Video Conferencing

Video Conferencing for Access to Justice: An Evaluation of the Montana Experiment (Final Report, June 2007)

Submitted by eva on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 5:44pm.

Since 2001, Montana Legal Services Association has been experimenting with using video conferencing to improve delivery of services.


DimDim -- A Bright Idea!

Submitted by mmonahan on Thu, 02/07/2008 - 1:11pm.

Our brilliant and resourceful IT folks at Georgia Legal Services Program have just loaded Dimdim onto a Linux server.


Video Conferencing: An Article by Honorable Judge Day

Submitted by gabrielle on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 5:12pm.
Video Conferencing and Advocacy: the New Wave
(May, 2004)

by: Hon. Gary L. Day (District Judge, Sixteenth Judicial District, Montana)


Community Collaborations: A Stunning View of the Effect of Video Conferencing

Submitted by gabrielle on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 2:39pm.

by Gabrielle Hammond and Emily Tennant (NTAP)

“Collaboration often (nearly always) bears fruit in ways never anticipated at the outset.”

 

Unlike other technologies employed in legal services where individual programs pay for and benefit from new tools, video conferencing technologies catalyze partnerships uniquely. By offering the opportunity for increased delivery of client services to a wide variety of social services organizations that face similar problems caused by sparsely scattered constituencies, partnerships can be instrumental in managing the sustained costs of any video conferencing network. Both Pine Tree Legal Assistance in Maine (http://www.ptla.org) and Montana Legal Services Association (http://www.mtlsa.org) are currently working to build a base of partners who will contribute monthly to the recurring costs in order to share usage of the system.

In this article, we have gathered information about the partnerships and collaborative projects related to the video conferencing systems utilized by legal aid programs in Maine, Montana, and Hawaii. You will find both highlights of the video conferencing project in each state and links to descriptions of the specific partnerships.


Video Conferencing in Action: Uses in Legal Aid Programs

Submitted by gabrielle on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 2:37pm.

By Hugh Calkins, Alison Paul, Bill Yarian

 

Improving Internal Management
The single benefit of video conferencing most-cited by programs using it is the improvement of internal management within their program. This advantage has resulted in large cost savings and dramatically heightened communication among staff and attorneys across offices. However, the benefits will be felt most strongly in areas where a number of talented staff members are dispersed over a geographic region large enough to impede transportation and communication. Video conferencing has been applied as a strategy to deal with several other internal management hurdles:


Making the Decision -- A Detailed Look at All Considerations

Submitted by gabrielle on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 12:04pm.

by Hugh Calkins (PTLA), Bill Yarian (LASH), Alison Paul (MLSA)

While most new technologies offer programs the promise of improved service or efficiency of advocacy, an effective project director will see past the sales pitches of vendors to analyze - beyond the generic strengths of any technology - whether the investment is appropriate for your specific program, how it will improve your services to clients, and what will be needed to make it successful.

With that in mind, this article takes an in-depth look at both the costs and the benefits of video conferencing to help you make an informed decision about whether it is right for your program. It reviews primary factors that affect this decision, using several case studies to demonstrate how video conferencing technology can improve areas like litigation, client service delivery, and community partnerships. It also provides an overview of specific equipment needs and sample costs associated with implementing video conferencing.

Table of Contents


Why Video Conferencing for Legal Services?

Submitted by gabrielle on Tue, 08/07/2007 - 9:36pm.
by Gabrielle Hammond (NTAP), Hugh Calkins (PTLA), Alison Paul (MLSA),
Bill Yarian (LASH)

Is Video Conferencing Right for Your Program?

Submitted by gabrielle on Tue, 05/08/2007 - 2:02pm.

Influential Factors


Equipment Needs and Lingo: The ABCs of Video Conferencing

Submitted by gabrielle on Mon, 09/18/2006 - 5:36pm.

Equipment Needs and Definitions: The Alphabet Soup of Video Conferencing

The type of equipment you need for video conferencing is dependent on the decision you make about how the data (visual data) will be transmitted (data transmission protocol) across the video conferencing network. The two primary options are either using the Internet (known as "IP" or "Internet Protocol") or using phone lines (known as ISDN). To learn more about each transport technology, including benefits, disadvantages, and how to choose between them, please see the following technical article, Choosing a Hardware Configuration.


Costs of Video Conferencing

Submitted by gabrielle on Mon, 09/18/2006 - 5:22pm.

Costs and Sustainability

Managing the Costs
You have decided that video conferencing would benefit your program greatly. Now you need to know something about how much it costs - and some suggestions for how to get the cost under control.

Snapshot on Costs
There are 3 types of costs: setup of the host site; setup of remote sites; and recurring monthly costs.

Host Site: If the experiments in Hawaii, Maine, and Montana are any indication, the cost to equip a host site with multipoint capability (the ability to link to multiple offices) ranged from $5,000 and 12,000. The main reason for such a vast spread is the program's decision to transmit data via IP (Internet, more expensive, primarily due to the purchase of a router) or ISDN (phone lines, less expensive).

Remote Site: The cost to setup a remote site that did not require a video conferencing unit with multipoint capability was approximately $3800.

Recurring Costs: For IP-based sites in Hawaii, the monthly cost is about $600 for the host site (a T-1 connection) and $78 for each remote site (DSL connections). IP-based sites with T-1 connections in Montana range from $200 - $1000/month, depending on location. Each ISDN site is about $300.

For more information, especially on ISDN setup, contact Hugh Calkins at Pine Tree Legal Assistance (hcalkins [at] ptla.org).

Initial costs to implement video conferencing depend on specific vendors, equipment needed, bandwidth, and existing infrastructure. One of the most important things you can do to keep costs down is to draft a thorough Request for Proposal (RFP) that outlines your goals and needs. Vendors can use this statement of need to bid appropriately on the costs of setting up your system. Without a clear statement of goals and needs, projects can get in trouble - ending up either under budget or, even worse, over budget to the detriment of the program or project. An RFP will help a vendor match the appropriate technology to your vision. Ask NTAP for assistance with an RFP if needed.

However, other factors outside of the startup cash price affect the cost of the entire system:

  • Will my existing network help facilitate this project?
  • Who can maintain and fix the system?
  • What are the recurring costs? Can I afford to keep my decisions on bandwidth after I've installed it?

These other factors can be big issues in successfully integrating video conferencing into your technical toolkit. At this point bandwidth is both expensive and necessary. While it's impossible to say exactly how much telecommunications companies in your area would charge for your monthly bandwidth, you should be warned that sustainability is an important issue, which cannot be overlooked and will not disappear. You don't want to successfully implement a new technology, only to have to tell everyone you're pulling the plug because you can't afford the monthly fees. The more carefully the vision is planned, the easier it will be to obtain accurate initial and re-occurring costs giving you a better idea of viable sustainability.


Syndicate content