concerned	Q13 and Q14 concern quality of process and outcome. Q14 can also contribute to measurement of unmet legal need using the framework set out Figure ‎2.1
14. Regardless of the outcome of this problem, do you feel the process through which the outcome was reached was basically fair or unfair to everybody concerned? a) Fair to everybody concerned b) Not fair to everybody concerned
15. Excluding indirect payments – such as insurance premiums or membership subscriptions – but including payments made by family members and friends, [did you/have you], personally [have/had] to pay for any of the following in order to resolve the problem: [ASK EACH SEPARATELY] a) Lawyer and other advisor fees b) Court, mediation or other administrative fees c) Telephone calls and correspondence d) Collecting information or obtaining evidence (incl. reimbursement of witnesses’ costs) e) Travel (e.g. bus fares or petrol to visit an advisor) f) Lost business or salary, from taking time off work (e.g. to obtain advice) g) Bribes / kick-backs (Remember, your answer is confidential) h) Incidental domestic costs (e.g. childcare)	If interest is limited to legal service costs and process fees, then a shorter Q15 is appropriate, although it will not provide the same insight in benefit-cost analysis: “Excluding indirect payments – such as insurance premiums or membership subscriptions – but including payments made by family members and friends, [did you/have you], personally [have/had] to pay for [the help you received from [advisor]/[process] fees]?” If respondents report costs for a category, then Q16 should be asked immediately, for efficiency purposes. Q15 can be shortened by not asking about each cost item separately, but with fewer items the data will be ambiguous.
16. “Approximately how much [did you have/have you had] to pay for [cost item]?”	If a shorter version of Q15 is used, then Q16 should be phrased as follows: “Approximately how much in total did it cost you to deal with this problem?” This phrasing is inappropriate if individual cost items have been identified, as respondents will in any event need to add the cost of the items. Another approach is to ask the following: “How difficult was it to find the money to pay for this/these things?”
17. Which of the following describe the problem? You can choose more than one option, or none. [ASK EACH SEPARATELY] a) Bad luck / part of life b) Bureaucratic c) A family or private matter d) Legal e) Political f) A social or community matter g) Economic h) None of these	Q17 and Q18 together address the four broad aspects of legal capability discussed in Chapter 2. The two questions also provide data that can be used as part of the process of measuring unmet legal need using the framework set out in Figure ‎2.1.
18. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about the problem? [strongly agree, mainly agree, mainly disagree, strongly disagree] a) I understood or [came/have come] to understand my legal rights and responsibilities b) I [knew/know] where to get good information and advice about resolving the problem c) I [was able/have been able] to get all the expert help I needed d) I [was/am] confident I [could/can] achieve a fair outcome
19. Did you experience any of the following as part of or as a result of this problem? [ASK EACH SEPARATELY] a) ill-health or injury b) stress c) damage to a family relationship d) being harassed, threatened or assaulted e) damage to your property f) loss of employment g) having to move home h) financial loss i) loss of confidence or fear j) problems to do with your education k) problems with alcohol or drugs
20. [If 6 = NO to all items] Why didn’t you obtain independent advice to help resolve [PROBLEM 1, etc.]? [PROBE] [DO NOT READ] [CODE ALL THAT APPLY] a) No dispute with anybody/thought other party was right b) Problem resolved without need to get advice c) Did not think needed advice d) Did not think problem important enough e) Concerned about the time it would take f) Concerned about the financial cost g) Advisers were too far away h) Thought it would be too stressful i) Thought it would damage relationship with other party j) Was scared to take action/get advice k) Didn’t know where/how to get advice l) Didn’t think it would make any difference to the outcome m) Had tried seeking advice before and not found it useful n) Other (SPECIFY)	As well as providing valuable strategic information concerning obstacles to advice, this question also provides data that can be used as part of the process of measuring unmet legal need using the framework set out at in Table ‎2.1. If interest is primarily in legal advice, then the routing for this question can be amended to ask about only this.
21. Finally, can you tell me roughly what month and year the problem started?	Establishing problem start and end dates provides greater flexibility in using ongoing problems within analyses.
22. [If Q11=c] And when did you and everybody else give up all actions to resolve the problem?
23. [If Q11=d] And when did it conclude?
[End of core question loop]
Detailed problem loop: Nature
[Randomly select z number of problems from those asked about in the core question loop. For each selected problem, ask Q24 to Q80. If there are no such problems, go to Q81]	The number of problems asked about in the core question loop and in this detailed problem loop will often be the same. However, the cap in number may vary between the sections to reflect different stakeholder priorities. If the cap is the same, then the questionnaire could be restructured to include one, rather than two, main loops.
I am now going to ask you some more detailed questions about different aspects of [PROBLEM 1, PROBLEM 2, etc.]. First some questions about the nature of [PROBLEM 1, etc.].
Detailed problem loop: Nature
24. Which of the following [was/is] being sought? [READ OUT] [CODE ALL THAT APPLY] a) Money or property b) Something being restored to how it was c) Somebody recognising rights or meeting responsibilities d) Change to the nature of a relationship d) Change to a decision f) An apology g) Something else (Other)	To simplify routing, this question follows the approach of the Justice Needs and Satisfaction Survey and asks about the subject matter of the problem rather than ask about objectives.
25. Who was the problem with? [DO NOT READ] [CODE ONE ONLY (most relevant to problem)] a) Family member b) Friend c) Colleague d) Employer e) Neighbour f) Other individual g) Community organisation h) Commercial organisation i) Police j) Other public servant or authority k) Other (SPECIFY)	The codes set out are broadly framed and suitable for use across problem categories. Some surveys have adopted different codes for different problem categories to reflect the nature of the categories and in the interest in greater distinction.
26. Thinking about the time the problem first started, would you say … [READ OUT] [CODE ONE ONLY] a) You thought the other party had done something wrong or were at fault b) The other party thought you had done something wrong c) Or were at fault d) Both thought the other had done something wrong or were at fault e) Or neither thought the other had done anything wrong or were at fault	This question aims to ascertain, in lay language, whether survey respondents were claimants or defendants. The question has been used extensively. It originated in the English and Welsh Civil and Social Justice Survey.
27. Was there ever any disagreement between you and the other side about what you or they should do in response to the problem?	Disagreement is relevant when choosing a problem resolving strategy. It has been asked about in a number of surveys. It is also possible to ask about the level of disagreement.
28. Did any party resort to physical violence or threats of violence during the disagreement or in the process of settling the disagreement?	This question is adapted from one in the World Justice Project’s General Population Poll.
29. Thinking about [PROBLEM 1, etc.] as a whole, which of you or the other side would you say had more resources to address the problem? By resources I mean money, access to specialist help, etc. a) The other party had more resources b) The survey respondent had more resources c) The parties had equal resources d) Don’t know	Resource imbalance is theorised to affect both resolution strategy and outcomes.
30. Excluding the other party, was the problem shared with other people, such as members of your family, friends, colleagues, neighbours or other members of your community? [CODE ONE ONLY] a) No, only me b) Family or friends c) Colleagues d) Neighbours or community	This question is adapted from the Argentina survey and World Justice Project’s General Population Poll (GPP). The GPP also included a follow-up, asking whether, “to achieve a solution, did you require that these people agree with your position or that they took collective action?” Surveys in which members of households are interviewed separately have also asked about problem sharing, to ascertain if problems are reported on multiple occasions.
31. Do you think [PROBLEM 1, etc.] was due to you being discriminated against on the basis of any of the following? [READ OUT] [CODE ALL THAT APPLY] a) Age b) Gender c) Disability/ill-health d) Ethnicity e) Caste/economic class f) Religion g) Political affiliation h) Sexual orientation	In some surveys, discrimination has been asked about as a discrete problem category. However, here the approach of the English and Welsh Civil and Social Justice Survey has been adopted, with discrimination asked about as an attribute of problems of any category. The forms of discrimination asked about should be appropriate for the jurisdiction concerned.
32. [If Q19a=Yes] You said earlier that the problem resulted in ill-health or injury. Did this cause you to visit a health professional or spend time in hospital? a) No b) Visited health professional c) Spent time in hospital	This and the following questions can be used to build up a picture of the overall cost of justiciable problems. Surveys including detailed questions on problem impact include the 2004 English and Welsh Civil and Social Justice Survey and the 2014 Canadian survey. Potentially, all types of impact asked about in Q19 could be followed-up.
33. [If Q32b=Yes] How many visits did you make?	Additional questions on health impact could, for example, the cost of medication, etc.
34. [If Q32c=Yes] How long did you stay in hospital?
35. [If Q19b=Yes] You said earlier that the problem resulted in your suffering from stress. Did this cause you to visit a health professional?
36. [If Q35=Yes] How many visits did you make?
37. [If Q19a=Yes OR Q19b=Yes] How much did you personally have to pay for medical treatment?
38. [If Q19e=Yes] You said earlier that the problem resulted in your property being damaged. How much did it cost to repair or replace the property (or how much would repair cost)?
39. [If Q19f=Yes] You said earlier that the problem resulted in you losing your job. How long were you without a job? Months/Weeks/Days
40.[If Q19f=Yes] How much, if any, income did you lose as a result of losing your job?
41. [If Q19f=Yes] Did you receive [welfare payments] as a result of losing your job?
42. [If Q41=Yes] How long did you receive [welfare payments] for?
43. [If Q41=Yes] How much did you receive in [welfare payments] per month?
44. [If Q19g=Yes] You said earlier that the problem resulted in you having to move home. How long were you without a permanent home? Months/Weeks/Days
45. [If Q44>0] a) Relatives or friends b) Emergency housing paid for by government or another organisation c) Emergency housing that you had to pay for yourself d) Other (SPECIFY)
46. [If Q19h=Yes] You said earlier that the problem resulted in you suffering financial loss. How much money did you lose?
Detailed problem loop: Information and advice
[If Q5a=Yes OR any advisor identified at Q6] Now, some questions about support you obtained.
47. [If Q5a=Yes] You mentioned earlier that you obtained information from the Internet or “app” to help better understand or resolve the problem. Which of the following did you obtain? [ASK EACH SEPARATELY] a) Information about your rights and/or the law b) Information about ways to resolve the problem c) Forms or other documents d) The identity of an online dispute resolution process e) The identity of an offline source of help, dispute resolution process or relevant authority f) Contact details for an offline source of help, dispute resolution process or relevant authority g) Something else (SPECIFY)	Relatively few surveys have asked follow-up questions about digital information seeking, although the practice has been common in recent surveys in England and Wales. As with the nature of help obtained from advisors (Q49 et seq., below), establishing the nature of digital information obtained gives insight into levels of support. This and later advisor focused questions can also be used to generate an overall picture of digital service use, along with its social and other stratification. Other information sources could also be followed-up in similar fashion.
48. [If Q5a=Yes] How useful did you find the Internet in trying to resolve the problem? a) Very useful b) Somewhat useful c) Not very useful d) Not useful at all	This question contributes to assessments of digital service delivery and the relative value of different forms of support. If the former is of particular interest, then examples of additional questions include: “How much of what you were looking for did you find?” “Excluding search engines (such as Google), what was the most useful website that you visited, or app that you used to obtain information from the Internet?”
Information and advice sub-loop
[If advisors identified in Q6, go to Q49. Otherwise go to Q65] [[If advisors identified in Q6, questions Q49 to Q64 should be asked in a loop until no further advisors are detailed at Q50c or a maximum number of y advisors has been asked about, with y being determined with reference to interview length and the results of piloting]	Many respondents will obtain help from only one advisor. However, help can be – and often is – obtained from multiple advisors. Following-up only a single advisor in this case can be problematic. First, advice is relatively uncommon across typical samples, which may result in unviable advisor sample sizes (especially in relation to particular advisor types). Also, there can be a difference in what is sought from first, lest, etc., advisors. This means selection of advisors for follow-up must be carefully considered. Following-up all advisors can also be problematic, yielding lengthy “outlier” interviews. A sensible compromise, adopted in the 2017-2018 Nepal survey, is to follow-up three or four advisors, so only rarely excluding advisors from follow-up. Many of the questions in this section can be easily adapted to be asked of advisors as a whole.
49. [If exactly one advisor type identified at Q6] You (also) mentioned that you, or someone acting on your behalf, obtained help from [Q6 ADVISOR] to better understand or resolve the problem. Can I just check, [did you obtain/have you obtained] help from more than one [Q6 ADVISOR]? [If Q49=No, go to Q51]	The term “help” can be used here, as the distinction between information/advice/ representation and process has already been established.
50a. [If Q49 = Yes] From whom did you first obtain help? [Record non-identifying description to distinguish advisors within this section] [Go to Q51]	This simple approach to ordering advisors, used previously in (for example) the 2014 Canadian survey, avoids the need to identify the number of advisors of each type at Q6.
50b. [If more than one advisor type identified at Q6] You (also) mentioned that you, or someone acting on your behalf, obtained help from [LIST OF ADVISOR TYPES IDENTIFIED AT Q6] to better understand or resolve the problem. From whom did you first obtain help? Do not give their name, just indicate the type of person or organisation. [Go to Q51]
50c. [If 50a or 50b asked previously] [OPEN: Use for inserts] [Simultaneously code to Q6 codes] After [ADVISOR 1, etc.], who did you obtain help from next? Do not give their name, just indicate the type of person or organisation. [Go to Q52 if If ADVISOR 2 (etc.) if Q6 category (a), otherwise go to Q53, or, if 50c=Nobody else, go to Q65]
51. [ADVISOR 1 ONLY] What was the trigger for you getting help from [ADVISOR 1]?
52. [If ADVISOR 1, etc. is Q6 category (a)] Can I just check, does [ADVISOR 1, etc.] have professional experience of helping people with problems of the type you faced?	This question confirms coding at Q6 and ensures that a distinction can be drawn between friends, etc., who are advisors and friends who are not. It is relevant in relation to whether legal need is met or unmet.
53. [If ADVISOR 1, etc. is NOT Q6 category (a)] How did you find out about [ADVISOR 1, etc.]? [PROBE] [DO NOT READ] [CODE ALL THAT APPLY] a) Previous use b) Referral from another advisor c) Friend, family or colleague d) Online e) Yellow pages, or similar offline directory f) Newspaper/magazine/radio g) Other (SPECIFY)	This question relates to advice seeking decision making. It can be included if there is interest in understanding more about how advisors are identified and chosen. This was a particular focus of the 2015 English and Welsh survey.
54. In which of the following ways did [or do] you communicate with [ADVISOR 1, etc.]? [ASK EACH SEPARATELY] a) Saw the advisor in person b) By telephone c) By email d) Through a website or app e) By post f) Some other way (specify)	This and the following questions provide information concerning, for example, how support is accessed, the use of digital services and the reach of different service channels. Previous surveys have indicated that channels vary because of distances to advisors and demography.
55. And what was [or is] the most common way you communicated with [ADVISOR 1, etc.]? [ASK EACH SEPARATELY] a) Saw the advisor in person b) By telephone c) By email d) Through a website or app e) By post f) Some other way (specify)
56. [If Q55=a] When you met [or meet] [ADVISOR 1, etc.] in person, how did [or do] you usually get there? a) By car/van/motorcycle b) By public transport c) Walked/cycled
57. Approximately how long did [or does] it take you to reach [ADVISOR 1, etc.]? Days/Hours/Minutes	Some surveys – such as those in Nepal, Poland and the Justice Needs and Satisfaction Survey – have focused on time, while others – such as the 2010 Ukraine survey and the English and Welsh Civil and Social Justice Survey – have focused on distance. Here, time is used, acknowledging that the impact of distance may vary considerably across jurisdictions. If there is interest in calculating the total time respondents spent travelling to advisors (e.g. in relation to cost-benefit analyses), a further follow-on question can ask, “…and how many times did you travel to see the advisor?” This question was asked in the Polish survey. The cost of travel is separately captured in Q15. The most comprehensive treatment of mode of contact, duration, distance, etc., was in the 2006-2009 English and Welsh Civil and Social Justice Survey.
58. Which of the following did [or has] [ADVISOR 1, etc.] [do/done] to help you? [ASK EACH SEPARATELY] a) Provided pre-packaged information, such as a leaflet b) Provided information about your rights and/or the law c) Provided information about ways to resolve the problem d) Provided information about types of financial support available to help you resolve the problem e) Recommended what you should do f) Helped with paperwork g) Communicated with the other party on your behalf h) Communicated with relevant authorities i) Managed the problem resolution process on your behalf j) [IF Q7=b-k] Represented you in [PROCESSES] k) Suggested where to go for further information, advice or representation l) Something else (specify)	This question gives insight into levels of support and the types of support provided by different advisors. To provide a more detailed picture of the success of help-seeking, the English and Welsh Civil and Social Justice Panel Survey also asked what types of help were sought from advisers, as well as further questions concerning the nature of the help obtained. The question could be asked as an open question, although this could impact on coding consistency.
59. [If Q58=k] Did you go on to get further help from the source suggested by [ADVISER 1, etc.]?
60. Would you describe the help that [ADVISOR 1, etc.] provided as mostly legal in nature?	Past surveys indicate that people facing justiciable problems seek help from a broad array of sources, many of which provide help that is not legal in nature. The type of help obtained can be relevant in determining whether legal need is met or unmet.
61. [If Q6b=Yes] Did you receive funding (for example, through legal aid), or have insurance, to help to pay for the assistance you received from [ADVISOR 1, etc.]? a) No b) Yes, legal aid c) Yes, insurance d) Yes, other funding (SPECIFY)	If the cost of help from specific advisors is of interest, then it should be asked about ahead of Q61.
62. How useful was [ADVISER 1, etc.] in resolving the problem? a) Very useful b) Somewhat useful c) Not very useful d) Not useful at all	This question corresponds with Q48.
63. Would you recommend other people in your situation to consult [ADVISOR 1, etc.]?	While similar to the previous question, this question combines satisfaction and utility. It also provides a broader base for Q64.
64. [If Q63 = No] Why is that? [DO NOT READ] [CODE ALL THAT APPLY] a) Made no difference or made problem worse b) Inadequate, poor or badly explained advice c) Not the kind or level of support sought d) Too far away or hard to get to e) Inconvenient opening hours f) Too expensive g) Language barrier h) Other (SPECIFY) [If Q49=No, go to Q65, otherwise go to Q50c]
[End of information and advice sub-loop]
65. [If any advisors identified at Q6: “In addition to the sources of help you have told me about”] Did you try unsuccessfully to obtain information, advice or representation from anywhere [else]?	Unsuccessful attempts to obtain help indicate structural obstacles to access.
66. [If QX=Yes] Where did you try unsuccessfully to obtain information, advice or representation from? [CODE TO Q6 CODES]	This question corresponds to Q6, although is closed in form. A form more similar to Q6 could be used if there are concerns about recall accuracy.
67. [If Q65=Yes OR Any advisor identified at Q6 (excluding category (a)] [If Q65=Yes AND Any advisor identified at Q6: “Including sources you did get help from”] Did you experience any of the following difficulties when trying to get help from the sources you have mentioned? [ASK EACH SEPARATELY] a) Too far away or hard to get to b) Inconvenient opening hours c) Difficulty getting through on the phone d) Difficulty getting an appointment e) Too long to get a response f) Too expensive g) Language barrier h) Poor adaptation for disabilities i) Inadequate, poor or badly explained advice j) Source not able or willing to help k) Any other difficulty (SPECIFY)	This question could be linked exclusively to the previous question but can also – as here and in Mongolia and Nepal, for example – provide a more general indication of obstacles faced. Though an open form could also be used, this question adopts the approach of surveys in, for example, Argentina, Mongolia and Nepal, to stimulate recollection in relation to convenience, access and quality.
68. [If Q15a=Yes] You mentioned earlier that you had to pay for lawyer or other advisor fees. How difficult was it to find the money to meet these costs?
69. [If Q11=a] Do you intend to get advice about the problem in the future?	This question is asked about ongoing problems to give a fuller picture of problem resolution strategy.
Detailed problem loop: Process and outcome
Now, some questions about the problem resolution process and outcome.
[If processes identified in Q6 (excluding a and d), go to Q70. Otherwise go to Q73] [For all respondents who answer QX, questions QX to QZ should be asked in a loop until no further advisors are detailed at QX or a maximum number of y advisors has been asked about, with y being determined with reference to interview length and the results of piloting]	No questions concerning the details of Q6 processes are included, as processes tend to be rare and understanding of technical aspects of process limited. If there is interest in such questions, the original Paths to Justice survey contained a significant number of detailed questions.
70. Thinking about [PROCESS 1, etc.], why did you choose this way of trying to resolve the problem? [PROBE] [DO NOT READ] [CODE ALL THAT APPLY] a) Appropriate authority/process b) Advisor chose or recommended c) Previous use d) Cost e) Convenience I didn’t choose	This question is adapted from the Colombia 2012 survey.
71. Thinking about [PROCESS 1, etc.], to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements. For each statement, please tell me whether you strongly agree, mainly agree, mainly disagree or strongly disagree. a) The process was fair and I had opportunity to explain my position b) I was treated with respect c) The process and decisions were clearly explained d) The outcome of the process was much the same as for other people in similar situations The process concluded in a timely matter	This question includes single items for each of procedural, interpersonal and informational justice and outcome transparency (discussed in Chapter 2). There is also an item concerning timeliness. If there is interest in additional questions, the Justice Needs and Satisfaction Survey includes many further examples, based on the extensive Measuring Access to Justice in a Globalising World project.
72. Was any part of [PROCESS 1, etc.] conducted online, incorporate online submission of forms or evidence?
[End of process sub-loop]
73. Thinking about the problem resolution process as a whole, how stressful did you find it? Very stressful, fairly stressful or not very stressful?	While the problem resolution process may bring about benefits, it also involves economic and other costs.
74. Again, thinking about the problem resolution process as a whole, [were you/have you been] asked to (or did you need to) pay a bribe or incentive as a part of the process of resolving a problem?
75. And do you feel that at any point in the problem resolution process you [were/have been] discriminated against, in how the problem [was/has been] dealt with, on the basis of any of the following? [READ OUT] [CODE ALL THAT APPLY] a) Age b) Gender c) Disability/ill-health d) Ethnicity e) Caste/economic class f) Religion g) Political affiliation h) Sexual orientation	Questions concerning discrimination have generally related to the nature of problems. However, the Mongolia survey also asked about discrimination in the context of the problem resolution process.
76. [If Q11=c OR d] Thinking about the problem outcome, to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements. For each statement, please tell me whether you strongly agree, mainly agree, mainly disagree or strongly disagree. a) The outcome involved a fair distribution of benefits and burdens b) Any loss or harm arising from the problem (e.g. financial or concerning relationships) has been made good c) [ONLY IF Q11=d] The problem was solved in a timely manner and is unlikely to reoccur [ONLY IF Q12=a to e] The [decision of the [Q12 process]/agreement] was fulfilled]	This question includes single items for each of distributive and restorative justice and outcome functionality (discussed in Chapter 2). If there is interest in additional questions, the Justice Needs and Satisfaction Survey includes many further examples, based on the extensive Measuring Access to Justice in a Globalising World project.
77. Was the outcome better or worse than you had hoped for?
78. [If Q13=Yes] Did resolving the problem fairly lead to improvements in any of the following? [INCLUDE PREVIOUSLY REPORTED Q13 ITEMS] a) Your health b) Levels of stress c) Family relationships d) Levels of harassment or violence e) Your employment situation f) Your housing situation g) Your finances h) Your confidence i) Your education situation j) Your alcohol or drug problems	This question could also be routed from Q76 or a combination of Q13 and Q67. Or Q11=c OR d
79. Is there anything that you wish you had done differently to try to sort out the problem? [PROBE] [DO NOT READ] [CODE ALL THAT APPLY] a) Got (more) information or advice b) Got information or advice sooner c) Acted sooner d) Been more resolved e) Not get advice f) Taken no action g) Avoided the problem h) Other (SPECIFY)
80. And, looking back on this problem and [how things turned out/how it is progressing], do you feel the situation might [have worked out better/be progressing better] if you had obtained [more] information, advice or other support? a) Yes, definitely b) Yes, probably c) Not sure d) No, probably not e) No, definitely not
[End of detailed problem loop]
Legal capability
General legal capability questions can be placed either following initial demographics questions (at the start of the questionnaire) or ahead of the additional demographics section (at the end of the questionnaire). If capability questions are placed at the start they must be formulated to avoid drawing attention to the ‘legal’ focus of the questionnaire. A benefit of including general legal capability questions at the start is that they can help to engage respondents; particularly those who go on to report no justiciable problems. Placing questions at the start also means that respondents will not have been exposed to questions providing names of sources of help, processes, etc. However, if access to justice related attitude questions are included in a questionnaire, they should appear here; as they will then benefit from respondents’ reflections on their own experience of justiciable issues.
Finally, some questions about your confidence in being able to resolve problems such as those I have been asking you about, and your perceptions of the justice system in [JURISDICTION]	Questions concerning legal capability have generally been drafted on an ad hoc basis, with measures developed without use of modern psychometric methods. If survey stakeholders have particular interest in, say, perceptions of a specific aspect of the justice system, appropriately developed questions may not be available. If this is the case, there may be little scope for appropriate development. The following questions incorporate three sets of questions that can be used as scales found to have acceptable psychometric properties (see Chapter 2 above), along with further theoretically grounded questions in a commonly used form. Particularly in this section, questions are illustrative, and a very different approach may sometimes be necessary in practice. However, if untested questions are used, their limitations should be acknowledged.
81. Thinking about significant legal problems – such as being unreasonably sacked by your employer, injured as a result of someone else’s negligence, involved in a dispute over money as part of a divorce, or facing eviction from your home. To what extent do the following statements describe you? For each statement say whether it is not at all true, hardly true, moderately true or exactly true. a) I can always manage to solve difficult problems if I try hard enough. b) If someone opposes me, I can find the means and ways to get what I want. c) It is easy for me to stick to my aims and accomplish my goals. d) I can remain calm when facing difficulties because I can rely on my coping abilities. e) When I am confronted with a problem, I can usually find several solutions. f) I am good at finding information to help resolve problems. g) I am afraid to speak to people directly to press my rights h) Worry that I don’t express myself clearly can stop me from acting. i) I avoid pressing my rights because I am not confident that I will be successful. j) I do not always get the best outcome for myself because I try to avoid conflict.	This first question, incorporating ten items, includes both the Legal Self-Efficacy Scale (LEF) and the Legal Anxiety Scale (discussed in Chapter 2). Both scales were developed using modern psychometric methods and have acceptable psychometric properties. Scoring guidance is available. The example problems that are included are those detailed in the user guidance. However, it may occasionally be necessary to adapt these to be jurisdictionally appropriate. Placement of the scales towards the end of the questionnaire allows reference to the range of justiciable problems already discussed. This will strengthen contextual understanding.
82. If you had a dispute with an official authority regarding, for example, an application to get vital registration, how confident are you that you could achieve a fair outcome, one you would be happy with? Very confident, quite confident, not very confident or not confident at all? [Prompt if necessary: “This outcome might be achieved by you individually, or through use of an outside person, organisation, or formal dispute resolution process.”]	This question is adapted from the “subjective legal empowerment” questions discussed in Chapter 2, and draws on implementations in the Justice Needs and Satisfaction Survey, Nepal and England and Wales. As in the 2011 Moldova survey, two additional similar questions are included, rather than (the more traditional) five, as recent testing suggests they do not readily combine as a scale. Problems can be adapted to reference local interests.
83. And if you were unable to resolve such a dispute on your own, where might you get expert help to assist you in resolving the problem? [OPEN]	Appropriate coding will vary substantially between jurisdictions and geographical regions.
84. If you had a dispute with an employer over, for example, your dismissal, how confident are you that you could achieve fair outcome, one you would be happy with? Very confident, quite confident, not very confident or not confident at all? [Prompt if necessary: “This outcome might be achieved by you individually, or through use of an outside person, organisation, or formal dispute resolution process.”]
85. And if you were unable to resolve such a dispute on your own, where might you get expert help to assist you in resolving the problem? [OPEN]
86. If you became a victim of domestic violence, and were physically assaulted by a family member, how confident are you that you could achieve fair outcome, one you would be happy with? Very confident, quite confident, not very confident or not confident at all? [Prompt if necessary: “This outcome might be achieved by you individually, or through use of an outside person, organisation, or formal dispute resolution process.”]
87. And if you were unable to resolve such a dispute on your own, where might you get expert help to assist you in resolving the problem? [OPEN]
88. Do you know any places where you can get free legal advice, if you need it? [OPEN]	A simple question asking about awareness of free legal advice services, or legal aid, can be effective in ascertaining the visibility of public legal assistance services. This question is adapted from the Argentina survey.
Now some questions about your perceptions of the justice system. [Individual attitude questions]	Previous legal need surveys have included a very broad range of attitude questions, varying in focus (e.g. police, legal system, lawyers, courts, etc.), themes/domains (e.g. fairness, bribery, cost, speed, utility, inequality, access, corruption, etc.), coherence and number.
89. Finally, some questions about your general impression and experience of the justice system. We are not concerned with the “criminal” justice system. We are concerned with the justice system that deals with the sort of issues we have been talking about, such as being unreasonably sacked by your employer, injured as a result of someone else’s negligence, involved in a dispute over money as part of a divorce, or facing eviction from your home. Thinking about issues like this, to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements: (For each statement, please tell me whether you strongly agree, mainly agree, mainly disagree or strongly disagree.) a) Issues like these are usually resolved promptly and efficiently b) People with less money generally get a worse outcome c) For issues like these, law is like a game in which the skillful and resourceful are more likely to get what they want d) It is easy to take issues like these to court if needed e) For issues like these, lawyers are too expensive for most people to use f) The justice system provides good value for money g) For issues like these, people like me can afford help from a lawyer h) Rich people’s lawyers are no better than poor people’s lawyers i) Taking a case to court is generally more trouble than it is worth	Finally, this section includes a third standardised scale, this time of perceived accessibility of justice (the Inaccessibility of Justice (IoJ) scale discussed in Chapter 2). Again, it has acceptable psychometric properties. Scoring guidance is available.
Additional demographics
[Sensitive and additional demographics]	e.g. health status, poverty proxies, etc.
Concluding remarks
[If there is interest in recontacting respondents, consent should be obtained at this point.]

End of the section – Back to iLibrary publication page