evaluation of the distance family …...the technology-assisted family mediation project –...
TRANSCRIPT
EVALUATION OF THE DISTANCE FAMILY
MEDIATION PROJECT
Report on Phase III of the Technology-Assisted
Family Mediation Project
March, 2013
Prepared for:
Mediate BC Society
Prepared by:
Catherine Tait
Catherine Tait Consulting
Victoria, British Columbia
iii
Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge and extend thanks to the Distance Family Mediation Project team members
who participated in the evaluation. Their contribution of time and insights were essential for this report.
Participants included the Project Mediators, the Mediation Advisor, the Family Justice Services Liaison
(FJSD) Liaison, and the Project Coordinator:
Mediators: Christine Bahr
Peter Baines
Jane Henderson, Q.C.
Carole McKnight
Ayne Meiklem
Andrea Perreaux
Eugene Raponi, Q.C.
Ronald Smith, Q.C.
Mediation Advisor: Nancy Baker
FJSD Liaison: Colleen Shaw
Project Coordinator: Susanna Jani
Thanks, too, to the Project clients who took the time to complete the client survey and provide
important insights into the experience of distance mediation from the point of view of the families
involved.
I would also like extend my thanks to the author of the Phase II evaluation report, Colleen Getz. The
Phase II report was the very useful starting point for this research. I drew on many of the results
presented in that report as a basis for comparison to results for Phase III, and based many of the
interview and client survey questions used in this evaluation on those developed for Phase II.
Finally, I would like to acknowledge and thank the Law Foundation of British Columbia for funding the
Technology-Assisted Family Mediation Project and this evaluation, and Mediate BC Society and Family
Justice Services Division, Ministry of Justice for their guidance and support throughout the evaluation.
iv
Evaluation Highlights
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
The Technology-Assisted Family Mediation Project – referred to also as the Distance Family Mediation
Project – was an ambitious, multi-phase project which spanned the course of six years, from 2007-2012.
While driven by a number of objectives, its primary vision was to demonstrate the potential of using
technology to bring quality mediation services to families throughout British Columbia. This report
presents the evaluation results for the third and final phase of the Project.
Phase III provided mediation services to families undergoing separation or divorce, throughout British
Columbia, using information and communication technologies (ICTs) such as the telephone and web-
based conferencing platforms. The Project was operated by the Mediate BC Society in 2011 and 2012.
British Columbia’s Ministry of Justice, Family Justice Services Division (FJSD), was a key collaboration
agency. Services were provided by a mix of private practice and public sector family mediators.
In most cases mediation parties were separated from each other and the mediator by some degree of
physical distance, leading to the term “distance mediation”. Interest in distance mediation arose
originally in part because a shortage of family mediation services outside the more populated areas of
the province prevented access to services for many families.
The Project had two prior Phases. Phase I investigated and confirmed the feasibility of using ICTs to
conduct appropriate, safe and effective family mediations. Phase II field tested the use of ICTs to deliver
actual mediations to families residing in remote and rural areas of BC. In almost all cases mediation was
conducted using the telephone. All mediation services in Phase II were offered free of charge. Mediate
BC embarked on Phase III by again offering distance mediation services to families, but changing some
key elements for this Phase:
Distance mediation services were made available to families throughout the province, including
those living in populated and urban areas,
Fees were charged for services provided by private practice mediators participating in the
Project, and
The use of a wider range of ICTs, including a web conferencing platform selected for the Project,
was encouraged.
The overall objective of this Phase of the Project was:
“to enhance the effectiveness and accessibility of family mediation in British Columbia by
further developing the distance mediation approach.”
v
Questions related to four specific objectives were investigated for the evaluation of Phase III.
Information for the evaluation was gathered from the following sources:
A review of program documents and practice guidelines developed during the pilot Project;
Records regarding inquiries and actual mediation cases maintained by Project team members;
A written and on-line survey of clients who participated in Phase III mediations;
Telephone and in-person interviews conducted with Project team members, and
External data regarding the demographic profile of British Columbians.
PHASE III EVALUATION FINDINGS
Objective One: “To further increase knowledge about distance mediation through its application to a
wider range of family mediation cases.” This objective was fully achieved.
Phase III of the Project received 153 inquiries which resulted in 46 completed mediation cases.
Many potential cases did not proceed because the parties were not interested in mediation,
declined the service, pursued other means to resolve their issues or failed to attend
appointments.
Landline telephones, cell phones, web conferencing and email were used in Phase III cases.
Because web conferencing provides real-time visual contact between distant parties it had a
marked impact on the qualitative experience of distance mediation, especially when compared
to the audio-only experience of telephone.
Mediators found assessing safety issues at a distance to be effective for all of the technologies
used, though expressed a preference for video-enabled technologies.
Mediators suggested that cases more suited to distance mediation include those where the
parties are comfortable with technology, low conflict cases and, conversely, high conflict cases,
as there is less emotional charge if the parties are not together in the same room. The client
survey also lends support to the particular usefulness of distance mediation in high conflict
cases.
Most of the advantages of distance mediation identified in Phase II – improved access to service,
efficiency and convenience – were confirmed in Phase III. Additional advantages focussed on
the face-to-face simulation of web conferencing and the ease of use and the creation of a
business-like tone with the telephone. Clients, more than mediators, noted the advantage of
being physically separate from the other party.
Fewer disadvantages were cited in Phase III, particularly because the use of web conferencing
overcame some of the limitations of an audio-only ICT.
However, while web conferencing has some advantages over the telephone for conducting
mediations, it also introduces some new disadvantages, notably the potential for technical
glitches or difficulties.
vi
Project mediators felt that distance mediation compares favourably to traditional face-to-face
mediations, a view shared by close to 80% of the client survey respondents who had had
previous experience with mediation.
FJSD mediators were unanimous that joint meetings conducted at a distance with ICTs are
better, more effective and less time consuming than shuttle mediation.
Full or partial settlement of issues was achieved in 85% of Phase III cases. This compares well
with settlement rates for other family mediations where ICTs are typically not used.
Just over half of the Project mediators felt that the difficulty of achieving an agreement was
about the same for distance mediation as for in-person mediation. Some others felt that
parties’ commitment could be a bit less in distance mediation.
Between 60% and 70% of the client survey respondents were satisfied or very satisfied with the
mediation process, outcomes and their ability to speak freely and openly during mediation.
They also gave positive ratings to the reliability, effectiveness and ease of use of the ICTs used in
their mediations. Mediators also gave positive reviews to the ICTs; they were particularly
positive about the effectiveness of web conferencing.
Mediators gave positive reviews to Project training and tools, and expressed the view that
distance mediation should only be conducted by experienced family mediators.
Objective Two: “To improve the effectiveness and accessibility of mediation for all British Columbian
families by making distance mediation available province-wide and offering a support structure and
services through the Society [Mediate BC].” This objective was fully achieved.
About a third of client survey respondents would not have been able to use an alternative
service to resolve their issues if the distance mediation service had not been available. This
supports the conclusion that offering technology-assisted distance mediation improved access
to mediation services in BC.
Clients were more likely to come from small and mid-sized communities, live outside the
Southwest region, be younger and better educated, and have mid-range incomes, than the
British Columbian adult population as a whole.
Parties to mediation cases (versus parties to cases that did not proceed) were more likely to
have access to nearly every form of ICT used in the Project. However, a high proportion of
parties who did not participate also had access to ICTs.
The most common reason that clients chose distance mediation is that they and the other party
lived in different communities. Other reasons included a desire to avoid travel or in-person
mediation, the flexibility to access distance mediation outside working hours, reduced fees for
the Project mediations, environmental reasons and a preference for communicating using
technology.
Particular ICTs were often selected for individual cases because the technology was available to
both parties and the mediator and/or the parties were familiar with the ICT. About 75% of
client survey respondents had access to a computer, 70% had high speed internet and 63% had
vii
a webcam. Nearly everyone had experience with email, and two thirds had experience with a
web based meeting platform.
Telephone was used more frequently than web conferencing only for distance mediation among
40-49 year olds. Those with lower incomes made use of web conferencing and telephone/cell
phones in nearly the same proportion, while the telephone was used much less frequently
among those of higher incomes.
Most clients who used web conferencing for their distance mediation had both prior experience
with web conferencing and the necessary equipment, but some lacked one or both of these and
still proceeded with distance mediation using web conferencing. This suggests that some clients
find ways to access equipment that they lack, and are willing to try new technologies.
The Project Coordinator played a key role in implementing the Project, in promoting its services
and supporting the mediators who participated. The Mediation Advisor role also supported
clients and mediators.
Mediators suggested that a private practice distance mediation service model could include a
distance mediation practice group and/or special roster, technical support, inquiry support and
an adjunct, independent “distance legal advice” service for clients.
Objective Three: “To work collaboratively with stakeholders in the family justice system to make
distance mediation available to British Columbians and to integrate it with available legal services.” This
objective was mostly achieved.
The Project and Mediate BC generally, promoted awareness of the Distance Family Mediation
service widely with the public, family service agencies and the legal and dispute resolution
communities. Project activities such as the blog and Twitter feed proved popular and gained
recognition for the Project.
Just over half of those who contacted the Project had first heard about Project services through
a Family Justice Counsellor and about 10% first heard of the service through a friend or family
member. Other sources included the Project pamphlet or advertisements, Legal Aid, other
Family Justice Services Division staff, a lawyer or the Court. This result, combined with the
intensive promotion and information sharing activities of the Project supports the conclusion
that the Project achieved its goals to collaborate with family justice stakeholders.
Most clients who participated in the Project were not represented by counsel. Project
mediators confirmed that they recommended obtaining independent legal advice to every
unrepresented client they served. Nearly two thirds of unrepresented client survey respondents
recalled receiving such a recommendation.
While about two thirds of clients responding to the survey had, or intended to, obtain legal
advice, several did not intend to engage a lawyer – some because they could not afford to do so.
A recommendation to incorporate a “distance legal advice” component was made by some
mediators and clients; this could be one means to further the objective of enhancing linkages to
legal advice services.
viii
Mediators found that team meetings were highly useful for information exchange within the
team.
Mediators’ participation in the other activities – such as the Project blog and Twitter feed –
served to sustain their already keen interest in distance mediation and the Project.
Objective Four: “To develop and test a financially sustainable, province-wide distance mediation service
delivery model which includes a user-pay feature.” This objective was partially achieved.
A discounted Project fee rate applied to the seven mediations conducted by private practice
mediators in Phase III. Because a very limited number of paid mediation cases were completed,
Phase III was not a strong test of a financially sustainable distance mediation model.
The discounted fee rate represented 25% to 100% of the mediators’ usual fees, depending on
the mediator. Two out of four private mediators in the Project would be willing to offer
distance mediation services at Project rates in the future and a third may be willing to do so.
Most clients surveyed indicated that they saved time and money by participating in distance
mediation, and most who had paid a fee for service felt it was reasonable.
A question remains regarding how features of a private practice distance mediation model
(including technical support, inquiry support and legal advice for clients) could be financially
sustained on an ongoing basis.
In conclusion, the Technology-Assisted Family Mediation Project was an ambitious and successful
project that clearly demonstrated the benefits of using technology to bring mediation services to
families. Perhaps the greatest achievement of the Project is its contribution to the body of knowledge
regarding the practice of distance mediation. It achieved this through the real life test of technology
assisted mediations, and the subsequent dissemination of knowledge gained through the publication of
the Project’s Practice Guidelines1 and the dedicated information sharing with the wider legal and
dispute resolution communities.
The future for the practice of distance mediation is positive – and the results of this and the Phase II
evaluation confirm that mediation can be provided safely, effectively and competently at a distance.
1 “Mediating from a Distance: Suggested Practice Guidelines for Family Mediators”, Second Edition, Mediate BC
Society, Vancouver, British Columbia, November 2012, which can be accessed at: http://mediatebc.com/PDFs/1-14-Family-Mediation---FAQs/Guidelines_Mediating-from-a-Distance-%28Second-editi.aspx
ix
Contents
Evaluation Highlights .................................................................................................................. iv
Introduction and Background ................................................................................................................... iv
Phase III Evaluation Findings ...................................................................................................................... v
Chapter One: Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 1
Evaluation Scope and Objectives ............................................................................................................... 3
Methodology and Data Sources ................................................................................................................ 4
Chapter Two: About the Project ................................................................................................. 8
Process Flow .............................................................................................................................................. 8
Project Requirments and Scope................................................................................................................. 9
Project Team ............................................................................................................................................ 10
Features of the Project Service Model .................................................................................................... 11
Use of ICTs ............................................................................................................................................... 13
Deliverables and Outcomes ..................................................................................................................... 13
Chapter Three: Increased Knowledge About Distance Mediation ....................................... 14
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 14
1. Are technology-assisted mediations completed over the course of the Project? ............................ 15
2. How effective is assessment for violence and mediation capacity when ICTs are used in family
mediation? ......................................................................................................................................... 19
3. Which ICTs appear to be best suited to distance mediation generally? Which are better suited to
different parts of the mediation process? ......................................................................................... 25
4. Are particular types of family cases more suited to technology-assisted mediation than others? .. 27
5. What are the advantages and disadvantages of using ICTs? ............................................................ 29
6. How does technology-assisted mediation compare with other approaches when distance is a
factor? ................................................................................................................................................ 33
x
7. How does technology–assisted mediation compare with existing dispute resolution approaches? 34
8. Can the broader benefits of mediation be realized when ICTs are used to conduct mediations? ... 37
9. Are the parties generally satisfied with their experience in mediation with ICTs? ........................... 39
10. Are Project mediators generally satisfied with their experience with ICTs in mediation? ............... 44
11. Do project tools support competent, safe and appropriate methods of technology-assisted family
mediation? ......................................................................................................................................... 47
12. What added skills or training should mediators acquire? ................................................................. 49
13. What are the primary lessons learned regarding the use of ICTs in family mediation? ................... 51
Summary .................................................................................................................................................. 53
Chapter Four: Improved Effectiveness and Access to Mediation .......................................... 56
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 56
14. What is the demographic profile of the Project’s clientele? ............................................................. 57
15. What factors appear to encourage, or barriers prevent, parties’ use of technology-assisted
mediation services? ........................................................................................................................... 61
16. What influences the selection of particular ICTs? ............................................................................. 66
17. In what ways does the Mediation Advisor role support the provision of distance mediation? ....... 71
18. In what ways does the Project Coordinator role support the provision of distance mediation? ..... 72
19. Do mediators or clients identify other supports that would be helpful in a distance mediation
service model? ................................................................................................................................... 73
Summary .................................................................................................................................................. 75
Chapter Five: Collaboration with Stakeholders and Integration with Legal Services ........ 77
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 77
20. Do stakeholders in the family justice system direct clientele to the Project? .................................. 77
21. Do Project clients access independent legal advice? ........................................................................ 79
22. Do the opportunities for information exchange increase mediators’ interest in providing or making
referrals to distance mediation? ....................................................................................................... 82
Summary .................................................................................................................................................. 83
xi
Chapter Six: Financially Sustainable Distance Family Mediation Service ........................... 84
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 84
23. To what extent do fees paid by clients cover the cost of mediator services? .................................. 85
24. To what extent are clients willing to pay for distance mediation services?...................................... 85
25. To what extent are mediators willing to provide distance mediation services at Project rates? ..... 86
Summary .................................................................................................................................................. 87
Chapter Seven: Conclusions ...................................................................................................... 88
1
Chapter One: Introduction
INTRODUCTION
The Technology-Assisted Family Mediation Project2 was an ambitious, multi-phase project which
spanned the course of six years, from 2007-2012. While driven by a number of objectives, its primary
vision was to demonstrate the potential of using technology to bring quality mediation services to
families throughout British Columbia. This report presents evaluation results for Phase III of the Project,
which was operated by the Mediate BC Society from May 2011 through June 2012.
During Phase III the Project provided mediation services to British Columbian families undergoing
separation or divorce through the use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) such as the
telephone and web-based conferencing platforms. British Columbia’s Ministry of Justice, Family Justice
Services Division (FJSD), was a key collaboration agency in the Project. In most cases mediation parties
were separated from each other and the mediator by some degree of physical distance, leading to the
term “distance mediation”. The overall objective of this Phase of the Project was:
“to enhance the effectiveness and accessibility of family mediation in British Columbia by
further developing the distance mediation approach.”3
Interest in distance mediation arose in part because a shortage of family mediation services outside the
more populated areas of the province prevented access, in practical terms, to mediation services for
many families. This problem led Mediate BC4 to embark on the Technology-Assisted Family Mediation
Project to explore avenues for bringing dispute resolution services to those who could not normally
access them.
The Project has had two prior Phases. Phase l, completed in 2007, investigated and confirmed the
feasibility of using ICTs to conduct appropriate, safe and effective family mediations in BC5. Phase II,
which ran from May 2009 to February 2010, field tested the use of ICTs to deliver actual family
mediations. Services were provided by a mix of private and public sector family mediators to families
living in remote and rural areas of British Columbia; all mediation services were provided free of charge.
A total of 23 cases were completed and the ICT used to conduct mediations was the telephone in nearly
2 Referred to also as the Distance Family Mediation Project.
3 Mediate BC Society, “Project Application: Phase 3: Technology-Assisted Family Mediation Project”, submitted to
the Law Foundation of British Columbia, May 20, 2010, unpublished. 4 Known as the BC Mediator Roster Society when the Project began.
5 The results of this research are contained in: Colleen Getz, Closing the Distance with Technology: Report of Phase
1 of the Technology-Assisted Family Mediation Project. Victoria: British Columbia Mediator Roster Society, December 2007, which can be accessed at: http://mediatebc.com/PDFs/1-2-Mediation-Services/Closing_Distance.aspx
2
all cases. The evaluation of Phase II6 concluded that the Project had demonstrated that it is possible to
provide family mediations that are safe, appropriate and effective using ICTs, and that there is a demand
for these services among families living in remote and rural areas of BC.
One surprising outcome of Phase II was the suggestion that distance mediation may offer advantages
over traditional mediations where parties have difficulty being in the same room together. Distance
mediation also allows parties to participate in mediation sessions from the comfort and privacy of their
homes, and the lack of face-to-face interaction helps to bring the emotional tone of mediation down to
a business-like level. These findings, along with the generally positive results of Phase II, raised the
possibility that distance mediation may have appeal for families in all parts of British Columbia, not just
those who cannot access mediation services where they live.
Phase II also left some questions unanswered, or only partially answered, due in part to the small
number of mediation cases completed, the limited client group targeted and the reliance on one form of
ICT in that Phase. Questions of interest that remained at the end of Phase II included7:
What potential is there for the use of ICTs that were not used in Phase II? Do demographic
differences effect how families choose and use ICTs?
What techniques and practices would provide parties involved in distance mediation with access
to legal advice as needed before, during and after the distance mediation process?
How do settlement rates in distance mediation compare to those for traditional mediation?
What skills are required of mediators when conducting distance mediations?
Are some kinds of disputes better suited, or not suited, for distance mediations?
What level of demand exists throughout British Columbia for distance mediation?
What support and services could Mediate BC offer to support the growth of distance mediation?
Mediate BC embarked on Phase III of the Project to examine these and related questions by once again
offering distance mediation services to families, but changing some key elements of the Project for this
Phase:
Distance mediation services in Phase III would be made available to families throughout the
province, including those living in populated and urban areas,
Fees were charged for services provided by private practice mediators participating in the
Project, and
The use of a wider range of ICTs, including a web conferencing platform selected for the Project
(Cisco WebEx Meeting Centre8), would be encouraged.
6 Colleen Getz, Evaluation of the Distance Mediation Project: Report of Phase II of the Technology–Assisted Family
Mediation Project, Victoria: British Columbia Mediator Roster Society, May 2010, which can be accessed at: http://mediatebc.com/PDFs/1-2-Mediation-Services/Distance-Mediation-Project---Evaluation-Report.aspx and http://mediatebc.com/PDFs/1-2-Mediation-Services/Distance-Mediation-Project-Evaluation-Report---App.aspx. 7 Mediate BC Society, “Project Application”, p.10
8 See http://www.webex.com/ for more information about WebEx. The name of the platform used in the Project
has since changed to WebEx Meetings.
3
A goal of 50 completed mediations9 was set for the Phase with the hope that a larger sample of
mediations and clients would strengthen the reliability and validity of the pilot’s results. Accordingly,
work to prepare for Phase III began in September 2010, and the Project began offering distance
mediations in May 2011. Details of the Phase III project design are described more fully in Chapter Two.
EVALUATION SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES
As with Phase II, Phase III of the Technology-Assisted Family Mediation Project was a pilot, designed to
test innovative ways to deliver family mediation services using ICTs. The evaluation of this Phase,
therefore, is similar to that of Phase II: it takes more of a formative than a summative approach,
focussing on aspects of the Project design as well as outcomes, and in particular considers the
“learnings” of mediators, project administrators and clients. While considerable attention is given to the
effectiveness of mediating with ICTs, questions related to the model and tools provided to support the
delivery of distance mediation are also examined.
This evaluation has been guided by the Phase III evaluation framework, developed in consultation with
the Project Coordinator, FJSD, and Mediate BC. The framework addresses the four specific objectives of
Phase III, and identifies 25 evaluation questions which include a number that were also examined in the
Phase II evaluation. Like Phase II, the Phase III of the Project delivered mediation services to families
using ICTs provided by a mix of private and public sector mediators. However, Phase III differed from
the prior Phase because the scope of target clients was expanded, fees were charged for private
mediator services and the ICTs used included a web based meeting platform. Where possible, the
results of Phase III are compared to the Phase II results with a focus on these factors.
The specific objectives of Phase III examined in this evaluation are:
1. To further increase knowledge about distance mediation through its application to a wider
range of family mediation cases.
2. To improve the effectiveness and accessibility of mediation for all British Columbian families by
making distance mediation available province-wide and offering a support structure and
services through the Society [Mediate BC].
3. To work collaboratively with stakeholders in the family justice system to make distance
mediation available to British Columbians and to integrate it with available legal services.
9 The Project’s definition of a “completed mediation” is the same as that used in Phase II, which is: “a file in which
all the participants, including the mediator, signed an Agreement to Mediate and attended at least one mediation session”. Mediate BC Society, “Distance Family Mediation Project, Phase 3: Project Map”, March 28, 2011, unpublished, p. 22.
4
4. To develop and test a financially sustainable, province-wide distance mediation service delivery
model which includes a user-pay feature.
Chapters Three through Six of this report each address one objective and related evaluation questions.
METHODOLOGY AND DATA SOURCES
Information examined during the Phase III evaluation was collected and/or provided by Project team
members and the clients themselves. The Project Coordinator, Mediation Advisor and FJSD Liaison were
instrumental in recording information regarding the inquiries received by the Project; they also created
and supplied a number of Project documents, and participated in interviews with the evaluator.
Mediators tracked their distance mediation cases using Case Notes forms developed for the Project, and
provided their views and insights through interviews with the evaluator. Many clients responded to the
invitation to participate in a survey about their distance mediation experience, sent to them after their
cases concluded. The following table outlines each type data source and the data collection method and
analysis approach taken for each. Further detail on each source is provided below Table 1-1.
Table 1-1
Data Sources, Collection and Analysis
Data Source
Data Collection and Analysis Approaches
Project documentation
Content review to obtain qualitative data
Project Inquiry Forms
Completed by Mediation Advisor and Family Justice Counsellors; analysed to obtain quantitative and qualitative data
Mediator Case Notes forms Completed by mediators; analysed to obtain quantitative and qualitative data
Project Coordinator, Mediation Advisor and FJSD Liaison
Interviews (telephone and in person) to obtain qualitative data
Project Mediators Interviews (in person and telephone) to obtain qualitative data
Mediation clients On-line and mail survey to obtain qualitative and quantitative data
External data sources (Statistics Canada and BC Stats)
Accessed to obtain demographic data
5
A. Project Documents
The project documentation reviewed for this evaluation provided valuable information on: the Project
design, intended workflows and distance mediation model; Project objectives and activities; and tools
provided to the mediators to support them in their distance mediation cases. Review of this material
informed the development of the evaluation framework, and provided information needed to answer
the evaluation questions related to Objectives Three and Four above, regarding the support structure
and service delivery model tested in the Project.
Specific materials reviewed included: the Law Foundation of BC funding submission and Project Activity
Reports, Project Map, inquiry and referral pathway diagrams, “Mediating from a Distance: Suggested
Practice Guidelines for Family Mediators”10, training materials, Think Tank notes, template letters and
forms, technology instructions, policy documents and social media materials (blog and discussion forum
entries). In particular the “Evaluation of the Distance Mediation Project: Report on Phase II of the
Technology-Assisted Family Mediator Project”, by Colleen Getz, was an important source of information.
Where feasible and appropriate, the current report compares the outcomes and experiences of Phase III
to those of Phase II.
B. Project inquiry forms
In total the Project received 153 inquiries from individuals seeking information about, and potentially,
services through the Project. An inquiry form was completed by either the Mediation Advisor or the
FJSD mediators11 for each inquiry received. The form recorded information about both parties,
including their particular issues; the ICTs each party could access; whether the case met the criteria for
inclusion in the Project; referrals made to Project mediators, other services and independent legal
advice; and comments about client interest in or barriers to participation. Client demographic
information was also recorded for those cases that were accepted into the Project and proceeded to
mediation.
Inquiry data proved to be a rich source of information about both potential and actual Project clients,
and illuminated evaluation issues related to the characteristics of cases and clients who participated,
and those who did not participate, in the Project. It was an especially important source of information
regarding the reasons why many who inquired about distance mediation ultimately did not participate
in the Project.
C. Mediator Case Note Forms
A total of 46 distance mediation cases were completed in Phase III. Mediators recorded information
about each case, including the technologies used during each stage of mediation, the results of violence
and capacity screening and of mediation itself, referrals for independent legal advice and the time per
10
June 2010 and July 2012, accessed at: http://mediatebc.com/PDFs/1-14-Family-Mediation---FAQs/Mediating_From_a_Distance_2nd_Edition_Nov-2012.aspx 11
Family Justice Counsellors, see below.
6
case, on Case Notes forms. These forms were submitted to the evaluator directly. Data from this source
was particularly important for answering questions about the effectiveness of screening using ICTs and
of the technologies themselves, in mediation cases. It also provided quantitative evidence regarding the
settlement rates achieved during the Project, and the qualitative information regarding mediators’
views of the advantages, disadvantages, effectiveness and reliability of the particular technologies used.
D. Project Coordinator, Mediation Advisor and FJSD Liaison
The Project Coordinator, Mediation Advisor and FJSD Liaison supported Project clients and mediators,
and undertook many other activities to develop and implement the Project in this Phase. Interviews
were conducted with each of them to gain their views on the project design features, and factors that
influenced the outcomes of the Project, such as client access to ICTs.
E. Project Mediators
In-person or telephone interviews were conducted to obtain in-depth information from the mediators
about their experiences during Phase III. Questions delved into screening for violence using ICTs, the
effectiveness and reliability of particular technologies for various phases of mediation cases, comparison
of distance mediation to shuttle and in-person mediations, and the usefulness of various practice
supports and training provided throughout the Project. Private mediators were also asked about the
Project fees and the user-pay model. Seven of the Project’s completed mediation cases were conducted
by private practice mediators, and 39 by Family Justice Counsellors. This report does not distinguish
information provided by Family Justice Counsellors and private practice mediators unless the distinction
is relevant to the question under discussion.
F. Client Survey
A client survey with 30 questions was developed to obtain the views of the clients themselves. The
Agreement to Mediate form signed by all clients included a section regarding the client survey, and
clients were encouraged to participate in the survey by the mediators. The survey was available on-line
or could be completed in hard copy. For clients with a known email address, an invitation to participate
in the online survey was initially sent, followed by up to three reminders. If the client had not
responded after the third reminder, they were sent a hard copy of the survey with a stamped return
envelope. For clients where an email address was not available, a hard copy of the survey was mailed to
their physical address, followed by up to three subsequent mail-outs. In total, 51 clients responded to
the survey which gave a response rate of 54%, the same response rate achieved in the Phase II
evaluation.
The survey consisted of a mix of closed-ended and open-ended questions, and provided information
about the clients themselves, why they had chosen to participate in distance mediations, their views of
the mediation process, outcomes and technologies used, and their use of independent legal advice.
They were also asked about the benefits of mediating at a distance, and for those who had worked with
private mediators, about the fees paid for the service received.
7
Although 54% is a very good response rate for a client survey, the numbers of clients involved (51) is still
small and the results must be viewed as indicative of the experience of this particular Project client
group. Inferences about a wider population of distance mediation clients should not be made based on
a sample of this size.
G. External Data Sources
Information was drawn from Statistics Canada and BC Stats regarding the demographic profile (age,
education, income and residence by geographic area) of the adult population in British Columbia. This
data was used to assess the degree to which the Project had attracted clients from all areas of the
province, and to determine how similar the Project clients were to the adult population of BC as a
whole.
The next Chapter provides an overview of the Phase III Project design and processes. Chapters Three
through Six each address a specific objective of the Project, discussing related evaluation questions and
results.
8
Chapter Two: About the Project
This Chapter describes Phase III of the Distance Family Mediation Project. Important features of the
Project, as well as the general flow of cases through the intake and mediation processes, are outlined to
provide context to the subsequent chapters which provide the evaluation results.
PROCESS FLOW
This section describes the flow of clients through the Project, from initial contact through to mediation
itself.
A. Initial Contact
Clients may have come to the Project by any of a number of means: some were referred by their lawyer
or other legal professional; some read about the Project services on the internet or in a pamphlet,
poster or advertisement; others learned about the Project when they approached a Family Justice
Centre, Justice Access Centre or Mediate BC for assistance. Project promotional materials and Mediate
BC encouraged potential distance mediation clients to contact the Mediation Advisor. Clients who
sought service through FJSD were encouraged to consider distance mediation if their circumstances
warranted it – in these cases, clients were directed to Family Justice Counsellors working on the Project
by other Family Justice Counsellors throughout the Division. Cross referrals between the Mediation
Advisor and Project Family Justice Counsellors also occurred, matching clients with the type of
mediation that would best suit their case characteristics and financial circumstances12. For all inquiries,
the Mediation Advisor or Family Justice Counsellor explained the Project to the potential client and
discussed whether it might meet their needs. Recommendations to obtain independent legal advice
were also provided, and where appropriate, clients were referred to services outside the Project.
B. Assessment and Agreement to Mediate
Once initial contact was established, and after confirming that a client was potentially interested in
pursuing distance mediation, clients were screened by the Mediation Advisor or Family Justice
Counsellor to ensure that their case was suitable for mediation and met the mandatory requirements
for the Project (see below). If their case met these criteria and the clients expressed interest in
12
See sections below on the Project Team and the features of the service model for information regarding differences between service provision by private practice mediators and Family Justice Counsellors.
9
continuing, the case was screened for family violence issues and capacity to mediate. ICT options, and
the suitability of the clients using them, were also discussed at this time. When this screening and
discussion confirmed the appropriateness of the case for the Project, the clients were either referred to
a mediator by the Mediation Advisor or, if the assessment had been conducted by a Project Family
Justice Counsellor, they continued working with them. The case was then given a Project case number.
The Mediation Advisor conducted only high level safety and capacity screening; accordingly, mediators
receiving these referrals conducted further, in-depth screening of both parties for family violence issues
and capacity to mediate, as well as discussing ICT use with them more thoroughly. Mediators were
required (by both the Project and their professional standards of conduct) to assess for the
appropriateness for mediation by screening for family violence and to assess parties for their capacity
and readiness to mediate. Screening for family violence issues was done by the mediator with each
party individually, in most cases with the use of some form of ICT. Based on the outcome of this
screening the mediator would determine whether the case was, in fact, suitable for mediation within
the Project. Once the mediator and both parties were satisfied that their case was appropriate, clients
were asked to sign an Agreement to Mediate to participate in Project mediation services. Cases did not
proceed to mediation until the agreement was signed by both parties. Clients who were screened out,
or decided that distance mediation was not for them, would be referred elsewhere for other services.
C. Distance Mediation Sessions and Outcomes
Mediators worked with the clients to select ICTs to be used in their case and scheduled individual pre-
mediation sessions to review issues, the Agreement to Mediate, and ICTs to be used for mediation; joint
mediation sessions were then scheduled. One or more mediation sessions were conducted using ICTs
(different technologies could be used at different stages throughout this process). If the clients’ issues
were partially or fully resolved, mediators could document the areas of agreement for the parties in a
written agreement or Memorandum of Understanding (depending on the mediator’s qualifications),
again recommending that they obtain independent legal advice. Regardless of the outcome, mediators
recorded information about the case on Case Notes Form submitted to the evaluator, and provided
client contact information for the client survey.
PROJECT REQUIREMENTS AND SCOPE
To be accepted into the Project, potential cases were required to meet all of the following criteria:
The issues requiring resolution are consistent with the Project’s definition of “family
mediation”;
The mediation meets the Project’s definition of “distance mediation”;
The clients have access to at least one type of ICT which is potentially appropriate for family
mediation;
10
The issues to be resolved are appropriate to mediate using ICTs; and
The mediation concerns a matter that would come within the jurisdiction of British
Columbia’s courts. Generally, this requires one party – and when a child is involved, the
child – to be resident in the province:
o For non-child issues: one of the parties has to be ordinarily resident in BC for at
least one year before the proceeding began: and
o For child issues: the child must be habitually resident in BC13
The Project applied the following definitions14 when considering the case criteria:
Family mediation: Mediation of issues relating to the reorganization of the family after
separation or divorce, and parenting, financial support and property matters connected to
separation or divorce;
ICT: Any range of a range of information and communication tools, including regular landline
and cell phones, teleconferencing, videoconferencing, email, text messaging, custom text-based
applications and web conferencing;
Distance mediation: Any mediation using information and communication technologies, in
which one or both parties are not present in the same room as the mediator.
The results regarding the number and type of cases meeting and not meeting the mandatory Project
requirements are examined in Chapter Three.
The Project broadened the scope of clients served in Phase III, with a goal to make dispute resolution
services available to families throughout the province regardless of where they resided, their socio-
economic status, cultural background or disability. The intent was for service to be provided to parties
located anywhere in the province by mediators who also were located anywhere in the province,
thereby increasing access to mediation services.
PROJECT TEAM
The Project team consisted of a number of individuals in a variety of roles. Eight experienced family
mediators participated: four private practice mediators from the Mediate BC Society roster of family
mediators, and four Family Justice Counsellors employed by the British Columbia Ministry of Justice,
FJSD. The mediators were located in the Lower Mainland, on Vancouver Island and in the interior of BC.
Five of the mediators had previously provided services in Phase II of the Project.
13
Mediate BC Society, “Project Map”, p. 22 14
Mediate BC Society, “Project Map”, p. 10
11
The private practice mediators accepted cases on a full range of family issues including child custody,
access and support, spousal support and property division. Family Justice Counsellors accepted cases
with children involved, and provided mediation on the same range of issues as private practice
mediators, except that property division mediation was limited to property of $25,000 value or less.
Family Justice Counsellors provided dispute resolution services without charge, as is their usual practice,
whereas private practice mediators applied the Project fee schedule to their Project cases.
Support for the Project was provided by a Project Coordinator, Mediation Advisor and FJSD Liaison.
Their roles were as follows:
Project Coordinator: The Project Coordinator was responsible for overall implementation and
management of the Project. Activities included creating the design for the Project, promoting
the Project with the public and stakeholders, and supporting the mediators’ distance mediation
practice through training, facilitation of information exchange, and providing technical support
when needed.
Mediation Advisor: The Mediation Advisor works within the Vancouver Justice Access Centre
and was Mediate BC’s primary contact person for clients seeking services under the Project. She
provided potential clients with information about the mediation and the Project, helped to
determine if the case met the Project requirements, and provided clients with referrals to
mediators within the Project and other services, including independent legal advice, as
appropriate.
FJSD Liaison: The FJSD Liaison was a Senior Program Analyst within FJSD who coordinated the
work of the Family Justice Counsellors within the Project, liaised with the Project Coordinator
and Mediation Advisor, collaborated on the development of Project policies and documents,
and supported the Family Justice Counsellors by providing FJSD-specific policies and tools as well
as technical support.
The effectiveness of the support provided by these roles is examined in Chapter Four.
FEATURES OF THE PROJECT SERVICE MODEL
The Project service model is described in the “Project Map” and the Project funding submission. Key
features of the service model that are particularly relevant to the evaluation were the emphasis on the
provision of effective screening for clients entering the Project, on making referrals for independent
legal advice, and on the use of a fee schedule to support a financially sustainable distance mediation
service.
12
Mediators were required to screen all Project clients for family
violence issues and capacity to mediate, in accordance with Mediate
BC’s Standard of Conduct or, for Family Justice Counsellors, FJSD’s
Manual of Operations and policies. Mediators assessed cases for the
appropriateness of mediation, to be satisfied that:
“ a) there is not now nor has there been any abuse;
b) if there has been abuse, a fair and safe mediation is still
possible;
c) if there has been abuse, any vulnerable participant can be
protected in the mediation process and all of the necessary safety measures to do this are put in
place for the mediation.”15
The effectiveness of safety screening conducted in the Project is examined in Chapter Three.
The Mediation Advisor and mediators were also expected to recommend that parties not represented
by counsel obtain independent legal advice. These recommendations were to be made throughout the
mediation process, to “make the participants aware of the value of consulting other professionals in
order to make fully informed decisions.”16 The requirement to recommend independent legal advice to
clients is in keeping with Mediate BC’s Standards of conduct and FJSD’s policies. Chapter Five presents
results regarding the provision of such recommendations, and clients’ actions to obtain legal advice.
The Project also strove to work collaboratively with stakeholders in the family justice system, to make
services known and therefore accessible to potential clients, and to integrate services with available
legal advice. Stakeholders directly involved in the project were Mediate BC and FJSD. Other
stakeholders relevant to the Project included the legal community, private lawyers, Legal Services
Society and the Justice Institute of BC and other organizations serving families in BC. The Project’s
collaboration with stakeholders is examined in Chapter Five.
The Project implemented a fee schedule for mediations conducted by private practice mediators to test
a user-pay contribution model that could sustain affordable distance mediation services. In Phase III of
the Project introduced a sliding-fee model based on parties’ net annual income and household size. The
Project rates applied to the first 10 hours of mediation. Part way through the Project timeframe, the
sliding scale was replaced by a single, discounted fee to be paid by both parties. This change was
implemented in part in response to mediator concerns about the complexity of applying the sliding scale
to individual cases. The use of fees, and mediator and client reactions to the Project rates, are examined
in Chapter Six.
15
Mediate BC Society, “Project Map”, p. 19 16
Mediate BC Society, “Project Map”, p. 20
“Ensuring mediation takes place in a safe
environment is as critical when using ICTs as it is when mediations take
place face-to-face.”
- Project Map
13
USE OF ICTS
A particularly important feature of the Project was the use of ICTs to conduct mediation cases. As the
definition above suggests, the Project accepted the use of a wide variety of ICTs. Also, a “multi-media”
approach was permitted, where more than one ICT could be used within the conduct of a single
mediation file. The Project encouraged the use of ICTs beyond the telephone, which had been heavily
used in Phase II, and selected a web conferencing platform as the “favoured” ICT for Phase III. Like
many web conferencing platforms, the platform allows participants to have both audio and video
connections, making distance mediation more akin to face-to-face mediation than is possible with
telephone or text alone. It also allows participants to share documents onscreen, a useful tool in the
context of mediation cases. While the web conferencing platform was identified as the Project’s
“favoured” ICT, use of other ICTs was permitted as well, and mediators were responsible for assessing
clients’ needs, circumstances, skills and preferences when selecting ICTs to use in each case. It should
be noted that while the Project did use WebEx Meeting Centre17, this report provides no evaluation of
WebEx as a product and is not an endorsement of WebEx. The use, advantages and disadvantages of
ICTs, and client and mediator satisfaction with ICTs, are examined in Chapter Three; the factors related
to the use of particular ICTs, and the process to select ICTs for mediation cases, are examined in Chapter
Four.
DELIVERABLES AND OUTCOMES
As stated in the “Project Map”, Mediate BC’s vision of success for the
project is that distance mediation is confirmed as a viable, accessible and
affordable dispute resolution option for British Columbian families.
In addition, the Project had three concrete deliverables to produce in
Phase III: a goal of 50 completed distance family mediations, a revision of
Phase II’s Suggested Practice Guidelines for Family Mediators18 which
documented the teams’ learnings, and this evaluation report.
17
Note that one Project mediation was conducted using a web conferencing platform other than WebEx. 18
Mediate BC Society, “Practice Guidelines”, 2010.
“A further indicator of success will be the confirmation that
technology can bring the power of mediation to families who need it”
- Project Map
14
Chapter Three:
Increased Knowledge About Distance
Mediation
INTRODUCTION
The first objective of the Distance Family Mediation Project, Phase III, is:
“To further increase knowledge about distance mediation through its application to a wider
range of family mediation cases.”
The “wider range of family mediation cases” alludes to the greater geographic reach of the Project in
Phase III. In contrast to Phase II of the Project, Phase III did not require that one or both parties to a
dispute live in remote or rural communities; the services of the Project mediators in Phase III were
available to resolve any case as long as at least one party lived somewhere in British Columbia. It was
hoped that the greater catchment area would generate more mediation cases from which to learn
about the practice and effectiveness of distance mediation.
The “further increase knowledge about distance mediation” refers simply to the continued process of
acquiring experience with, and therefore knowledge and insights into, conducting mediation at a
distance using ICTs. An important change with Phase III was the more widespread use of a web
conferencing platform which provides both visual as well as audio connection between the participants.
Nearly all of the cases in Phase II were conducted using telephone alone – so the “increased
knowledge” expected in Phase III also refers to the knowledge gained about distance mediation
conducted using a web-based platform.
There are 13 evaluation questions associated with this objective. Many of these questions entail a
comparison to the results of the same or similar questions from the Phase II evaluation. The questions
are:
1. Are technology-assisted mediations completed over the course of the Project?
2. How effective is assessment for violence and mediation capacity when ICTs are used in
family mediation?
3. What advantages and disadvantages of using ICTs are observed during Phase III?
15
4. Of the ICTs used by the Project, which appear to be best suited for distance mediation
generally and which are better suited to different parts of the mediation process?
5. Are there particular types of family cases that lend themselves more to the application of
technology-assisted mediation methods than others?
6. How does technology-assisted mediation compare with existing dispute resolution
approaches (e.g., shuttle mediation) when distance is a factor?
7. How does technology-assisted mediation compare with existing dispute resolution
approaches?
8. Can some broader benefits of mediation be realized when ICTs are used to conduct
mediations?
9. Are the parties generally satisfied with their experience in mediation with ICTs?
10. Are Project mediators generally satisfied with their experience with ICTs in mediation?
11. Do the policy/procedural tools developed for the Project support and promote competent,
safe and appropriate methods of technology- assisted family mediation?
12. What additional skills or training should mediators acquire to use competent, safe and
appropriate methods in technology-assisted family mediation?
13. What are the primary lessons learned regarding competent, safe and appropriate use of the
ICTs in family mediation?
The remainder of this Chapter examines the findings and results for each of these questions.
1. ARE TECHNOLOGY-ASSISTED MEDIATIONS COMPLETED OVER THE
COURSE OF THE PROJECT?
In Phase III, the Project intended to offer technology-assisted family mediation services to any family in
British Columbia regardless of where they may reside, their socio-economic background status, cultural
background or disability19. This section reviews the inquiries received by the Project and the number of
cases that ultimately resulted. It also looks briefly at the ICTs used to conduct mediation cases to
confirm that cases were “technology assisted”.
19
Mediate BC Society, “Project Application”, p.7
16
The Project had a goal of 50 completed mediations. To achieve completed mediations the Project
received inquiries that met the Project’s mandatory requirements, which then translated into mediation
cases that were completed using one or more ICTs. Each of these aspects, or indicators, has been
assessed through a review of data contained in the Project’s Inquiry spreadsheet and mediator Case
Notes forms.
A. Inquiries received, criteria met and cases completed
In Phase III, the Project received 153 inquiries, 89 of which met the Project’s mandatory requirements.
These inquiries resulted in 55 cases which were assigned Project case numbers, and a total of 46
completed mediation cases. The Project received nearly 50% more inquires in Phase III than in Phase II,
and double the number of completed cases. A similar proportion of the inquiries met the mandatory
case requirements in both Phases. See Table 3-1.
Table 3-1
Inquiries Received, Requirements Met, and Cases Assigned and Completed
Phase II20
Phase III
Number
% of Inquiries
Number
% of Inquiries
Inquiries received 103 153
Inquiries meeting mandatory requirements
64 62% 89 58%
Case numbers assigned 31 30% 55 36%
Cases completed 23 22% 46 30% Sources: Inquiry/Intake Spreadsheet, Case Notes
The increased number of inquiries in Phase III may be due to one or more factors including:
The relaxation of the “remote or rural” residence requirement in Phase III; this may have
encouraged a broader range of families to inquire about the Project services;
intensive promotional activities in Phase III;
greater awareness of the Project in general;
and / or a longer intake period (the intake period in Phase II was 9 months – May 2009 to
January 2010; in contrast, Phase III’s intake period lasted 13 months, from May 2011 through
June 2012)21.
In both Phases roughly 60% of the inquiries met the mandatory requirements. The key difference
between the requirements for cases in Phase II and Phase III relates to the location of the parties. Phase
20
Getz, p.16 21
Phase II received an average of 11.4 inquiries per month while Phase III received an average of 11.7 per month. The additional 4 months that Phase III ran likely resulted in about 45 - 50 additional inquiries in Phase III.
17
II required that “at least one of the parties was in a remote, “non-urban” area”22 and 15% of inquiries
failed to meet this criteria23. In Phase III only two inquiries actually failed to meet the mandatory
criteria. Thus it appears that relaxing the residence requirement in Phase III allowed some additional
cases to proceed.
Data regarding whether a potential case met mandatory requirements was not recorded for 62 cases in
Phase III. Notes recorded on inquiry sheets shed some light on why many inquiries did not proceed to
the point where an assessment against the criteria was made. As seen in Table 3-2, a common reason is
that one or both parties were simply not interested in mediation; in other cases, parties were pursuing
other means to address their issues. Safety issues were disclosed in five cases.
Table 3-2
Themes where Mandatory Criteria Assessment was Not Recorded in Phase III
One or both parties not interested in mediation 18
Nothing noted 17
Inquiry only 7
Parties prefer in-person mediation 6
Safety issues disclosed 5
Taking case to court 4
Parties resolved issues themselves 3
Party not comfortable with technology 1
Pursuing another option 1
Total 62 Source: Inquiry/Intake Spreadsheet
Of the 91 inquiries where the assessment result was recorded, 89 met the
mandatory criteria and two did not. One failed to meet the requirement that
the case be within the jurisdiction of a British Columbian court and the child
reside in British Columbia. The other failed to meet the definition of a family
mediation case because the dispute, which involved reorganization of the
family, was not due to separation or divorce.
Of the 89 inquiries that met the mandatory requirements, 55 were assigned a
case number by the Project Coordinator and referred to a mediator. Thirty
four cases that had met the Project requirements did not proceed to this
stage. Again, notes recorded on the inquiry sheets shed some light regarding
22
Getz, p. 7. In Phase II, another requirement was that neither party needed an interpreter to participate in mediation; in Phase III this was not a requirement, though the “Project Map” (p. 23) indicates that a careful case-by- case consideration would be undertaken for such inquiries. Phase III inquiry data indicates that interpreters were not required in any of cases reviewed against the mandatory requirements. 23
Getz, p. 16
“Party 2 never responded to any attempted contact -
letters, phone by Family Justice Counsellor. Party 1 persevered for a year to no
avail. “
- Mediator Inquiry
Comment
18
why these cases did not proceed (see Table 3-3). In 10 cases, contact with the second party was not
established. Failure to attend a follow-up appointment or calls, or an outright decision not to pursue
distance mediation were other common reasons that cases did not proceed. Three cases were screened
out due to safety issues. Two cases did proceed to mediation, but after the cut-off date for the pilot
Project.
Table 3-3
Notes for Inquiries that met Project Requirements but were not Assigned to Mediator
No contact by/with second party 10
Party(ies) withdrew or failed to attend appointments 6
Service was declined by second party 7
Safety issues identified – screened out 3
Parties did not want mediation 3
Case proceeded but too late for pilot 2
Need to resolve related issue first 1
Parties reconciled 1
Nothing noted 1
Total 35 Source: Inquiry/Intake Spreadsheet
Of the 55 cases that were assigned a Project case number, distance mediation was begun in 47 cases
and completed in 46 cases. Reasons, noted by mediators, that cases did not proceed to distance
mediation after case number assignment are listed in Table 3-4.
Table 3-4
Cases Accepted where Mediation Did Not Occur: Mediator Comments
Parties withdrew or failed to attend appointments 5
Pursued in-person mediation 2
Parties did not connect with mediator 1
Screened out for safety reasons 1
Total 9 Source: Mediator Case Notes
In summary, Phase III of the Project received 153 inquiries which resulted in 46 completed mediation
cases. Thus, for every three inquiries, slightly more than two did not proceed to distance mediation – a
very similar result to that seen in Phase II. Many potential cases did not proceed because the parties
were not interested in mediation, declined the service or failed to attend appointments; in other cases,
parties pursued other means to resolve their dispute (court, in-person mediation, resolving issues
19
themselves). A few cases were not suitable because they involved safety issues. There was only one
instance where discomfort with technology was noted as a reason that the party did not want to
proceed; however, this may reflect some self-selection on part of people who make inquiries of a
technology-assisted mediation service to begin with.
B. ICTs Used
Four technologies were used in the distance mediation cases in Phase III: landline telephones, cell
phones, web conferencing and email. Many cases used more than one technology – in different stages
of the case, or simultaneously for particular sessions (for example, combined use of web conferencing
and telephone). The use of web conferencing sets this Phase of the pilot apart from Phase II, where
telephone and email were the technologies used in all but one case24. Because web conferencing
provides real-time visual contact between distant parties it has a marked impact on the qualitative
experience of distance mediation, especially when compared to the audio only experience of telephone.
The parties’ decisions to use particular technologies, and their effectiveness, are explored in more depth
later in this report.
2. HOW EFFECTIVE IS ASSESSMENT FOR VIOLENCE AND MEDIATION
CAPACITY WHEN ICTS ARE USED IN FAMILY MEDIATION?
In Phase II, mediators conducted safety screening during pre-mediation meetings which occurred by
telephone or teleconference. The evaluation report for that Phase suggested that while the mediators
could conduct screening interviews competently using the telephone, the absence of visual cues made
the task more difficult for them, and they expressed a preference for in-person meetings for safety
screening25. Phase III allowed mediators to conduct safety screening with audio and video provided
through web conferencing. This section reviews the Phase III results for safety screening, the mediators’
comments regarding screening with various technologies, and client survey data relevant to safety
issues.
A. Results of Safety Screening
During Phase III, safety issues may have been disclosed during the initial inquiry, or in response to high
level screening questions posed by the Mediation Advisor26, or through the safety screening performed
by the mediators themselves. As noted above, safety issues were disclosed or identified in a total of
24
One case in Phase II made use of Skype, WebEx, Windows Live Video, chat, telephone and email. Getz, p. 22 25
Getz, p.29 26
In February 2012, the intake model for private mediations changed so that the high level safety screening was no longer performed by the Mediation Advisor. After that change, private mediators became fully responsible for conducting safety screening once clients were referred to them (Source: Project Activity Report, March 31, 2012, unpublished).
20
nine potential cases that were not ultimately assigned to mediators, and in one case that was referred
to a mediator where the mediator screened the case out of the Project due to safety concerns.
No safety issues were identified for 73% of the clients27. However, mediator records show that some
safety and capacity to mediate issues were identified during the screening process for some of the cases
that did proceed to distance mediation. Past safety issues were identified for 15% of the clients. Verbal
abuse, power imbalance and emotional safety concerns were noted for 4% of clients. In those cases the
mediators made accommodations to ensure continued safety during the mediation process, for
example, by using the telephone instead of web conferencing, and caucusing separately with clients to
review comfort levels and any concerns. Mediators also referred two parties to appropriate services to
address safety issues. Table 3-5 indicates the safety and capacity to mediate screening outcome for the
92 clients who participated in distance mediation cases:
Table 3-5
Results of Mediator Safety Screening
Parties Screened
% of Parties
No safety issues identified 67 73%
Past safety issues only 14 15%
Result of safety screen not recorded 5 5%
Some safety issues – referred to appropriate agency 2 2%
Incidents of verbal abuse noted 2 2%
Power imbalance but no safety issues 1 1%
Emotional safety concerns so client prefers distance mediation 1 1%
Total 92 100%
Source: Mediator Case Notes
These results indicate that screening did occur, and that some safety and capacity to mediate issues
were identified for approximately 20% of the clients, who eventually went on to participate in distance
mediation. While this is a small sample of clients with safety concerns, clearly the mediators in these
cases were aware of their clients’ issues and felt that distance mediation remained an appropriate
service for these clients.
27
Note that this is a higher percentage of clients without safety issues than reported in a longitudinal study of FJSD clients who had received in-person mediation services; this difference might be something worthy of further investigation. See “Dispute Resolution Longitudinal Study Phase 3 Final Report”, Focus Consultants, March 2008.
21
B. Safety Screening Approaches
During interviews conducted for the evaluation, mediators were asked to describe their approach to
safety screening, any challenges they encountered and how they dealt with them, and to comment on
the effectiveness of conducting safety screening at a distance using ICTs.
FJSD policy requires Family Justice Counsellors to conduct safety screening for all mediation clients. A
formal assessment tool is used that consists of 22 questions in total, 10 of which address family violence
and safety issues directly. For in-person mediation, clients are given the opportunity to complete the
assessment tool themselves prior to meeting with a Family Justice Counsellor for an intake interview,
and then review their responses in person with the Family Justice Counsellor. In the Distance Family
Mediation Project, Family Justice Counsellors sent the assessment tool to some clients in advance and
reviewed their responses with them using the telephone or web conferencing. Family Justice
Counsellors reported that they always used the assessment tool, sometimes supplemented by additional
questions, to conduct the safety screening.
The Mediation Advisor conducted some high level screening before responsibility for in-depth screening
was passed on to the mediators. She used a set of six standard questions and usually conducted the
screening by telephone. The private mediators reported that they used less formal approaches to
screening for safety issues – that is, they do not use a formal assessment tool, but instead:
One uses many of FJSD’s assessment tool questions, and works through them in a
conversational way;
Another always does a pre-mediation meeting and asks questions to determine the degree of
the client’s comfort with the mediation process, whether there are any safety issues, and the
appropriateness of technology. This is the same screening as with face-to-face mediation;
Another uses an informal approach when building rapport with the client and gathering
information; this mediator asks questions about safety and if it appears that there are issues,
probes further; and
Another poses questions about the clients’ circumstances and watches for red flags.
As mediation cases progressed from intake to actual mediation, all of the mediators continued to assess
parties for safety and capacity to mediate issues that may not have emerged during the screening.
Techniques that mediators used to assess safety and capacity issues during mediation included:
remaining alert to behaviours that indicated client discomfort or feelings of intimidation, (such as
withdrawal or backing off), observing clients’ tone of voice and (when using web conferencing) body
language, and watching for major shifts in position for no apparent reason. When these situations
arose, mediators reported that they would check in with the clients individually, to further assess the
situation.
22
C. Technologies Used
Mediators made use of telephone, cell phone, web conferencing, email and in-person meetings to
conduct safety screening for clients in this Phase of the Project. (Email was used only to send the Family
Justice Counsellor assessment tool to clients). Different technologies were sometimes used to screen
the two parties in a case. Table 3-6 indicates the technologies used for safety screening, as a percentage
of the total cases (n=46).
Table 3-6
Technologies used to Conduct Safety Screening
Safety screening technologies used:
% of cases
Telephone 72%
Web conferencing 54%
In person 11%
Email (document sharing only) 11%
Cell phone 9%
Telephone + web conferencing 6%
Source: Mediator Case Notes
Percentages sum to more than 100% as more than one technology was used in several cases
D. Effectiveness of Safety Screening using ICTs
Mediators were asked to rate the effectiveness of the technologies they
used at different stages of their cases. Ratings for the technologies used
for safety screening were given using a 1 to 5 scale, with 1 = “very poor”
and 5 = “excellent”; average ratings by ICT used are shown in Table 3-7.
All technologies received an average rating of greater than 3, indicating
general overall satisfaction with the effectiveness of the technologies used.
Highest ratings were given to cell phones and the combination of
telephone and web conferencing, though these results should be viewed
with caution due to the limited number of ratings given for these
technologies.
“The added layer of technology between the
mediator and the client is a hurdle to get by in order to get
information from the parties. It’s a hurdle but not a wall.”
- Mediator Interview
Comment
23
Table 3-7
Ratings for Technologies used to Conduct Safety Screening
Safety screening technologies used:
Average rating
# of ratings
Cell phone 5.0 4
Telephone + web conferencing 4.5 2
Web conferencing 4.3 24
Email (document sharing only) 4.2 5
Telephone 4.0 32
In person28
3.5 2 Source: Mediator Case Notes
Comments recorded in mediator Case Notes submitted when cases closed indicated that mediators
found assessing safety issues at a distance to be effective for all of the technologies used, though a
preference for video-enabled technologies was occasionally noted. As one mediator noted, web
conferencing was more effective than telephone for screening as the mediator could observe the
client’s reactions to questions and then probe further.
Interviews conducted with the mediators towards the end of the Project also explored the effectiveness
of safety screening at a distance, specifically using telephone and web conferencing. The mediators’
comments include:
Safety Screening by Telephone:
If the clients had not completed the assessment tool beforehand, screening by telephone took
longer than it would in person;
It is not as easy to establish rapport for discussing sensitive issues on the telephone as it is in
person;
Though the telephone is not the best, it is a start;
It is harder to assess what is “normal” for a client by telephone and there is a need to be extra
vigilant;
Very similar effectiveness compared to face-to-face, and [this mediator] always does screening
by telephone;
Telephone is adequate, but face-to-face is better;
Using the telephone misses the visual cues;
28
The relatively low rating given to in-person screening was due in part to one case where the screening did not indicate capacity issues that later emerged during the mediation sessions. In this case one party was screened in person and the other by telephone.
24
Telephone is good for screening but does not provide quite the same richness of information as
web conferencing or in person.
Safety Screening through Web Conferencing:
Screening through web conferencing is not too bad but face-to-face is always best – the web
conferencing platform just gives a head shot, but is superior to telephone;
Web conferencing is close to face-to-face as the mediator can see the clients’ reactions. Web
conferencing is really good.
In general, at a distance:
Violence screening is tough as many factors are at play – cultural, gender differences; it is tricky
in person too; just a bit more difficult at a distance because non-verbal cues are harder to pick
up on.
Safety issues and power imbalances are always hidden and it is part of the mediator’s job to get
at these things obliquely.
About half of the mediators did not encounter any challenges in screening the distance mediation
clients for safety issues in the Project. The others did encounter some challenges, either during the
screening, or later during mediation, largely because of the circumstances of the individuals involved, as
opposed to any difficulties relating to the use of technology. Strategies they employed to address these
challenges include:
Stopping to explain the purpose of the screening and why it is important, if the screening
became awkward;
Reverting to an even more “distant” technology (i.e. to telephone rather than web
conferencing) to reduce the intensity of the interaction between the clients (once mediation
began); and
Recommending clients obtain legal advice.
E. Client Views
The client survey posed questions about safety issues and their impact on the client’s decision to pursue
distance mediation. Three clients (6%) who completed the client survey indicated that they had safety
concerns prior to starting mediation. Two of these clients answered additional questions related to
safety issues. Both indicated that the option of using technology was an important factor in their
decision to proceed with mediation because it reduced their safety concerns somewhat (1 response) or
considerably (1 response). Both also elaborated with comments that not being in a face-to-face
situation with their former partner helped to reduce their feelings of stress.
In response to another survey question, one client noted that she participated in the mediation using an
ICT, while the other party was participating in person with the mediator – the first client felt this created
25
an uneven power dynamic, and that at times she felt intimidated by her ex-husband but the mediator
was not able to perceive when she was withdrawing from the conversation. While this experience was
reported by only one client, it highlights the need for mediators to be extra alert to cues that clients give
when they are at a distance.
3. WHICH ICTS APPEAR TO BE BEST SUITED TO DISTANCE
MEDIATION GENERALLY? WHICH ARE BETTER SUITED TO
DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE MEDIATION PROCESS?
In Phase II of the Project, the ICTs used were largely limited to telephone and email. In Phase III it was
hoped that mediators would make more use of web conferencing, which offers both audio and visual
contact as well as document sharing. With that approach in mind a web conferencing platform was
adopted by the Project team as a “favoured” technology for this Phase. Licences for the platform were
acquired for the team, and training and support for the use of web conferencing was provided by the
Project Coordinator and, to some extent, by the FJSD Senior Program Analyst for the Family Justice
Counsellors. To give mediators added experience using the platform, all team meetings (which occurred
twice a month after the initial training period) were conducted using web conferencing.
This section reviews the use of web conferencing and other ICTs at various stages in the distance
mediation cases.
Mediators recorded the ICTs that they used for each of five stages of their mediation cases during the
Project. Table 3-8 shows how often each ICT was used in each stage, and the percentage of the Project
cases that each ICT was used for in any given stage. Percentages sum to more than 100% as more than
one technology may have been used per case in each stage.
26
Table 3-8
Technologies Used by Stage of Mediation Case
ICT Type Used
Stage of Mediation Case
Initial Contact Safety Screening Pre-Mediation Mediation Post-Mediation
Cell phone 5 11%
4 9%
4 9%
6 13%
4 9%
Email 9 20%
5 11%
10 22%
6 13%
25 54%
In person 2 4%
5 11%
3 7%
2 4%
1 2%
Telephone 39 85%
33 72%
23 50%
23 50%
17 37%
Telephone + email
2 4%
0 0%
3 7%
1 2%
2 4%
Telephone + web conferencing
0 0%
2 4%
2 4%
1 2%
0 0%
Web conferencing
11 24%
25 54%
30 65%
21 46%
5 11%
Web conferencing + email
0 0%
0 0%
0 0%
2 4%
3 7%
Web conferencing + in person
0 0%
0 0%
0 0%
1 2%
0 0%
Source: Mediator Case Notes
These results show that a wide range of technologies were used in every stage. They also show that the
most commonly used technologies changed depending on the stage:
At initial contact, the telephone was heavily favoured and used in 85% of cases (96% if cell
phone is added to the telephone category);
For safety screening, the telephone was used in 72% of cases (81% with cell phones), followed
by web conferencing in 54% of cases (email was used only for document sharing);
For pre-mediation meetings, web conferencing was the most favoured, used in 65% of cases,
followed by telephone in 50% of cases (59% with cell phones);
For mediation itself, telephone and web conferencing had similar levels of use, at 50% and 46%
of cases respectively; and
For post mediation, email was the most favoured ICT, used in 54% of cases, followed by the
telephone in 37% of cases (46% with cell phones).
27
During interviews, mediators were asked when email and web conferencing in particular are best suited
for use in distance mediation cases. Mediators commented that email is particularly useful for setting
up and re-scheduling appointments, sending documents, laying out the ground rules for the use of web
conferencing, and ensuring that the Agreement to Mediate and fee structure are in place. For web
conferencing, mediators all agreed that it best suited for use in the mediation sessions, but individual
mediators also found it effective for initial interviews and safety screening. Mediators also commented
that, for follow-up or to touch base with clients individually between sessions, they would often simply
call them on the telephone.
4. ARE PARTICULAR TYPES OF FAMILY CASES MORE SUITED TO
TECHNOLOGY-ASSISTED MEDIATION THAN OTHERS?
In Phase III, Project mediators dealt with a wide variety of family mediation cases. Some were simple –
there were a limited number of issues to resolve and/or the parties were low conflict and the process
was easy to manage. Other cases were more challenging – the issues were numerous and/or complex
and the parties entrenched in their positions. In one case, the clients were not only physically distant
from each other, they also came from very different cultural backgrounds. Mediator records indicate
that:
Cases averaged 2.8 issues each, and ranged from single issue cases to one case that had seven
issues;
Child and parenting issues were the most common issues to be resolved. The percentage of
cases with each type of family issue was:
o Access: 61%
o Child Support: 57%
o Parenting: 57%
o Custody / guardianship: 52%
o Spousal support: 13%
o Property division, over $25,000: 13%
o Property division, under $25,000: 0%
o Other issue: 24%
At least 5 cases involved one or more parties who were high conflict, very angry or very
entrenched.
Mediators were asked to comment on the types of cases that seemed to be more, or less, suited to
distance mediation using ICTs. They responded that cases more suited to distance mediation include:
28
Cases where the parties are both comfortable with
technology;
Low conflict cases, because they are generally easier and
any added complexity due to the technology is not a big
concern; and, conversely
High conflict cases, as there is less emotional charge if the
parties are not together in the same room. Taking that
concept further, one mediator expressed the view that
telephone mediation can be especially helpful due to the
absence of visual cues that convey the parties’ reactions to
the each other.
The client survey lends support to the particular usefulness of distance mediation in high conflict cases.
Twenty-two percent of survey respondents indicated that their desire (or that of the other party) to not
be together in-person was one of the reasons that they had opted for distance, rather than face-to-face,
mediation.
Mediators commented that the following types of cases may not be as suitable for technology-assisted
mediation:
Cases with more than two parties, as managing the technology connections would become
more challenging as the number of participants increases;
Cases where one or both parties lack the capacity to express themselves using ICTs;
Cases where the issues are more emotional than legal – because the mediator is less likely to be
familiar with counselling services in the parties’ communities;
Volatile family violence cases if the parties live in the same community but not close to the
mediator. In such situations, the mediator would likely have less direct knowledge of local
resources and the context of the community29;
Cases that are unsuited for mediation in general – for example, where a party is willfully
uncooperative, or where there is active family violence; and
Very complicated matters with many complex documents to be shared and reviewed together –
this could be awkward to manage via technology.
29
Project Guidelines recommended that mediators research and become familiar with supports and resources available in clients’ communities.
“Although these parties were high conflict and challenging - the use of technology served
to dilute the charge somewhat.”
- Mediator Case Notes
Comment
29
5. WHAT ARE THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF USING
ICTS?
In Phase II, mediators observed many advantages and disadvantages of using technology in the
provision of distance mediation. For this evaluation question, the results of Phase II are compared to
the observations of mediators, and clients, in Phase III.
A. Advantages
Table 3-9 lists the advantages observed by mediators in Phase II, and compares them to advantages
cited by mediators and clients in Phase III. Mediators (8 in total) provided their observations through
interviews and in the Case Notes they submitted for each case. Clients who completed the survey (51 in
total) were invited to provide comments on the advantages of using ICTs for mediation. More than one
response was often provided by the mediators and clients alike.
Table 3-9
Advantages of Using ICTs
Advantage Observed in Phase II
30:
Number of Observations in Phase III
Mediators Clients
Improved access to mediation services, without the need for travel
8 29
More timely 4 12
More economical 2 13
More efficient 0 1
Promotes a less emotional, and more professional or businesslike atmosphere
5 2
More logistically convenient, for both parties and mediators 3 8
Enables participation in the comfort of home or familiar surroundings
2 7
Greater appeal of physical separation (e.g., some parties either preferred or could not be in the same room together)
1 9
Modeled or enabled distant communications outside of mediation, either between the parties or between the parties and their children
0 0
Text communications provided a record or a statement of positions/interests
0 0
Sources: Mediator Interviews and Case Notes; Client Survey
30
Getz, p. 30
30
These results affirm the observations of advantages seen in Phase II with the exceptions of the modeling
of distant communication and text communications providing a record (texting/instant messaging was
not used in Phase III). There also was a general concurrence between mediators and clients in the
advantages they cited, except that clients were more likely than
the mediators to note the advantage of being physically separate
from the other party.
Phase III mediators also cited new advantages that had not been
observed in Phase ll. Many of these advantages arise from the
use of the web-based platform, but also relate to the use of
telephone and email:
Web conferencing visuals provide cues or information to
the mediator and to parties about what is going on (8
comments);
Web conferencing visuals simulate a face-to-face experience, allowing clients to see each other
and convey emotions (3 comments);
Web conferencing allows document sharing (4 comments);
Web conferencing allows for communication on all “channels” (i.e. audio and visual) (2
comments);
Web conferencing allows the mediator and the parties to see themselves, allowing them to
learn about, and possibly adjust, their own reactions (1 comment);
Telephone allows parties to hear each other and speak directly to each other (5 comments);
Telephone is easy to use and familiar for everyone (4 comments);
Cell phones are mobile and allow participation from almost anywhere (1 comment);
Telephone promotes a business-like tone and can be useful when parties cannot easily “face”
each other (3 comments);
Email is easy to use, provides a quick and efficient way to communicate with parties (4
comments);
Email provides a written record between the mediator and parties (2 comments); and
ICTs are tools to be used when parties can’t be in the same room with each other, for any
reason (1 comment).
Clients also noted further advantages that had not been cited in Phase II:
Distance mediation is useful in situations where party safety is a concern (4 comments);
Use of technologies avoids travel and therefore provides environmental benefits (2 comments);
and
Mediating through ICTs eliminates the need to travel after mediation sessions, when the parties
could be in an emotional state (1 comment).
“In Phase II we had to work very hard to overcome the loss of visuals; in Phase III with the
visuals there was an “aha” – this can really work!”
- Mediator Interview
Comment
31
The Project Coordinator noted a number of ways that distance mediation may improve access to mediation. It may allow clients to access a mediator located in another community with whom they want to work (e.g., someone who has an expertise in a particular type of issue). Distance mediation also allows clients living in very small communities to maintain their privacy by not using the services of a local mediator (if there is one), or avoid conflicts of interest in situations where one party has a pre-existing, personal relationship with the only mediator in town. Finally, the Project Coordinator noted that some web conferencing platforms have closed captioning capability, or will provide a sign language interpreter, which may make distance mediation an option for clients with hearing disabilities.
B. Disadvantages
Phase II also identified a number of disadvantages of conducting mediations using ICTs. One of the
reasons that a third Phase of the pilot Project was implemented was to see if some of the disadvantages
observed in Phase II could be mitigated through the use of different
ICTs, practices and strategies. Many of the disadvantages observed in
Phase II seemingly arose because the telephone was the only
technology used to conduct mediations in all but one case. As the
results shown in the Table 3-10 indicate, many of the disadvantages of
using the telephone for distance mediation continued to be observed in
Phase III, though not always by all mediators.
Some Phase II disadvantages were overcome, or at least not
experienced by all mediators, in Phase III with the use of web conferencing. Web conferencing appears
to offer advantages over the telephone in the provision of non-verbal cues and improving the mediators’
ability to elicit a response, use figures and illustrations, control the emotional climate, achieve buy-in
and commitment, share documents, read personalities and address power imbalances.
Happily, no mediators were aware of technology-enabled harassment in this Phase and none noted
problems apportioning equal time to parties.
Mediators noted some strategies that they used in Phase III to mitigate some disadvantages31 seen in
Phase II:
Give parties timelines to work on to improve buy-in;
Use more charisma in communication with clients to make up for not being face-to-face with
them;
Do more checking in with clients, make more of a point of drawing people in; in short, use more
exaggerated strategies to keep people involved;
Normalize the process and build rapport with humor;
Call each party five minutes before the session and link them in to help them get onto the web
conferencing platform – if there is a problem they are already on the telephone;
31
Many strategies to mitigate the disadvantages of mediating at a distance are documented in the revised Practice Guidelines developed as part of the pilot project at the conclusion of Phase III. See Question 13 for further description of the Guidelines.
“I don’t feel that there are any disadvantages.”
- Client, Survey
Comment
32
Give clients a walk-through test run of web conferencing during the intake interview or set up
another five minute test if intake occurred by telephone; and
Research local resources if clients are located in another community; for example, contact the
Family Justice Counsellor in that community to obtain information about local resources.
Table 3-10
Disadvantages of Using ICTs
Disadvantage Observed in Phase II
32
Mediators’ Experience in Phase lll:
Web Conferencing Telephone
Reduced/absence of non-verbal cues Experienced by some, not by others
Experienced
More difficult to elicit a response from passive participant
Experienced by some, not by others
Experienced
Technology-enabled harassment (e.g., harassing phone calls or email)
Not experienced Not experienced
Slower to build rapport/trust Experienced by some, not by others
Experienced by some, not by others
Facilitated “drifting away”, or made it easier to avoid contact
Experienced by some, not by others
Experienced by some, not by others
Less direct knowledge of local resources/supports for distant parties
Experienced by some, not by others
Experienced by some, not by others
Limited ability to caucus with some platforms
Experienced by some, not by others
Experienced by some, not by others
In audio-only medium, no ability to note down figures or use illustrations
Not experienced Experienced
More difficult to handle emotional climate Not experienced Experienced by some, not by others
Less buy-in or commitment to process/solutions
Experienced by some, not by others.
Experienced
More challenging to apportion equal time to parties
Not experienced Not experienced
In some mediums, difficult and more time consuming to share required documentation
Not experienced Experienced
More difficult to read personality characteristics and address power imbalances
Experienced by some, not by others
Experienced
Source: Mediator Interviews and Case Notes
If web conferencing has some advantages over the telephone for conducting mediations, it also
introduces some new disadvantages that were not seen in Phase II, notably the potential for technical
32
Getz, p. 30
33
glitches or difficulties (noted by five mediators) and presenting a steep learning curve for the mediator
(one mediator).
Some disadvantages were noted with the use of email. For example, some parties did not accept the
boundaries for using email in the context of mediation and forwarded emails they had received from the
other party to the mediator. As well, the tone of an email message can be misread, and sometimes it
takes time for parties to respond to emails.
Disadvantages of cell phones were also noted by mediators. While cell phones permit a party to
participate from almost anywhere, this can be a disadvantage if they choose a location with distracting
background notice or a public location that does not provide sufficient privacy. Cell phone reception can
also cut out, and batteries die.
Clients were also asked to comment on disadvantages through the client survey. Eleven out of 51
clients (21%) who participated in the survey noted that they saw no disadvantages to using information
and communication technologies for mediation.
Other clients noted a range of potential or actual disadvantages
including:
Potential for technical glitches to disrupt the mediation (5
comments);
Lack of visual cues for telephone mediation (4 comments);
Parties and the mediator need to know how to use the
technology and be comfortable using it (4 comments);
Mediation through technology loses some of the richness of
a face-to-face encounter (4 comments);
Technology allows a party to “cut out” or avoid contact (2
comments); and
Potential for reduced confidentiality depending on the
setting (2 comments).
6. HOW DOES TECHNOLOGY-ASSISTED MEDIATION COMPARE WITH
OTHER APPROACHES WHEN DISTANCE IS A FACTOR?
In their regular mediation practice, Family Justice Counsellors33 often use a shuttle mediation process
when distance prevents parties from coming to a Family Justice Centre for in-person, joint mediation
sessions. (Shuttle mediation is also used for cases where safety concerns indicate the parties should not
engage in mediation together.) In shuttle mediation cases, the Family Justice Counsellor talks to one
party by telephone, and then conveys information from that call in a second, separate call to the other
33
One private mediator in the Project also uses the type of shuttle mediation described here.
“An internal evolution happens when persons meet
face-to-face; there is something more real and dynamic. It can be more
difficult in some ways, but it makes people face what is
happening”
- Client, Survey
Comment
34
party, and then vice versa, until the parties reach, or do not reach, agreement. In shuttle mediation of
this sort the Family Justice Counsellor does not engage with both parties on the same call. In contrast,
in distance mediations conducted within this Project, the mediators and both parties mediated together,
at the same time, connected by whatever ICT they had agreed to use34.
Family Justice Counsellors were asked to compare the effectiveness of distance mediation to that of
shuttle mediation. They were unanimous that joint meetings, conducted at a distance with technology,
are better, more effective and less time consuming than shuttle mediation. In particular they find the
role of speaking for the parties, of condensing, consolidating and then conveying the views of one party
to the other, to be challenging and draining. They are concerned that they may emphasize the wrong
things, or put an incorrect interpretation on what they have been told. They also feel that the message
loses its emotional impact when conveyed by the Family Justice Counsellor and sometimes the loss of
the emotional content makes it harder for the parties to gain an understanding of the other party’s
point of view.
Family Justice Counsellors commented that, in contrast to shuttle mediation, distance mediation allows
them to work with the parties simultaneously, facilitating their communication with each other. The
direct communication – parties actually speaking directly to each other – empowers them in the
mediation process, and promotes better buy-in regarding the mediation outcomes.
The Family Justice Counsellors were also asked if they had used technology-assisted mediation for
Project cases where they would have used shuttle mediation otherwise. They answered “yes”, for cases
where distance separates the parties or where it is difficult for them to be together in person, but “no”
for cases where family violence is a factor. In cases with violence, shuttle mediation would still be used
to prevent any contact – virtual or otherwise – between the parties during mediation.
7. HOW DOES TECHNOLOGY–ASSISTED MEDIATION COMPARE WITH
EXISTING DISPUTE RESOLUTION APPROACHES?
This evaluation question is considered in three parts. First, the settlement rates achieved in the Project
are compared to those achieved in other forms of family mediation. Second, mediators’ views of
technology-assisted mediation compared to traditional mediation are explored. Finally, client
satisfaction with their Project mediation is compared to their satisfaction with prior mediations they
have participated in.
34
In a very few Project cases, the mediator did change the format to something more akin to traditional shuttle mediation, due to scheduling difficulties or to manage inappropriate interactions between parties.
35
A. Settlement Rates
Project mediators recorded the outcome of each case on the Case Notes Form when the case
concluded. Outcomes could include agreement on all issues, agreement on some issues, no agreement,
or another outcome (such as case adjourned to allow parties to obtain independent legal advice). Full or
partial settlement may have resulted in a formal written agreement or Memorandum of Understanding
signed by both parties, or an informal agreement between them. Using this definition, full or partial
agreement was achieved in 39 out of the 46 cases where mediation occurred – a settlement rate of 85%.
In Phase II of the Project, settlement was achieved in 70% of the cases35.
It is tempting to consider attributing the increased settlement rate for Phase III to the use of a web-
based platform, which provides both audio and visual connections, to conduct many of the Project
mediations. Web-based platforms were not generally used in Phase II (only one case made use of audio-
visual conference technology), and the mediations were conducted using telephone. A closer
examination of the results for Phase III, however, indicates that the settlement rate for those cases using
telephone36 as the principle technology for the mediation stage was similar to the settlement rate where
web conferencing37 was the principle mediation technology: 80% vs. 88%. Given the low case numbers
involved, this difference between these settlement rates should not be considered indicative of an
actual difference in the success rates between the two technologies.
The Phase III settlement rate does compare well with settlement rates for other family mediations
where ICTs are typically not used. As cited in the Phase II report, the rate of agreement for Family
Justice Counsellor cases is approximately 75%38, and the rate for Family Mediation Practicum Program
was 71% for its fast-tracked cases39.
The settlement rates achieved in this Phase confirm the effectiveness of technology-assisted mediation.
The views of mediators and clients also confirm this finding.
35
Getz, p. 32 36
Includes cases that used telephone alone (16 cases) cell phones (1 case), telephone combined with email (1 case) and telephone combined with in-person (1 case). 37
Includes cases that used web conferencing alone (24 cases), web conferencing combined with email (1 case), web conferencing and cell phone (1 case) and web conferencing and telephone (1 case). 38
Based on results of a study by Focus Consultants, Assessment of Dispute Resolution Prevalence and Case Outcomes: Final Report, Victoria: Family Justice Services Division, BC Ministry of Attorney General, March 31, 2008, (unpublished). 39
Justice Services Branch, Evaluation 0f the Family Mediation Practicum Project, BC Ministry of Attorney General, June 2005. Under the practicum program families received mediation services at no charge if they participated in cases where mediators wishing to gain experience in family mediation provided service under the supervision of senior family mediators. (This was a program of the Mediate BC Society. Mediate BC Society has replaced the Family Mediation Practicum Program with the Regional Mentoring Program, currently in a pilot phase.)
36
B. Mediator Views
When mediators were asked to compare technology-assisted mediation with the traditional face-to-face
mediations they have conducted the past, they offered the following positive comments, with just a few
reservations:
Web conferencing is as close to face-to-face as possible. In some ways, web conferencing is
better than face-to-face because parties can’t speak over each other, as the platform doesn’t
allow it; they must speak one at a time.
Web conferencing compares favourably to face-to-face mediation and [this mediator] would
stay away from telephone as much as possible; however there will be times when the telephone
is necessary.
Distance mediation allows access to mediation for more
people, such as those who as can’t get away from work, don’t
feel comfortable being with the other party, and those who
live in remote locations.
Distance mediation allows parties to participate in mediation
from the comfort of their home.
Time zone differences can mean that everyone is participating
at different times of day (e.g., early morning, after work). This
could not happen in face-to-face mediation.
There is reduced emotional charge compared to being in the
same room.
Sometimes in distance mediation there is less commitment to
what was agreed to in previous sessions – maybe due to less
exchange of energy.
Distance mediations can take a bit more time than face-to-face mediations (3 comments).
Face-to-face mediations are generally conducted over the course of a single day (in this
mediator’s practice) but with distance mediation, there is usually more than one session with
email follow up. This gives the parties some time to reflect between mediation sessions.
Face-to-face offers greater opportunity and time for discussions about counselling and
mediation readiness.
Caucusing individually with clients during mediation is a bit more awkward with the
technologies used.
The mediator has to pay attention to a lot more things in distance mediation and this takes
greater concentration.
Because the mediator is able to see themselves on the web conferencing platform, he/she can
learn about their own reactions, which he/she would never have been able to do in face-to-face
mediation.
Other than difference in the medium, the mediator still does all the same things as with face-to-
face mediation – there are many similarities.
“Distance mediation compares favourably to face-to-face
mediation. In person it may be easier to get to the agreement, but it can be done at a distance
if there is an agreement to be had”
- Mediator, Interview
Comment
37
One mediator still prefers face-to-face mediation in some cases, perhaps due to her own
comfort level as she has greater experience with face-to-face.
It’s a bit easier to generate greater rapport in face-to-face situations, through things like the
small talk while walking to the office with the parties; sharing the same physical place with the
parties also helps.
Distance mediation compares favourably to face-to-face mediation.
Mediators were also asked whether they found it as easy to achieve agreement between the parties
using ICTs as it is with face-to-face mediation. Five mediators felt that the level of difficulty was about
the same using either approach. One felt that it was easy to get an informal agreement, but perhaps
more challenging to get the parties to send a signed agreement back. Another agreed that the parties’
commitment could be a bit less, but in the end the two approaches produced similar results.
Mediators recorded the time for each case on the Case Notes forms. On average, mediators spent 4.0
hours in mediation sessions and an additional 3.2 hours on non-mediation activities per case. For most
cases (72%) mediators felt that the mediation time was about the same as it would have been in
traditional mediation; 18% felt that the time was longer by 1 to 2 hours. Comments regarding the
amount of non-mediation time were recorded for only 13 cases. For those cases, mediators felt that
about the same amount of time was spent in non-mediation activities in 18% of cases, while the time
was felt to be 1 to 2 hours longer in 63% of cases, and 3 to 5 hours longer in 19% of cases.
C. Client Views
In the client survey, clients were asked to indicate whether they had participated in another mediation
prior to the Project mediation that they were involved in. Eighteen (35%) of those responding to the
survey indicated that they had prior experience with mediation. Another question asked this group to
compare their satisfaction with the Project mediation to their satisfaction with the other mediation(s) in
which they had participated. Fourteen (78%) indicated that their satisfaction the Project mediation
compared “favourably” or “very favourably” to their prior mediation experience.
8. CAN THE BROADER BENEFITS OF MEDIATION BE REALIZED WHEN
ICTS ARE USED TO CONDUCT MEDIATIONS?
In addition to potentially resolving disputes, the mediation process is often credited with creating
further benefits for the parties involved, such as developing conflict resolution skills and communication
skills that can be used after the mediation concludes. This evaluation did not attempt to directly test
whether these benefits had in fact developed. Rather, we asked mediators about their impressions of
the potential for broader benefits to arise from distance mediation, and we asked clients about
improvements in communication skills resulting from mediation.
38
A. Mediator Views of Broader Benefits
During interviews at the conclusion of the Project, mediators were asked if they believed that broader
benefits are as likely to result from technology assisted mediation as from face-to-face mediation.
Mediator views were varied, with the private sector mediators being less inclined to believe that
broader benefits accrue even in face-to-face mediations, because the time spent in mediation is simply
too short to overcome a history of poor communication.
Family Justice Counsellors were more likely to expect that broader benefits could develop in mediation
generally, and in distance mediation specifically, particularly when using a web-based platform. One
mediator pointed out that the ability of clients to see themselves on screen can be educational and
transformative. In one case a party said she had observed her own behaviour through the visuals on the
web conferencing platform and decided that she didn’t like what she saw. She resolved to adopt a more
open and reasonable attitude in further mediation sessions. However, in another case, a mediator
specifically noted that the use of the teleconference medium limited the opportunities for working with
the parties to improve communications between them.
B. Improved Communication among Parties
Clients who responded to the client survey were asked, “Did you
learn better ways to communicate with your former spouse as a
result of participating in mediation?” Thirteen (25%) said “yes”,
and 17 (33% said “somewhat”; only two (4%) answered “no”.
These results are an improvement over those from Phase II, where
only 8% answered “yes”, 54% said “somewhat”, while 33% said
“no”. It is possible that the greater use of web-based platforms
that provide visual feedback in Phase III led more clients to feel that
they had learned better ways to communicate with their former
spouses.
Survey respondents were also invited to provide comments in response to this question. Three clients
indicated that they already had good communication with their former spouse while three felt that their
former spouse was uncooperative and unwilling to communicate during the mediation. Another two
commented specifically that they had learned better communication skills through the mediation
process.
“Our mediator was successful with teaching
us techniques to communicate effectively”
- Client, Survey
Comment
39
9. ARE THE PARTIES GENERALLY SATISFIED WITH THEIR
EXPERIENCE IN MEDIATION WITH ICTS?
This evaluation question focusses on the clients’ experience in two ways. First, it considers the clients’
satisfaction with the mediation provided through the Project as a process for resolving disputes.
Second, this question considers the clients’ experience with using ICTs during for mediation.
A. Client Satisfaction with Mediation
In both Phases II and III, the client survey created for the evaluation asked clients how satisfied they
were with the mediation process and outcomes, apart from their views on the ICTs used to conduct
mediation.
When asked how satisfied they were with the outcome or result of their mediation, 59% of the Phase III
clients who gave a rating40 were satisfied or very satisfied, similar to the 52% reported for Phase II41.
Clients were asked to rate their satisfaction with the mediation process, apart from their impressions of
the mediation outcome. Of the 51 clients who responded in Phase III, 36 (70%) were satisfied or very
satisfied; this compares to 76% in Phase II.
Clients were also asked whether they felt that they had been fully able to express their thoughts,
feelings and concerns during mediation. In Phase III, 34 (67%) said “yes” to this question, while 14
(27%) said “somewhat” and 4 (8%) said “no”. In Phase II, 80% of clients answered “yes”42.
Clients were also invited to provide comments for this last item. One respondent who had answered
“no” to this question commented that she had expressed her thoughts to the mediator, but felt that
nothing was getting through to the other party. Three other comments expressed some reservations;
for example, “I knew I could not share my thoughts but that was due to [the other party’s] personality,
not due to the process” or “It seemed more about pushing for an agreement…part of each mediation
session should include feed-back about how each is feeling about what is said.” The remaining four
comments were positive; for example, “Our mediator provided a good environment that encouraged
me to express my thoughts and feelings throughout the process” and “I felt comfortable enough with
the process and mediator to communicate fully”.
40
Ratings were provided by 44 respondents. 41
Getz, p. 20 42
Ibid. Breakdown of the other response categories was not reported for Phase II.
40
B. Client Satisfaction with ICTs in Mediation
The client survey asked clients to comment on the ICTs that they had experience with prior to
participating in the Project, the technologies that they used during their discussions with mediators and
in mediation, and their satisfaction with those technologies.
The question about prior use of ICTs revealed a surprisingly high degree of experience with ICTs among
the clients who responded to the survey. Nearly all had prior experience with email, and just over half
had participated in teleconferences. Regarding web-based platforms, two thirds had experience with
Skype and nearly 20% had prior experience with WebEx. See Table 3-11.
Table 3-11
ICTs used by Clients before the Project
ICTs that Clients had Used Prior to the Project:
Number of Responses
% of
Respondents
E-mail 50 98%
Teleconferencing 29 57%
WebEx Meeting Centre 10 20%
Skype 34 67%
Other ICTs43
5 10%
Total 51 Source: Client Survey
Clients who responded to the survey reported which ICTs they had used in their discussions and/or
mediations sessions with their mediator (more than one response was permitted). Telephone and email
were the most used ICTs, followed by web conferencing. As more than one response was permitted, the
percentages sum to over 100%:
43
Other ICTs that clients had used prior to the Project include: Live Meeting, FaceTime, and GoToMeeting.
41
Table 3-12
ICTs used in discussions and mediations reported in Client Survey
Technologies Used:
Number of Responses
% of
Respondents
Dedicated (or landline) telephone 30 61%
Cell phone 16 33%
Teleconferencing 8 16%
Email 31 63%
Web conferencing 27 55%
Other 3 6%
Total clients responding 49 Source: Client Survey
Clients were asked to rate the technologies they used in mediation in terms of how easy they were to
use. Most (84%) found the technologies to be easy or very easy to use:
Table 3-13
Client ratings of ICTs: Ease of Use
ICTs: Ease of Use
Number of Responses
% of
Responses
1 (very hard to use)44
1 2%
2 0 0%
3 5 10%
4 14 27%
5 (very easy to use) 29 57%
Don't Know 2 4%
Total 51 100% Source: Client Survey
The reliability of the ICTs used was given slightly less positive ratings, with 70% giving better than a
neutral rating. Just over a quarter gave the ICTs’ reliability a neutral rating or less:
44
This response was given by a client who reported using only web conferencing.
42
Table 3-14
Client ratings of ICTs: Reliability
ICTs: Reliability
Number of
Response(s)
% of
Responses
1 (very unreliable) 2 4%
2 3 6%
3 8 16%
4 15 29%
5 (very reliable) 21 41%
Don't Know 2 4%
Total 51 100% Source: Client Survey
Another survey question asked if the client had experienced any difficulties in their discussions and/or
mediation sessions because of the ICTs they used. Fifty-three percent had not experienced difficulties,
but 45% had45. Clients described the difficulties as:
Equipment problems – computer, microphone or webcam
malfunction; connection failure; audio problems or volume
issues (11 comments; 5 noted that they were easily
resolved or that they found a workaround, such as using
the telephone for audio);
Platform problems – trouble downloading the web
conferencing software; the platform would not load; the
platform caused computer or visuals to freeze; trouble
connecting to the platform (6 comments; 2 noted that
issues were resolved or a workaround found); and
Situational problems – both parties in the same location created feedback and delay; client not
at home and unable to call the mediator; too much background noise; one party simply not
comfortable with using technology (4 comments).
Despite the fact that some difficulty was reported by nearly half of the survey respondents, clients
remained generally satisfied with the technologies they used; 86% found the technologies to be
satisfactory or very satisfactory overall (see Table 3-15).
45
2% did not know if they had difficulties.
“We are at the mercy of 3 people’s internet
connections and other hardware”
- Client, Survey
Comment
43
Table 3-15
Client ratings of ICTs: Overall Satisfaction
ICTs: Overall Satisfaction
Number of
Response(s)
% of
Responses
1 (very unsatisfactory) 1 2%
2 1 2%
3 2 4%
4 16 31%
5 (very satisfactory) 28 55%
Don't Know 3 6%
Total 51 100% Source: Client Survey
An open-ended question invited survey respondents to comment on the strengths and weaknesses they
observed in their mediator’s ability to manage discussions using technology. Clients who completed this
question expressed a range of views including that:
Technology had no impact on the discussions (3 comments);
Technology created some minor issues or detracted from the mediation – for example, the use
of telephone meant that the parties could not see facial expressions and body language; the
mediator was learning how to use the technology with them, or didn’t know how to deal with
minor technical issues (6 comments);
The mediator handled the technology competently (3 comments); and
The technology improved the mediation by making the mediation easier to manage (compared
to in person), allowing the mediator to be a bit removed from the personal dynamics between
the parties (noted as a strength) (3 comments).
In one case, a party noted that they participated via telephone while the other party participated in
person with the mediator; in their view, this created an unequal situation as the client could not see the
mediator and was lacking visual cues that the other party could see.
C. Overall Satisfaction
An indication of the clients’ overall satisfaction with distance mediation is whether they would use it
again and whether they would recommend it to others. In response to the question, “If another issue
arose, would you choose a distance mediation process for help in resolving it?” nearly three quarters
(73%) said “yes” while only 10% said that they would prefer in-person mediation. In Phase II, 80% had
44
answered “yes”46. When asked if they would recommend that others choose a distance mediation
process for help in resolving an issue, 90% said “yes” compared to 84% in Phase II47.
Table 3-16
Responses to “If another issue arose, would you choose a distance mediation process for help in resolving it?”
Number of
Response(s)
% of
Responses
Yes 37 73%
No, I would prefer an in-person mediation process, if possible 5 10%
No, I would not choose mediation of any kind 1 2%
Don't Know 8 16%
Total 51 100% Source: Client Survey
10. ARE PROJECT MEDIATORS GENERALLY SATISFIED WITH THEIR
EXPERIENCE WITH ICTS IN MEDIATION?
This section reports on the mediators’ views regarding how easy to use, reliable and effective different
ICTs are. It also reports on mediators’ overall level of satisfaction with using ICTs in mediation.
A. Ease of Use, Reliability and Effectiveness of ICTs
Mediators were asked to rate each ICT they used regarding its ease of use, technical reliability and
overall effectiveness. They did this using a 1 to 5 scale, with 1 = “very poor”, and 5 = “excellent”.
Mediators gave a rating to each ICT used for each stage, of each case, they conducted. The following
table reports the average ratings given across all stages of mediation and all cases, for telephone, email,
web conferencing and cell phone48.
46
Getz, p. 21 47
Getz, p. 21 48
The use of computer based video conferencing and the combinations of web conferencing, telephone and email had too few ratings to be reported reliably.
45
Table 3-17
Mediator Ratings of ICT Ease of Use, Reliability and Effectiveness
ICT Used:
Number of ratings
Average Rating
Ease of Use Reliability Effectiveness
Telephone 128 4.8 4.3 4.1
Email 47 5.1 4.8 4.4
Web conferencing 82 4.7 4.3 4.6
Cell phone 23 5.0 4.9 4.8 Source: Mediator Case Notes Form data
Overall, all of the ICTs received high ratings from the mediators for their ease of use, including the web
conferencing platform, which was the least familiar of the ICTs that the mediators used. Ratings for
technical reliably were slightly lower than for ease of use, but still very high, with the highest ratings for
cell phones. Effectiveness ratings were moderately high, though slightly lower than the ratings for ease
of use and reliability.
During interviews, mediators were asked to comment on email and web conferencing in particular,
regarding their ease of use for both themselves and for clients, their reliability and their effectiveness.
Mediators found email easy to use, though one mediator commented that care was needed to
ensure that information was shared equally between the parties, and that both parties are
copied on answers to questions. Mediators also indicated that, for the most part, clients are
comfortable with email. One mediator noted that it sometimes took a long time for parties to
respond to emails and speculated that the clients may not be as used to communicating via
email as mediators are. Mediators also found email to be technically reliable and without
glitches, except for the possibility of using an incorrect email address.
Regarding the effectiveness of email, several mediators noted that it is best used for setting up
appointments and sending documents. As one Family Justice Counsellor put it, email is “good
for cutting down on telephone tag”. FJSD does not allow dialogue with clients via email, and
Family Justice Counsellors cannot, for example, answer questions using email. One Family
Justice Counsellor found that some clients would try to engage in dialogue via email and she had
to remind them that she could not do this.
Private mediators described using email in more situations – to answer questions and for
sending summaries of parties’ positions to them between mediation sessions – and found email
to be an effective tool.
46
Web conferencing
Most of the mediators found the web conferencing platform easy to use once they had learned
the functions. One commented that web conferencing can be a challenge for the convener (i.e.,
mediator) until everyone is into the site. Another commented they used the telephone in
conjunction with the web platform if there were audio issues or if the clients had trouble with
their microphones. Another found the platform to be relatively easy but not wholly intuitive
and found setting up meetings, and the methods to protect privacy of the users, a bit awkward.
The mediators commented that most of the clients had no trouble with web conferencing and
were comfortable with the platform. The mediators emailed the clients a link for signing in and
most had no difficulty getting onto the platform. Sometimes the mediators gave the clients a
walk-through of the system to orient them to its features. As well, the Project Coordinator had
prepared a set of written instructions for clients which mediators could provide and these were
helpful. However, a few clients experienced difficulties with connecting to the program, or had
trouble with feedback and echo when using laptops, or their computer lacked speakers.
Reverting to telephone for audio was a useful back-up strategy if this occurred. WebEx’s Client
Support provided assistance in at least one case, which was very helpful.
For the most part, mediators found web conferencing to be technically reliable as well, with few
glitches. Problems such as freezing screens, or cutting out of the audio, or visuals appearing
upside down, were very infrequent. One mediator had a problem using child support
calculation software on the platform desktop but quickly resolved it through trial and error.
Positive comments included good sound quality and not being cut off if the mediation exceeded
the scheduled end time.
Most of the mediators found web conferencing to be a very effective way to conduct mediation:
Two commented how quickly they and the clients adapted to the platform and soon
didn’t notice that it was there;
Some commented that the visuals of web conferencing made it as close to a face-to-
face situation as possible, though one mediator remains of two minds regarding the
value of the visuals as he is quite comfortable with using conference calls for mediation;
Others remained enthusiastic about the visuals of the web platform – they could see
both parties, and the parties could see each other. The visuals provided important
information about the clients’ reactions to the mediation proceedings;
Two noted that having the visuals also helped them to concentrate, with less chance of
drifting away; and
The mediator can also see himself/herself – which allowed them to see the cues that
they themselves were giving to clients.
47
The web conferencing platform was also regarded as an excellent way to share documents
during mediation, allowing the mediators to upload calendars for children’s times, or go to the
web for information.
One of the ways in which web conferencing was not ideal for mediation in this Phase was that
the particular version of the platform used did not allow breakout sessions for caucusing
individually with the parties49. Additionally, one mediator commented that the audio is voice
activated so the camera shifts to whoever is speaking; the mediator who noted this would
prefer that the mediator control the camera.
B. Overall Satisfaction
During the evaluation interviews, the mediators were asked to rate their overall level of satisfaction with
their experience of using ICTs in mediation in Phase III. Six out of eight gave a rating of “highly
satisfied”. Two mediators rated their satisfaction slightly below ‘highly satisfied”, more akin to “quite
satisfied”. These mediators have a few reservations and see room for improvement in a few areas.
Overall though, the mediators were enthusiastic in particular about the innovation, functionality and
improvements that web conferencing had provided in this Phase. They were gratified to learn through
their own experience that effective mediation can be provided at a high standard with the use of a web-
based ICT.
11. DO PROJECT TOOLS SUPPORT COMPETENT, SAFE AND
APPROPRIATE METHODS OF TECHNOLOGY-ASSISTED FAMILY
MEDIATION?
During Phase III of the Distance Family Mediation Project, a number of tools were developed or
provided to support the Project mediators in their distance mediation practice. These tools included:
Practice Guidelines50, developed and published at the conclusion of Phase II, that detailed the
lessons learned in that Phase and resulting distance mediation practice suggestions;
Phase III Project Map;
Tips on Video and Web Conferencing;
Inquiry/Intake form for the Mediation Advisor and Family Justice Counsellors’ use;
Process flow charts outlining procedures and timelines for submitting documentation;
Agreement to Mediate template, specifically designed for use in the Distance Family Mediation
Project;
Instructions and guidelines for the use of the various web conferencing platform features51;
49
Other web conferencing platforms, and other versions of the platform used, do have a breakout feature. 50
Mediate BC Society, ““Mediating from a Distance: Suggested Practice Guidelines for Family Mediators”, 2010.
48
FJSD policy document, focussing on policies relevant to the Project52;
Information bulletin outlining the difference between a formal agreement and a Memorandum
of Understanding, for use with clients;
Email templates for invitations to meetings and mediation via web conferencing; and
A Project wiki that housed pages on safety screening, articles on online dispute resolution and
other related resources for the mediators.
Mediators were asked whether they referred to the Practice Guidelines in particular throughout their
cases in Phase III. About half of the mediators commented that they referred to the Guidelines
throughout the Project, while the others referred to them mainly at the start of Phase III. A few
commented that the training they received, and the support provided by the Project Coordinator, really
replaced the need to refer to a written set of Practice Guidelines53. All found the Guidelines to be well
written and helpful to have on hand.
Project mediators were also asked what additional tool and materials, beyond written Practice
Guidelines, would be useful for mediators undertaking technology-assisted mediation. They mentioned
several items that were provided in this Phase:
Hands-on technical support;
Distance Mediation Practice Group to share experiences, best practices and ideas for
overcoming problems;
Instructions on how to use the technology, for the mediator’s use;
Practical examples of using the technology (scenarios); and
Instructions for the technology that can be sent to clients.
A common theme in the comments was the important role played by the Project’s regular team
meetings. As one mediator put it, “this is when real learning occurred” and prompted the suggestion
above regarding Practice Groups. See Question 22 for further discussion of team meetings.
51
Produced by the Project Coordinator and FJSD Liaison: “How to Join a Meeting (for clients)”, “How to Customize a WebEx Initiation”, “How and When to Share your Desktop, Files and Applications”, “How and When to Grant Client Privileges and Controls” and “WebEx Functionality and Ways We Can Use it”. Mediators were also provided with WebEx User Guides and information about accessing WebEx’s knowledge base and other resources. 52
“Distance Mediation Project - Family Justice Services Division Policy Considerations, Project Decisions and Best Practices”, Family Justice Services Division, Ministry of Justice, October 2011, unpublished. 53
See Question 18 for further comments about the role the Project Coordinator played in this Phase.
49
12. WHAT ADDED SKILLS OR TRAINING SHOULD MEDIATORS
ACQUIRE?
Five of the eight Phase III mediators had experience with distance mediation gained through their
participation in Phase II of the Project. In the view of the Project Coordinator, much of the learning from
Phase II transferred from the experienced distance mediators to the new members of the team through
their interactions in team meetings. The base of experience gained in Phase II meant that training for
Phase III was more focussed than it would have been for mediators completely new to distance
mediation.
To prepare for Phase III all the Project mediators attended online presentations/training sessions
presented by the Project Coordinator and others, in the following areas54:
Session 1: General Orientation
Session 2: ICTs for Conducting Mediation
Session 3: ICT Training: One-on-one session with the Project Coordinator
Session 4: Applying the Standards of Conduct (documenting agreements, recommending
independent legal advice, limiting practice to areas where trained, screening for safety and
capacity)
Session 5: Screening for Safety and Capacity
Session 6: Practice Guidelines for Distance Mediation
Numerous additional one-on-one practice sessions with the
Project Coordinator were also held.
Mediators were asked to comment on the skills and training that a
mediator should have in order to conduct mediation using ICTs in
a safe and appropriate way. The Project team also participated in
a Think Tank at the end of the Project during which the team
discussed a number of training questions.
A consistent theme in the Project mediators’ comments was that
mediators should be seasoned, experienced and comfortable with
conducting in-person mediations before they move into providing
technology-assisted mediations. Reasons given for this included:
54
“Phase 3 of the Distance Family Mediation Project – Syllabus for Project Team Preparation Sessions”, Mediate BC Society, February 2011, unpublished.
“My fear is that novices will see this as a marketing tool
and a place to “get their feet wet safely” - that it is not!”
- Mediator, Interview
Comment
50
With the addition of technology there is much for the mediator to pay attention to. Experience
with in-person mediations will allow the mediator to manage the added technology layers more
comfortably;
Different physical arrangements of the parties – for example, together but in a location distant
from the mediator – give rise to added concerns regarding safety. Judgment and experience will
help the mediator weigh such issues as they arise;
Mediators need to have confidence in their judgement in order to deal with unexpected issues
that arise at a distance;
Because cues from clients are somewhat reduced when using ICTs, mediators need experience
in tuning in to client emotions; and
Learning how to handle a mediation and technology at the same time would be very stressful.
The concern that distance mediation not be offered by inexperienced mediators led some to the
thought that creating a special distance mediation roster (for private practice mediators), with
experience and training requirements, would be a way to provide potential clients with a pool of skilled
and experienced distance mediators to choose from.
Additional suggestions, regarding the skills that distance mediators should have, included:
Comfort with, and a thorough understanding of, the being used so that the technology doesn’t
“get in the way” during mediation;
The ability to conduct an in-depth client assessment, as distance may make it more difficult to
pick up on subtle client cues about violence and/or capacity issues;
Multi-tasking skills;
An ability to teach others (i.e., clients) how to use technology; and
Flexibility and an ability to deal on the spot with the unexpected, particularly as the mediator
does not have the same degree of control over the mediation environment at the clients’ end,
as they do in in-person mediation.
Topics for distance mediation training that were suggested include:
The principles of mediating at a distance that would apply regardless of the platform used –
including topics such as how to put others at ease using technology, how to engage clients and
develop rapport, and how to address cultural differences, at a distance;
Specifically, how to screen for violence and capacity issues at a distance;
Training on mediation with different categories of technology (e.g., telephone, web based);
Training on the use, functions and applications of specific technologies and platforms in distance
mediation; and
Mock mediation sessions on the selected platforms, to walk through each part of a mediation
session using the technology.
51
13. WHAT ARE THE PRIMARY LESSONS LEARNED REGARDING THE
USE OF ICTS IN FAMILY MEDIATION?
As part of the evaluation of Phase II of the Project, mediators were asked what primary lessons they had
learned about the competent, safe and appropriate use of ICTs in family mediation. For the evaluation
of Phase III, mediators, the FJSD Liaison and Project Coordinator were asked to review the primary
lessons for Phase II and comment on whether they held true in Phase III. Results comparing Phase II and
Phase III are shown in Table 3-18. For the most part, those interviewed agreed that the lessons learned
remained the same in both Phases, though they had some comments and ideas to add.
Those interviewed suggested three more key lessons learned from Phase III:
A picture is worth a thousand words: The visual component provided by web conferencing makes
distance mediation much more effective – in many cases – than if provided by telephone alone;
Pick up the telephone: There is still a place for telephone in distance mediation – when it is the only
technology available that all are comfortable with, and in situations where even the visual presence,
if not the physical presence, of the other party can cause distress or intimidation for a participant;
and
Mediator, be flexible!: Distance mediators need to be prepared to learn new things and be ready to
address the unexpected.
A key output of Phase III was the development of a revised version of the Practice Guidelines55, originally
developed at the conclusion of Phase II. The revised version incorporates many new suggestions
regarding the use of web conferencing technologies in distance mediation, and includes a checklist for
mediators to assess their on-screen presence in video and web conferencing mediations. The revised
Practice Guidelines contains a wealth of detailed information that is not repeated here, regarding the
learnings of Project mediators during Phase III, and can be accessed on Mediate BC’s website at:
http://mediatebc.com/About-Us/News/Just-Released!-Second-Edition-of--Mediating-from-a.aspx .
55
“Mediating from a Distance: Suggested Practice Guidelines for Family Mediators”, Second Edition, Mediate BC Society, Vancouver, British Columbia, November 2012.
52
Table 3-18
Lessons Learned in Phase II and Phase III
Phase II Lesson Learned Phase III Comments
1. The walls have ears — ensure that the parties are alone, and that they aren’t recording a session.
This remains true. Added comment:
It can be difficult at a distance to enforce conditions in the client’s home space, for example, that children are not nearby. These requirements need to be clearly spelled out.
2. Take time to build trust — building rapport and trust can take more time when using an ICT, but it is worth the effort; some level of trust must be present, not only between the mediator and the parties, but also between the parties.
This remains true. Added comments:
The technology used makes a difference – it is easier to build rapport using web conferencing than by telephone alone
If meeting by phone alone you may never really build that rapport
Different rapport building skills are needed when using the telephone instead of meeting in person, e.g., more verbal skills
3. Keep it real — the power of authenticity, and the necessity of it, is magnified when using an ICT; remember that the parties may have a more difficult time correctly understanding and interpreting what you say when they’ve never met you.
This remains true. Added comments:
For some cultures, the concept of keeping it real may not be part of the strategy used in mediation and negotiation.
4. Plan alone time — as caucusing can be more difficult in distance mediation, think through how to conduct a caucus meeting and discuss your methods with the parties in advance.
This remains true.
5. Always have a plan B — in case the technology fails, always have a back up modality that will suffice in its place; ensure that the parties know what “plan B” is.
This remains true. Added comment:
Have an alternative plan ready for each session.
It is not enough to have the plan; you must also be prepared, and remember, to use it.
6. Pitch to the lowest common denominator — choose the technology with which the least technically-oriented person is most comfortable.
This remains true. Added comment:
But don’t be opposed to introducing a new technology as some parties may feel comfortable after trying it out.
53
Phase II Lesson Learned (continued) Phase III Comments (continued)
7. Mediator, know thy equipment! — don’t let an ICT detract too much from the issues; if not totally up to speed on the technology, a mediator’s focus can get divided or taken away; as one mediator commented, “technology has its own interests, and it can be a very demanding party!”
This remains true. Added comment:
Also know how to troubleshoot simple technical issues for the clients, such as ensuring they have their microphones and webcam turned on, or are selecting the right link.
8. Mediator, know thyself! — as a mediator, it’s important to know what you’re comfortable with in using different techniques and technologies; reflect on who you are as a mediator, and what you bring to the distance mediation process.
This remains true. Added comments:
Establish and keep to boundaries for helping the parties technically, for example, stay away from reconfiguring their computers
Source: Getz Phase II Evaluation report, p. 25; Phase III Project Team interviews
SUMMARY
The following are the key findings with respect to the evaluation of Objective One:
Phase III of the Project received 153 inquiries which resulted in 46 completed mediation cases.
Many potential cases did not proceed because the parties were not interested in mediation,
declined the service, pursued other means to resolve their issues or failed to attend
appointments.
Landline telephones, cell phones, web conferencing and email were used in Phase III cases.
Because web conferencing provides real time visual contact between distant parties it has a
marked positive impact on the qualitative experience of distance mediation, especially when
compared to the audio-only experience of telephone.
Mediators found assessing safety issues at a distance to be effective for all of the technologies
used though a preference for video-enabled technologies was noted.
Mediators commented that email is particularly useful for handling the logistics of a case, while
web conferencing is best suited for use in the mediation sessions, initial interviews and safety
screening.
54
Mediators indicated that cases more suited to distance mediation include cases where the
parties are both comfortable with technology; low conflict cases, because they are generally
easier and any added complexity due to the technology is not a big concern; and, conversely
high conflict cases, as there is less emotional charge if the parties are not together in the same
room. The client survey lends support to the particular usefulness of distance mediation in high
conflict cases.
Cases which may not be as well suited to technology-assisted mediation include those with
more than two parties, cases where the issues are more emotional than legal, volatile family
violence, cases that are unsuited for mediation in general, and complex cases involving
numerous participants and the exchange of many lengthy documents.
Most of the advantages of distance mediation identified in Phase II – improved access to service,
efficiency and convenience – were again noted in Phase III. Additional advantages identified in
this Phase focussed on the plusses afforded by the ICTs used – the face-to-face simulation of
web conferencing, the ease of use and the creation of a business-like tone with the telephone.
Fewer disadvantages were cited in Phase III, particularly because the use of web conferencing in
some cases overcame some of the limitations of an audio only ICT. Mediators employed a
variety of strategies to overcome the disadvantages that remained.
Project mediators felt that distance mediation compares favourably to traditional face-to-face
mediations, a view shared by close to 80% of the client survey respondents who had had
previous experience with mediation.
The project achieved an overall settlement rate (full or partial settlement of all case issues) in
85% of the cases.
Just over half the client survey respondents indicated that they had learned better ways to
communicate with their former spouse through distance mediation, at least to some degree.
Family Justice Counsellors were unanimous that joint mediation sessions, conducted at a
distance with technology, are better, more effective and less time consuming than shuttle
mediation.
Between 60% and 70% of the client survey respondents were satisfied or very satisfied with the
mediation process, outcomes and their ability to speak freely and openly during mediation.
They also gave positive ratings of reliability, effectiveness and ease of use of the ICTs used in
their mediations. These views were echoed by the mediators, who also gave positive reviews to
the ICTs; they were particularly positive about the effectiveness of web conferencing to conduct
mediation.
55
Mediators gave positive reviews of the training and tools they were given to use in the Project,
and were in general agreement that distance mediation should only be conducted by
experienced family mediators.
All of the “lessons learned” in Phase II were confirmed in Phase III, and new lessons regarding
the use of web conferencing and the telephone as tools for distance mediation were identified.
56
Chapter Four: Improved Effectiveness and
Access to Mediation
INTRODUCTION
This Chapter reviews the results for six evaluation questions related to the second objective of the
Project, which is:
“To improve the effectiveness and accessibility of mediation for all British Columbian families by
making distance mediation available province-wide and offering a support structure and
services through the Society.”
One focus of this objective is improving access to mediation through the expansion of services
throughout the province – including to larger communities and major urban areas – in Phase III. The
first evaluation question related to this objective addresses the demographic profile of Project clients
and allows for an assessment of whether, in fact, a wider segment of the population accessed Project
services in this Phase than in Phase II. A second question explores the factors that encouraged or
discouraged client decisions to use technology-assisted mediation services, and the selection of
particular technologies for the cases conducted in the Project. These aspects are examined because
access to technologies may have impacted potential clients’ ability and willingness to participate in
distance mediation.
Objective Two also focusses on the role of supports and services provided during the Project, and how
they serve to increase the provision and effectiveness of distance mediation services to families with
issues to be resolved. Findings and results for the following evaluation questions are addressed in this
Chapter:
14. What is the demographic profile of the Project’s clientele?
15. What factors appear to encourage, or barriers prevent, parties’ use of technology-assisted
mediation services?
16. What influences the selection of particular ICTs?
17. In what ways does the Mediation Advisor role support the provision of distance mediation?
18. In what ways does the Project Coordinator role support the provision of distance mediation?
57
19. Do mediators or clients identify other supports that would be helpful to build into a distance
mediation service model?
14. WHAT IS THE DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF THE PROJECT’S
CLIENTELE?
Demographic information was collected for most of the parties who participated in Phase III cases,
including their location, age and broad income level. While Phase II sought clients from remote and
rural British Columbian communities, Phase III accepted cases where at least one party lived anywhere
in British Columbia, without restriction regarding the size of community. This section compares the
demographic profile of Phase II and III clients, and also compares the Phase III client profile to that of
British Columbia generally.
A. Location
In Phase II, 93% of clients resided in British Columbia56. In Phase III, 81 (86%) clients resided in British
Columbia, 10 (11%) resided elsewhere in Canada, 1 (1%) resided in the United States, and 2 (2%) resided
in other countries.
With the relaxation of “remote and rural” residency requirement, Phase III saw a large shift of the client
base away from smaller communities. Of the 81 Phase III clients residing in British Columbia, only 18
(22%) came from small communities (under 10,000 population); in Phase II, 83%57 of Project clients
came from communities under 10,000 population.
As Table 4-1 indicates, Phase III clients from British Columbia still tended to come from small and
medium sized communities in greater numbers than the overall distribution of the BC population might
suggest. Relative to the BC population as a whole, large centres are underrepresented in the Phase III
client base. This is not a surprising result – in the client survey, about half of the respondents indicated
that they would have had to seek assistance from resources outside their community if they had not
participated in the Project (see question 15). This suggests that part of the appeal of distance mediation
is overcoming the lack of resources available in smaller communities, and thus, the Project continued to
attract clients from these locations.
56
Three parties resided out of province. Getz, p. 15 57
Getz, p. 15. This percentage is based on a total number of clients that includes the 3 from out of province.
58
Table 4-1
Location of Project Clients and BC Population by Size of Community
Community Size
Project Clients in BC % of BC
Population Number of
Clients
Percentage
Rural area 5 6% 12%
Small (under 10,000) 11 14% 7%
Medium (10,000 – 100,000) 40 51% 32%
Large (over 100,000) 23 29% 49%
Total 79 100% 100% Sources: Inquiry Sheets; BC Stats, British Columbia Development Region, Regional District and Municipal
Population Estimates 2006-2011
The distribution of Phase III clients by region is compared to that of the British Columbia population
overall in Table 4-2. Relative to the overall population, the Vancouver Island/Coast region was
overrepresented among the Project’s clients, while the representation of Thompson/Okanagan,
Kootenay and Northeast regions was close to that of the overall provincial population. All other regions,
including the Mainland/Southwest were underrepresented among the clients.
Table 4-2
Location of Project Clients and BC Population by Development Region
Development Region
Project Clients in BC % of BC
Population Number of
Clients
Percentage
Vancouver Island/Coast 29 36% 17%
Mainland/Southwest 34 42% 60%
Thompson/Okanagan 12 15% 12%
Kootenay 3 4% 3%
Cariboo 0 0% 4%
North Coast 0 0% 1%
Nechako 0 0% 1%
Northeast 1 1% 2%
Total 79 100% 100% Sources: Inquiry Sheets; BC Stats, British Columbia Development Region, Regional District and Municipal
Population Estimates 2006-2011
59
Again, it is possible that the underrepresentation of the Mainland/Southwest region is due to the ready
availability of resources in the major urban area of the province. The underrepresentation of the more
rural areas of the province – the Cariboo, North Coast and Nechako regions – may simply be a reflection
of the low populations there generally. Certainly Project records indicate that services were promoted
throughout all areas of the Province58.
Of course, all Project cases had two parties. In most cases, parties to the same dispute lived in different
communities, often very distant from each other. However, in 7 out of the 47 cases (15%), the parties
lived in the same community. In only 2 of these 7 cases did the parties live in small communities where
in-person dispute resolution resources might not be readily available. This confirms that distance
between the parties, and the lack of local resources, are not the only reasons that some clients opted
for technology-assisted mediation.
B. Age, Education and Income Levels
The average age of Phase III clients when their cases began was 37 years59. Clients in Phase III tended to
be younger than those in Phase II. Seventy-six percent of Phase II clients were over age 35, and 43%
were over 45. In Phase III, 54% were older than 35, and only 15% were older than 45.
The distribution of clients by age in Phase III is compared to that of British Columbia’s adult population
in the following table. Project clients were more likely to be under the age of 50 than the general adult
population, but that is perhaps understandable due to the nature of family dispute resolution – which
often involves separating couples who have children living at home.
Table 4-3
Age Profile of Project Clients and BC Adult Population
Age Group
Project Clients % of BC Adult
Population Number of
Clients
Percentage
20 – 29 years 15 18% 15%
30 – 39 years 36 44% 13%
40 – 49 years 25 30% 15%
50 years and older 6 7% 57%
Total 82 100% 100% Sources: Inquiry Sheets; BC Stats accessed at: http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/StatisticsBySubject/Demography/PopulationEstimates.aspx
58
Project Activity Reports to the Law Foundation, September 2010 – March 2012, Mediate BC Society, unpublished. 59
82 out of 92 clients supplied date of birth information.
60
The educational attainment of Project clients was also compared to that of the British Columbian
population. Project clients were somewhat better educated than the general adult population, with a
smaller proportion having grade 12 education or less, and greater proportion having college or technical
school training. Project clients were about as likely to have undergraduate or graduate level university
education as those in the general population. See Table 4-4.
Clients of this Phase were also more likely to have higher levels of education than the clients in Phase II.
In Phase II, 42.5% of the clients had at least a grade 12 education or better, and 30% had a college or
university education60. In Phase III, 88% had at least grade 12, and 67% had college or university
education.
Table 4-4
Educational Attainment of Project Clients and BC Adult Population
Educational Attainment
Project Clients % of BC Adult
Population Number of
Clients
Percentage
Less than Grade 12 10 11% 20%
High school completion 18 20% 28%
College / technical school 34 37% 28%
University – undergraduate 14 15% 18%
University – graduate level 9 10% 7%
Total 85 100% 100% Sources: Inquiry Sheets; Statistics Canada - 2006 Census.
The income level of Project clients was recorded in broad categories only. Data for clients was
compared to income information available from Statistics Canada regarding tax returns for the 2009 tax
year. This data suggests that Project clients are somewhat more likely to have incomes of between
$50,000 and $100,000 than BC tax filers in general and slightly less likely to have incomes below or
above that level. See Table 4-5.
Just over 70% of Project clients had annual incomes of $50,000 or less; this is similar to the result in
Phase II, where 67% had an income of less than $50,000 per year61. The high proportion of clients in this
income group may be one reason why only a small number of Project cases were completed by private
mediators where fees applied.
60
Getz, p. 17 61
Getz, p. 17
61
Table 4-5
Income Levels of Project Clients and BC Tax Filers
Annual Income
Project Clients in BC % of BC Tax
filers62
Number of
Clients
Percentage
Less than $50,000 60 71% 74%
$50,000 - $100,000 24 28% 21%
More than $100,000 1 1% 5%
Total 85 100% 100% Sources: Inquiry Sheets; Statistics Canada Neighbourhood Income and Demographics, 2009
In summary, demographic information collected about Project clients indicates that the clients in Phase
III were more likely to come from small and mid-sized communities, live outside the Southwest region,
be younger and better educated, and have mid-range incomes, than the British Columbian adult
population as a whole.
Compared to Phase II, clients in this Phase were much more likely to come from mid and large sized
communities, confirming the conclusion that expanding the geographic reach of the Project allowed
clients from a greater number of British Columbian communities to access distance mediation services.
15. WHAT FACTORS APPEAR TO ENCOURAGE, OR BARRIERS
PREVENT, PARTIES’ USE OF TECHNOLOGY-ASSISTED
MEDIATION SERVICES?
A total of 153 individual inquiries were received by the Distance Family Mediation service in Phase III.
These inquiries ultimately narrowed down to 55 cases that were assigned Project case numbers, and 46
cases (equal to 30% of inquiries) where mediation occurred and concluded.
Phase II also experienced a large drop off from inquiries to cases, and ended up with the same
proportion of cases that proceeded (30%). Because Phase II was aimed at a target group located in
small, rural areas of British Columbia, there was a concern that this group might in some way be at a
disadvantage for participating in technology assisted distance mediation. However, at the end of Phase
II, it was unclear whether “digital divide” factors, such as cultural background, broadband availability,
62
Note that tax filer data does not provide information on those who have not filed a tax return in a given year. In 2009, approximately 3.4 million adults in BC filed tax returns and 1.0 million did not.
62
age, disability, income, geography and education had an impact on the participation rate in the
Project63.
This evaluation question examines factors that motivated people to proceed with cases, and those
factors that may have discouraged or prevented participation. Information drawn from the client survey
results, as well as the inquiry data and interviews conducted with the Mediation Advisor, the FJSD
Liaison and mediators who received inquiries, shed light on this question.
A. Reasons for Non-Participation
As was seen in Chapter Three, question 1, the reasons that parties ultimately did not proceed to a case
within the project included: one or more parties to a case were not interested in mediation, declined
service or failed to attend appointments; some parties pursued other means to their resolve dispute
(court, in person mediation, on their own); and safety issues meant some cases were screened out. In
only one instance was discomfort with technology noted.
Data from the Inquiry Sheets indicated the ICTs that potential clients and clients had access to, should a
case proceed. This information was analysed to compare the availability of ICTs for parties where cases
completed (n=90 parties), to that for parties where cases did not proceed or complete (n= 87 parties)64.
Table 4-6 reports these results; percentages sum to more than 100% because parties often had access to
more than one type of ICT.
Table 4-6
Percentage of Parties with Access to ICTs
ICT Available to Party
Distance Mediation Case Completed
Yes No
Cell phone 68% 58%
Telephone 76% 80%
Computer at home 86% 72%
Computer at work 2% 6%
Computer elsewhere 6% 9%
High speed internet 83% 82%
Webcam 63% 57%
Microphone /sound 79% 60% Source: Inquiry Sheets
63
Getz, p. 20 64
Although 46 cases (with 92 parties) completed mediation, information regarding available ICTs was not recorded for 2 parties. For inquiries that did not result in completed mediation cases, information regarding available ICTs was recorded for only 87 parties; many inquiries did not progress to the stage where this question was asked of potential clients, and in many cases there was no contact at all with the second party to a dispute.
63
This data indicates that, in fact, parties to disputes that completed (versus parties to cases that did not
proceed) were more likely to have access to nearly every form of ICT used in the Project; so, lack of
equipment may have prevented some cases from proceeding. However, this data also indicates that a
high proportion of parties who did not participate in the Project did in fact have access to ICTs. Thus,
this factor alone does not explain why potential cases did not proceed.
Of course, ideally, for a case to proceed using ICTs, both parties must have access to the same
technology. Because of the way the data was recorded on the Inquiry Sheets, an analysis of the match
between parties’ ICTs for each technology would be very difficult. However, this was attempted for the
technologies needed for a case to proceed using web conferencing. In these cases, parties would ideally
have: a computer at home65, high speed internet, webcam, microphone and sound, and a telephone or
cell phone as back up for the audio. These are the results:
30 instances were found in the inquiry data where both parties had all of the ICTs needed for
web conferencing; 24 of those cases proceeded and completed (80%);
However, in 6 of the cases that proceeded, telephone, not web conferencing, was the principle
technology used; and
Another 8 cases proceeded and completed where one or more parties lacked some element of
the ideal set-up for web conferencing, yet web conferencing was the principle technology used,
suggesting that parties acquired or found access to the technology they needed in order to use
the web platform.
In interviews, the mediators, the Mediation Advisor and the FJSD Liaison were asked to comment on
possible reasons why some inquiries did not lead to actual distance mediation cases. A lack of computer
equipment or comfort with using such technology was suggested by many. However, as some pointed
out, a telephone or a cell phone are usually readily available and most people are very comfortable
using the telephone.
Some speculated on other factors that could potentially have discouraged participation. One mediator
suggested that cultural factors may possibly play a role – that some cultures may feel that using
technology is a not an appropriate way to settle disputes. One suggested that language may be a
barrier, and that telephone or Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) technologies may not render the
spoken word clearly enough for those who have acquired English as a second language. Another
suggested that distance itself may reduce the parties’ motivation – where parties live far away from
each other, they are already more detached and may not feel a pressing need to resolve their issues.
65
Computers at work or elsewhere do not usually offer the same private setting as a home computer.
64
B. Reasons for Participation
Notes recorded on the Inquiry Sheets sometimes indicated the
reasons why parties were potentially interested in pursuing mediation
through the Project. Of the 166 parties66 where this information was
recorded, 62% indicated that distance between the parties was a
motivating factor. Nine percent indicated that there was no local
service that they could access, 3% said that they wanted to avoid in-
person contact with the other party and 4% said they were
comfortable with technology. The remainder indicated simply that
they wanted to resolve their dispute, wanted mediation service or an alternative to court.
A question in the client survey asked why the respondents had decided to participate in distance
mediation instead of in-person mediation. Respondents were permitted to select more than one reason
(see Table 4-7). Results indicate that by far the most common reason that clients chose distance
mediation is that they and the other party lived in different communities (76%). The desire to avoid
travelling to attend in-person mediation, to save time or money, or for environmental reasons, were
selected by 42%, 38% and 12% of respondents respectively. So clearly, physical distance between the
parties, or between the parties and the mediator, remains a strong motivation for accessing distance
mediation.
Other reasons were selected as well. Nearly a quarter (22%) indicated that they or the other party did
not want to mediate in person. A fifth (20%) indicated that they could not attend, or perhaps could not
travel to, an in person mediation session during working hours, and 14% were motivated by reduced
fees for the Project mediations. Ten percent indicated that they have a preference for communicating
using technology.
Compared to the reasons for interest expressed at the inquiry stage, clients who completed the client
survey were more likely to have been motivated by a desire to avoid in-person contact with the other
party, the flexible hours of service, the reduced Project fees, and their own comfort level with
technology.
66
This includes many parties who made inquiries but did not ultimately proceed to distance mediation; 92 parties actually participated in distance mediation cases.
“Ease of access - although that may seem insignificant - if it did not exist I would not have been able to mediate at all. “
- Client, Survey
Comment
65
Table 4-7
Reasons Clients Chose Distance Mediation instead of In-Person Mediation
Client Survey Responses:
Responses
% of
Responses
The other party and I live in different communities 38 76%
I wanted to avoid travelling to save time 21 42%
I wanted to avoid travelling to save money 19 38%
I wanted to avoid travelling for environmental reasons 6 12%
I did not want to see the other party in person 6 12%
The other party did not want to mediate in person 5 10%
I couldn't go to an in-person mediation during working hours 10 20%
The mediator fees for this project were less than the normal fees
7 14%
I prefer to communicate using technology - it is the norm for me
5 10%
Total Respondents 50 Source: Client Survey Percentages sum to more than 100% as more than one technology was used in several cases
C. Distance Mediation was the Only Service Option for Some Clients
One measure of how effective the Project has been in improving access to mediation services is to
consider the number of clients who did not have access to any other dispute resolution service.
The client survey asked people what they would have done if distance mediation through the Project
had not been available. Of the 51 clients who completed the survey, 9 indicated that they would not
have received help at all, and another 9 indicated that they did not know what they would have done.
Therefore, it is likely that about 35% of clients would not have accessed, or been able to access, an
alternative service to resolve their family issues if the distance mediation service had not been
available67. While the numbers involved are small, the responses to this item on the client survey
support the conclusion that offering technology-assisted distance mediation improved access to
mediation services.
67
FJSD does provide shuttle mediation, via telephone, to clients separated by distance whose cases meet its service criteria. See Chapter Two for a description of FJSD’s case criteria; 15% of Project cases either included issues that FJSD does not mediate or were otherwise out of scope for FJSD services. See also Chapter Three, Question 6 for a comparison of shuttle mediation to technology-assisted distance mediation.
66
16. WHAT INFLUENCES THE SELECTION OF PARTICULAR ICTS?
As was seen in Chapter Three, a range of ICTs were used in Phase III distance mediation cases including
telephone, cell phones, web conferencing, email and various combinations of these. But what factors
influence which technologies were used in particular cases? Mediators were invited to describe how
they went about selecting ICTs to use, and their thoughts on the processes they used. They also
recorded the reasons that ICTs were selected on the Case Notes forms completed for each case. Finally,
the inquiry data, combined with the Case Notes data about the types of technologies used, shed some
light on the question of client characteristics and the choice of ICTs.
A. Mediator’s Views on Selection of ICTs.
On the Case Notes forms, mediators were asked to identify the principle ICT used for each case and why
that technology had been used. Their responses are presented in Table 4-8 (multiple answers were
permitted).
Table 4-8
Reasons Technologies were Selected
Reason technology selected:
Responses
% of Cases
Available to all parties and mediator 43 91%
Parties familiar with this technology 31 66%
Technology is good for facilitating communication 24 52%
Parties preferred technology with audio and video 14 30%
Mediator wanted to try this technology to gain experience with it
13 28%
Technology is good for managing safety 6 13%
Parties preferred technology with audio only 4 9% Source: Case Notes
Clearly, the practical necessity of a technology being available to both parties and the mediator was a
very common reason particular technologies were selected; party familiarity was another common
factor influencing the choice of ICT. Further analysis of the Case Notes data regarding the principle
mediation technology used indicates that:
Party familiarity was cited as a reason for selecting the telephone or cell phone68 in 16 cases and
web conferencing in 15 cases69;
68
Includes 1 case using telephone and email and 1 case using telephone and in-person. 69
Includes 1 case using web conferencing and telephone and 1 case using web conferencing and email.
67
Where the technology was thought to facilitate communication, web conferencing (or web
conferencing and telephone /cell phone) was selected in 14 cases and the telephone in 8 cases;
The ICT that mediators wanted to gain experience with was web conferencing in all 13 cases;
and
Where safety was cited as the reason for selecting the ICT, the ICT chosen used web
conferencing in all 6 cases70.
Mediators described the approaches they took to selecting ICTs with the clients. The approaches they
used included:
Describing the options to the parties, who usually quickly decided on their preference or asked
for a recommendation;
Checking into the technologies available for both parties;
Having a general conversation including questions about the clients’ use of the internet,
computer, and web conferencing platforms, and probing to be sure that everyone was
comfortable with the ICTs they use;
Offering the client a 10 minute trial with the ICT to see how it felt;
Enquiring into the setting in which the client would use an ICT, to confirm confidentiality; and
Starting from the assumption that web conferencing would be used, and asking the clients if
they had access to or could borrow the necessary technology, while making it clear that the
telephone was always an option.
A couple of the mediators commented that clients sometimes selected the telephone just for its
simplicity and because a cell phone can be used almost anywhere (i.e., does not have be connected to
the internet). In one case, teleconferencing was selected because one party was uncomfortable viewing
themselves on video. The mediators all felt that the approach they took to selecting ICTs with the
parties was easy and effective.
B. Client Access to, and Experience with, ICTs
In the survey, clients were asked to identify the ICTs they could access for the mediation. They were
permitted to select more than one ICT. Results indicate that about three quarters of the respondents
had access to a computer, but only 70% had high speed internet, and 63% had a webcam. Interestingly,
not everyone indicated that they had access to a telephone or cell phone. See Table 4-9.
Survey respondents were also asked which ICTs they had used prior to participating in the distance
mediation process. Results presented in Table 4-10 show that nearly everyone had experience with
email, and two thirds had experience with Skype. The fact that a client had used Skype would indicate
familiarity with a web-based audio-visual platform, somewhat like WebEx. The “other” technologies
that clients had experience with included other audio-visual platforms: Live Meeting, GoToMeeting and
70
Includes 1 case using web conferencing and cell phone.
68
FaceTime. In fact, 20% of the survey respondents indicated that they had actually used WebEx before
their case with the Project. Fifty-seven percent had experience with teleconferencing.
Table 4-9
Client Access to ICTs – Client Survey
Access to ICTs
Responses
% of
Respondents
Computer 38 74%
High-speed internet 36 70%
Webcam 32 63%
Dedicated (or landline) telephone 25 49%
Cell phone 20 39%
Telephone conferencing equipment 5 10%
Dedicated video conferencing equipment (i.e., not through a computer)
1 2%
Total 51 Source: Client Survey
Table 4-10
Clients’ Prior Experience with ICTs
ICTs that Clients had Used Prior to the Project:
Responses
% of Respondents
Email 50 98%
Skype 34 67%
Teleconferencing 29 57%
WebEx Meeting Centre 10 20%
Other ICTs 5 10%
Total 51 Source: Client Survey
Of particular interest in Phase III was the availability of web conferencing for Project mediations.
Mediators were trained in the use of the platform and were encouraged to suggest it to clients so that
its effectiveness could be tested in this Phase. The client survey results were examined to determine
whether access to the necessary technologies, and prior experience with web conferencing or similar
ICT, were consistent with the use of web conferencing for the distance mediation. For this analysis, the
ICTs those clients had access to, and those that they had prior experience with, were compared to the
technologies they actually used, as reported through the client survey. Twenty-five out of 51 survey
69
respondents indicated that they used web conferencing in the distance mediation case. Of those 25
respondents:
Only 21 had a computer with high speed internet access, suggesting that a few arranged access
to this equipment for the mediation process;
21 had some prior experience with at least one audio-visual ICT:
o 12 had prior experience with Skype;
o 7 with both WebEx and Skype;
o 1 with Skype, WebEx and GoToMeeting; and
o 1 with Skype, WebEx and FaceTime.
Four had no prior experience with audio-visual ICT technologies.
This analysis suggests that access to, and familiarity with, web-based audio-visual technologies are
important, but not necessary, factors in the selection of web conferencing for the mediation process.
While most clients who used web conferencing for their distance mediation had both prior experience
with a web conferencing platform and the necessary equipment, some lacked one or both of these
factors and yet proceeded with distance mediation using web conferencing.
C. Client Age, Income and Principle ICT Used
It is somewhat of a truism at present that younger people have greater familiarity and comfort with new
forms of technology such as web conferencing. Therefore, it could be supposed that younger clients
were more likely to makes use of web conferencing, and older clients more likely to use the telephone,
in this Phase of the Project.
However, data from mediator Case Notes suggests that this was not strictly the case. Although web
conferencing was used more often with younger clients, 4 out of 6 clients aged 50 or older also used
web conferencing. The group least likely to use web conferencing were the 40 to 49 year olds, and even
there, 44% used it (see Table 4-11). Telephone was most popular with clients in the 40-49 age group,
and equally popular among those aged 20-29 and over 50.
Table 4-11
ICT Used by Client Age
Principle ICT used for mediation:
Percentage of Age Group Using ICT as Principle Mediation Technology:
20-29 (n=15)
30-39 (n=36)
40-49 (n=25)
50+ (n=6)
Web conferencing 67% 58% 44% 67%
Cell phone 0% 3% 8% 0%
Telephone 33% 39% 48% 33%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
Source: Case Notes
70
Another supposition might be that because web conferencing requires a computer, high speed internet,
and webcam that it might be an option only for clients of higher income71. Again, we see that this is not
strictly the case in this Project. While a higher percentage of clients with annual incomes over $50,000
used web conferencing, it is also true that nearly half of those with incomes of less than $50,000 also
used web conferencing. However, telephone and cell phones were selected almost twice as often by
clients having incomes of less than $50,000 than by those with higher incomes.
Table 4-12
ICT Used by Client Income Level
Percentage of Income Group Using ICT as Principle Technology:
Under $50,000
(n=61)
$50,000 to $100,000
(n=26)
Over $100,000 (n=1)
Web conferencing 49% 73% 0%
Cell phone 5% 4% 0%
Telephone 46% 23% 100%
Total 100% 100% 100%
Source: Case Notes
In sum, web conferencing was used most often by younger and older clients and those with incomes
over $50,000 per year. However, it was also used to a significant degree by clients between 30 and 50,
and by those with incomes below $50,000.
Telephone was used more frequently than web conferencing only among 40-49 year olds. Those with
lower incomes made use of web conferencing and telephone/cell phones in nearly the same proportion
(51% vs. 49%), while the telephone was used much less frequently among those of higher incomes.
71
The use of this platform (as well as teleconferencing) was available to clients at no charge – platform access and long distance charges were covered through the Project or FJSD.
71
17. IN WHAT WAYS DOES THE MEDIATION ADVISOR ROLE SUPPORT
THE PROVISION OF DISTANCE MEDIATION?
The Mediation Advisor is a staff member of Mediate BC located in the Vancouver Justice Access Centre.
She assisted potential clients with their inquiries by providing information and referrals to the mediators
participating in the Project. She described her activities as:
Talking with the parties who contacted Mediate BC to inquire about the service;
Explaining mediation generally;
Explaining the scope of issues that could be dealt with through the Project;
Explaining the distance features of the Project and the use of various technologies;
Recommending that parties seek independent legal advice;
Conducting first/high level screening (until February 2012);
Contacting the second party if the first party requested it (until February 2012);
Helping to identify whether the case was suited to a Family Justice Counsellor or a private
mediator72;
For parties seeking a private mediator, providing referrals to the private mediators participating
in the Project;
Explaining and applying the sliding scale fee rate for the private mediators (until February 2012),
and
For parties seeking a Family Justice Counsellor, liaising with the FJSD Liaison to connect the
parties with a Family Justice Counsellor.
In February 2012, Mediate BC brought the Distance Family Mediation Project into its policy framework
for its family mediation services generally. Under this policy framework, the Society does not engage
the second party and does not do violence screening – those tasks are performed by the mediators
themselves after they receive a referral.
The Mediation Advisor indicated that she received inquiries from across the province. In total she
recorded 56 inquiries, of which 13 became Project mediation cases.
Private mediators were asked to comment on the role of the Mediation Advisor in the context of a
distance mediation service. Most of the mediators commented that they appreciated the work that had
been done to explain the Project to the parties and to set up the connection/referral to them.
Eleven parties who had been assisted by the Mediation Advisor completed the client survey, and 9 of
these respondents answered questions about the services they received from her:
72
Family Justice Counsellors could only deal with cases that involved children. They could not address property issues over $25,000 in value. Private mediators could deal with the full range of issues. See Chapter Two, Project Team section for further information.
72
Nearly all recalled that she explained the service, the technologies that could be used, and the
fee rates;
Most recalled that she helped ensure their case was suitable for the Project and helped them
find a mediator;
Some recalled that she talked to the other party about the service73; and
Five recalled receiving information about obtaining independent legal advice.
Survey respondents were also asked to rate the helpfulness of the service they received from the
Mediation Advisor on a 1 to 5 scale where 1 equals very unhelpful and 5 equals very helpful. The
average rating given was 4.8, indicating a high level of satisfaction among the clients who responded.
An outstanding question remains regarding how the Mediation Advisor role could be supported
financially as part of an on-going distance mediation service. Mediators, clients, government, or
institutional funders are potential sources to fund such a role; this question was not examined as part of
the evaluation.
18. IN WHAT WAYS DOES THE PROJECT COORDINATOR ROLE
SUPPORT THE PROVISION OF DISTANCE MEDIATION?
The Project Coordinator was hired on contract by Mediate BC to manage the planning and
implementation of the Distance Family Mediation Project. Her activities in Phase III included:
Managing the Project overall;
Researching and testing potential web conferencing platforms and other suitable technologies
for the Project;
Training the mediators in the use of the web conferencing platform and providing technical
support as needed;
Drafting support materials for the mediators;
Creating and managing a Project wiki for team members to post, and to access, materials that
support distance mediation;
Organizing and facilitating regular team meetings;
Arranging for presentations to the team and organizing a final Think Tank;
Liaising between the Project mediators, FJSD’s Project Liaison and Mediate BC;
Promoting the Project’s service through extensive distribution of emails, letters, pamphlets and
flyers describing the service;
Promoting the Project through online mechanisms, including the placement of advertisements
on LinkedIn, through Twitter, and the creation and management of a LinkedIn discussion group,
Facebook page and Project blog;
73
This activity was performed by the Mediation Advisor only until February 2012.
73
Promoting the Project through presentations and articles;
Revising the Phase III Project Guidelines document;
Providing information about the Project in response to inquiries from distance mediation
professionals and other individuals and organizations in British Columbia and elsewhere, and
Writing key Project documents such as the Project Map, the funding submission and activity
reports.
Mediators were asked to comment on the support they received from the Project Coordinator. They
were very positive about the skill and energy that she personally brought to the role, and commented
specifically on the value of the training, technical support and materials provided.
When asked about supports provided to mediators, the Project Coordinator indicated that the FJSD
Liaison provided invaluable support to the FJCs, including training, technical support and materials
specific to FJSD policies and practices. The Liaison also performed an essential function in her liaising
with the Project Coordinator, and assisted in coordinating many of the FJCs’ and private practice
mediators’ joint activities. It was the Project Coordinator’s view that the seamless coordination
between the Project’s private and public sector streams could not have taken place without the FJSD
Liaison’s skilful efforts.
Many of the activities undertaken by the Project Coordinator would not continue beyond the conclusion
of the pilot project (e.g., writing activity reports), but some conceivably could continue in support of a
distance mediation practice or roster (see next section). As with the Mediation Advisor, a question
remains regarding how such activities could be funded on an ongoing and sustainable basis.
19. DO MEDIATORS OR CLIENTS IDENTIFY OTHER SUPPORTS THAT
WOULD BE HELPFUL IN A DISTANCE MEDIATION SERVICE
MODEL?
Team members were asked about supports that should be built into a
distance mediation service model. Their suggestions included:
Practice group: Mediators were very positive about the
support they received from other member of the Project
team. The regular team meetings, conducted using web
conferencing, were a forum for learning, exchange of ideas
and experiences, and discussions of a wide variety of topics
related to the provision of distance mediation. Mediators
commented that best practices emerged during these
“I gained valuable insights from other mediators which
were highly beneficial.”
- Mediator, Interview
Comment
74
meetings, and that the collegial support strengthened everyone’s confidence. One mediator
commented that a practice group, that would replicate the team’s experience, would be
essential to building competency among mediators practicing distance mediation.
Special roster: A roster of qualified distance mediators could provide recurring opportunities
for practice sessions, if not actual cases, which would help mediators to retain skills if actual
cases are not frequent.
Technical support: Technical support was provided during the
pilot project by the Project Coordinator and, to some extent, by
the FJSD Liaison. For an ongoing service, a hands-on technical
support role, providing “help desk” assistance, was suggested.
As well, there appears to be a role for a system administrator, to
manage the access to technologies (i.e. licencing), stay abreast of
potential security issues and developments or changes to the
technology, and manage permissions to use the licenced web
based platform(s).
Legal advice and assistance: Clients are encouraged to obtain independent legal advice as part
of the Project, and would sometimes need to retain a lawyer to draw up a legal separation
agreement. One mediator suggested that having staff lawyers available to perform these
functions would greatly benefit clients.
Inquiry support: Two mediators suggested that the role of giving information about distance
mediation to prospective clients and screening cases for suitability would be beneficial. One
suggested that this function would be best handled centrally, as assistants working for individual
mediators might not become comfortable performing this function if the number of distance
mediation cases is slow to develop.
In the client survey, respondents were asked if they had any suggestions or recommendations about
how to improve the distance mediation service. One theme that emerged is the recommendation to
expand the program, and promote it, so that more families can access the service (4 responses). Two
comments echoed the suggestion made by one of the mediators to provide legal advice assistance as
part of the Project or service itself.
“Make this type of service more readily available to people to experience an easier/cheaper/ more accessible way of communicating.”
- Client, Survey
Comment
75
SUMMARY
The following are a summary of key findings for Chapter Four:
Clients in Phase III were more likely to come from small and mid-sized communities, live outside
the Southwest region, be younger and better educated, and have mid-range incomes, than the
British Columbian adult population as a whole.
Parties to mediation cases that completed (versus parties to cases that did not proceed) were
more likely to have access to nearly every form of ICT used in the Project; so, lack of equipment
may have prevented some cases from proceeding. However, this data also indicates that a high
proportion of parties who did not participate in the Project did in fact have access to ICTs.
The most common reason that clients chose distance mediation is that they and the other party
lived in different communities. The desire to avoid travelling to attend in-person mediation - to
save time or money, or for environmental reasons - was a related motivation. Other reasons
were important for some clients, including a desire to avoid in-person mediation, the flexibility
to access distance mediation outside working hours, reduced fees for the Project mediations,
and a preference for communicating using technology.
It is likely that about a third of the clients who completed the survey would not have been able
to use an alternative service to resolve their family issues if the distance mediation service had
not been available.
Particular ICTs were selected often for individual cases because a technology was available to
both parties and the mediator and/or the parties were familiar with the ICT. The client survey
results indicate that about three quarters of the respondents had access to a computer, 70%
had high speed internet, and 63% had a webcam. Nearly everyone had experience with email,
and two thirds had experience with Skype. About 20% had experience with WebEx and 10%
with other audio-visual ICTs. Over half had experience with teleconferencing.
Telephone was used more frequently than web conferencing in distance mediation only among
40-49 year olds. Those with lower incomes made use of web conferencing and telephone/cell
phones in nearly the same proportion, while the telephone was used much less frequently
among those of higher incomes.
While most clients who used web conferencing for their distance mediation had both prior
experience with a web conferencing platform and the necessary equipment, some lacked one or
both of these factors and yet proceeded with distance mediation using web conferencing. This
76
suggests that some clients find ways to access equipment that they lack, and are willing to try
new technologies.
The Project Coordinator played a key role in implementing the pilot project, in promoting its
services and supporting the mediators who participated. The Mediation Advisor role also
supported clients and mediators during the pilot.
Mediators suggested that a distance mediation service model could include a distance
mediation practice group and special roster, technical support, inquiry support and legal advice
for clients. A question remains regarding how such roles and activities could be financially
sustained on an ongoing basis.
77
Chapter Five: Collaboration with Stakeholders
and Integration with Legal Services
INTRODUCTION
The third objective of the Project was stated as:
“To work collaboratively with stakeholders in the family justice system to make distance mediation
available to British Columbians and to integrate it with available legal services.”
This objective addresses the Project’s interest in collaborating with family justice stakeholders to
increase awareness about the Project, so that a wide range of clients would seek out the service,
thereby improving access to mediation services. It also speaks to the desire to ensure that distance
mediation parties are given recommendations to seek independent legal advice, and information about
how they can do that. Finally, this objective speaks to the Project’s intent to share information, within
the team, but also to the wider mediation and legal communities about the practice, and benefits to
British Columbian families, of technology-assisted distance mediation.
Findings related to the following evaluation questions are presented in this Chapter:
20. Do stakeholders in the family justice system direct clientele to the Project?
21. Do Project clients access independent legal advice?
22. Do the opportunities for information exchange increase mediators’ and other stakeholders’
interest in providing or making referrals to distance mediation?
20. DO STAKEHOLDERS IN THE FAMILY JUSTICE SYSTEM DIRECT
CLIENTELE TO THE PROJECT?
To build a successful distance mediation service, potential clients must first become aware of the service
so that they can take steps to access it. In Phase III, the Project and Mediate BC sought to increase
awareness of the Distance Family Mediation service by collaborating with a wide range of stakeholders
– most notably the Ministry of Justice’s Family Justice services Division – and promoting it with the
general public, with agencies that serve families, and within the legal and dispute resolution
communities. The Project shared information and connected with individual lawyers, and numerous
78
agencies including the Legal Services Society of British Columbia, BC Notaries, BC Credit Counselling
Society, Family Mediation Canada, Clicklaw, Courthouse Libraries of BC, Relationships Australia, New
Zealand Department of Labour, Northwest Territories Department of Justice, Alberta Department of
Justice and the Canadian Bar Association ADR, Family Law and Collaborative Law subsections. Mediate
BC is also collaborating with the Justice Institute of British Columbia regarding a future course for
mediators on distance mediation.
Promotional activities included:
Creation of a Project blog, Twitter feed and Facebook page – often Project blog posts were
picked up and linked to by other blogs, such as ADRhub.com74 and Mediate.com;
Advertising on LinkedIn;
Promotion through electronic newsletters within the legal and dispute resolution communities;
In-person and remote presentations to Canadian Bar Association sections, the British Columbia
Arbitration and Mediation Institute, ADRhub, the Alberta Government Employees’ Conference
on Technology -Assisted Dispute Resolution, and other groups;
Articles published in newsletters and magazines of other organizations, such as the Canadian
Bar Association, BC Notaries, and Family Mediation Canada.
Maintaining a link to the Project on other internet sites and blogs; and
Distribution of hundreds of emails, letters, pamphlets and flyers to Public Legal Education and
Information agencies, family and community agencies, Members of BC’s Legislative Assembly,
BC Government Agents, all BC public libraries, court registries and law libraries, marriage
counsellors and therapists, employee assistance programs, and other professional groups and
individuals serving families in British Columba.
FJSD promoted the service internally, to all Family Justice Centres and Justice Access Centres in the
province.
In total, the Project received 153 inquiries; the first party to a case who inquired about the service was
asked how they had learned about the service. For the 142 parties where this information was
recorded, just over half had first heard about the Project through a Family Justice Counsellor, though
not necessarily a Family Justice Counsellor on the Project team. About 10% of those inquiring first heard
of the service through a friend or family member. Other sources included:
Distance mediation pamphlet or advertisement: 8%
Legal Aid: 6%
Other Family Justice Services Division staff: 6%
Lawyer: 5%
Court: 3%
74
Website of The Werner Institute for Negotiations and Dispute Resolution, Creighton University School of Law.
79
Though the numbers involved are small, the variety of sources that gave rise to client inquiries indicates
that the Project was successful in informing other agencies and the legal community about the Project,
and these sources, in turn, referred clients to the Project. In comparison to Phase II75, a higher
proportion of referrals was received in Phase III from Family Justice Counsellors (51% compared to 34%);
Project advertisement of promotional materials (8% compared to 2%) and family or friends (10%
compared to 4% for “Project client or word of mouth” in Phase II). Curiously, the proportion of clients
who had first discovered the Project through the internet decreased from 8% in Phase II to 3% in Phase
III.
Of particular interest is the collaboration between Mediate BC and FJSD (FJSD). As service delivery
partners the two agencies worked together to ensure that clients were referred either to a Family
Justice Counsellor or to a private mediator on the team, as appropriate based on case characteristics
and client preferences.
Just over a third (56) of all inquiries that came to the Project were handled by the Mediation Advisor (of
Mediate BC). A closer examination of these inquiries shows that:
8 out of 56 inquiries (14%) had originated from FJSD, either from a Family Justice Counsellor or
another FJSD staff member.
Of the 13 inquiries handled by the Mediation Advisor that became Project cases:
o 3 had begun with a referral from a Family Justice Counsellor or other FJSD staff member and
were assigned to private mediators on the Project team;
o 6 had begun with referrals from elsewhere and were assigned to a Family Justice Counsellor.
These data confirm that there was cross referral between Mediate BC and FJSD during the project.
Besides FJSD, other referral sources that led to inquiries handled by the Mediation Advisor included the
legal community (10 inquiries), and Project promotional and awareness activities (14 inquiries).
21. DO PROJECT CLIENTS ACCESS INDEPENDENT LEGAL ADVICE?
One of the goals of Phase III was to ensure that parties who were not represented by counsel when they
entered the Project were given a recommendation to seek independent legal advice. While the Project
initially set out to create formal linkages with legal advice services, to integrate the distance mediation
service with these services, this objective was modified early on. The Project’s modified objective
focussed on linking clients to legal services through the recommendation that clients seek independent
legal advice. Project mediators and the Mediation Advisor were instructed to recommend obtaining
independent legal advice to all unrepresented clients, and to provide a referral to an appropriate legal
resource if the client needed one.
75
Getz, p. 38; Phase II percentages have been recalculated to exclude inquiries where the source of referral was unknown.
80
A. Parties Represented by Counsel
If a mediator or the Mediation Advisor was confident that a party was already receiving legal advice,
they may not feel it was necessary to give the party a recommendation to seek independent legal
advice. Data collected for the evaluation indicate that some parties did indeed have legal counsel when
they entered the Project, while others did not:
Mediator records indicate that 10 (11%) parties had legal counsel;
Mediator records also indicate that 77 (89%) parties did not have legal counsel when they
entered the Project76.
48 clients responded to a question on the client survey asking if they were represented by a
lawyer before they began mediation; 13 (26%) said yes; 35 (70%) said no, and 2 (4%) did not
remember.
B. Recommendations and Referrals for Legal Advice
In interviews conducted for the evaluation, mediators were asked about the circumstances in which
they would recommend that a client seek independent legal advice. They all responded that they make
this recommendation for every unrepresented party they worked with.
They were also asked about the suggestions they provided for obtaining legal advice – their suggestions
included Legal Service Society’s Family Advice Lawyers/Family Duty Counsel (a free limited legal advice
service available in some communities), pro bono legal services generally, private lawyers and Legal
Service Society’s Family Law Line (which provides limited legal advice by telephone to low income
clients). Two mediators also mentioned referring clients to the Canadian Bar Association’s Lawyer
Referral Service and their Dial-A-Law service (which provides taped legal information over the
telephone).
Mediators recorded in Case Notes the referrals they made regarding independent legal advice for 55
parties. For 20 parties, the referral was not specified or the mediator commented that they gave the
party a general recommendation to obtain legal advice at the start of the case. The remaining referrals
made were to:
Family Advice Lawyer/Family Duty Counsel: 19
Legal Services Society’s Family Law line: 8
Private lawyer: 8
Canadian Bar Association Lawyer Referral Service and Family Law Line: 2
In the client survey, 63% of respondents who were not represented by counsel recalled receiving a
recommendation to obtain independent legal advice.
76
This information was recorded for 87 out of the 92 Project clients.
81
Clients were also asked to rate the helpfulness of the legal advice referral that they received on a 1 to 5
scale where 1 equals “very unhelpful” and 5 equals “very helpful”. Of the 39 who responded, 19
indicated that they did not receive a referral for legal advice, while 20 provided a rating. Three said the
referral was unhelpful or very unhelpful, 7 gave a neutral rating and 10 said the referral was helpful or
very helpful.
Mediators were asked about their ability to refer clients to legal advice when the clients live in a
different community to the mediator. Strategies that mediators used to deal with this situation included
contacting a colleague in the client’s community to ask for a recommendation, checking websites for
resources available in the client’s community, or suggesting the client look for local resources such as a
pro bono clinic. While some of the mediators did not find providing referrals to legal advice to be more
difficult in the distance mediation than in person, a few admitted that they had problems knowing or
learning about the legal resources in the clients’ communities, or that it could be difficult if the client
lives in a small community where few legal resources are available. A list of legal information and legal
advice resources available throughout British Columbia was made available on the Project’s wiki for
team members.
C. Clients Acting on Recommendation and Referral to Legal Advice
According to mediator Case Notes, of the 77 parties who started service with the Project without
counsel, four engaged counsel during the time that they were involved in distance mediation. This
number seems low, but it is possible that parties chose to engage counsel after their involvement with
the Project ended, or that they did not inform their mediator if they engaged counsel during their
mediation.
The client survey asked clients whether they had obtained legal advice before, during or after their
mediation. Forty-two clients answered this question. Fifty-one per cent of the clients who responded to
this item had obtained legal advice and a further 15% intended to do so. Thirty-six per cent indicated
that they had not obtained legal advice and some of those clients offered the following reasons for not
seeking legal advice:
Could not afford a lawyer, or cost was a factor: 5 comments
Confident in the outcome of the mediation so legal advice was unnecessary: 2 comments
Does not want a lawyer: 2 comments
Has an amicable relationship with the other party and legal advice not needed: 1 comment
That cost prevents a number of clients from accessing legal advice is a concern. Some legal advice
services do exist in British Columbia for families of low or modest income. Access Pro Bono operates a
network of legal advice clinics throughout the province, with 27 clinics operating in smaller communities
outside urban centres. The Legal Services Society operates the Family Law Line, where lawyers give
brief "next step" advice about family law issues over the telephone to low income clients.77 It may be
77
For example, for a household of 4 or fewer members, net monthly household income must be below $3,230.
82
that clients were unaware of these services, could not access them, or did not meet the income
requirements for service.
In summary, most clients who participated in the Project were not represented by counsel. Although mediators indicated that they recommended independent legal advice for all unrepresented parties, some clients did not recall receiving a recommendation. Mediators used various strategies to make referrals for legal advice for clients residing in communities where they themselves did not live, and some admitted that making such referrals could be a challenge. Clients who rated the value of the referrals they received gave mixed ratings. While about two thirds of clients responding the survey had, or intended to, obtain legal advice several did not intend to engage a lawyer for a variety of reasons. Cost limited the willingness of some to pursue independent legal advice.
22. DO THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR INFORMATION EXCHANGE
INCREASE MEDIATORS’ INTEREST IN PROVIDING OR MAKING
REFERRALS TO DISTANCE MEDIATION?
The Project offered a number of avenues for information exchange among the mediators on the team,
and also with the wider mediation and legal communities. The team held regular bi-weekly meetings
conducted via web conferencing. Family Justice Counsellors had their own meetings in addition to the
team meetings, to address questions specific to FJSD policies and practices.
The Project established a LinkedIn discussion forum, and then a Project blog, a Facebook page and a
Twitter account to promote interest in the Project, and to share learnings on a wider basis with
mediation and legal colleagues. The Project Coordinator noted that these were primarily created to
promote interest in the Project and in technology-assisted mediation generally. The LinkedIn discussion
forum was discontinued part way through the Project because it was not being used enough. The
Project blog, "BC Distance Family Mediation Blog", was more successful, and had nearly 9,250 views in
the year that it operated. In 2011 the Project blog won a runner-up award in the “best new blog"
category in the “CLawBies", or the Canadian Law Blog Awards. The Project Coordinator feels that, in
addition to being a possible source of cases for the Project, it was a good public outlet for the Project
team to share their thinking and learnings. Twitter was very successful for building collaboration,
sharing information, and raising awareness. The Facebook page was not as popular as Twitter or the
blog and may not have been the right medium to reach the intended audience.
Mediators were asked about their participation in these activities. All of the mediators participated in
the team meetings, and were enthusiastic about their effectiveness as a learning and information
exchange forum. Team members commented about the energy that they drew from these meetings
(see Chapter Four, question 19). Mediators indicated that they interacted with one another informally
as well, through email and telephone calls. Participation in the LinkedIn discussion forum was limited,
with only two mediators indicating that they periodically went to the forum. The blog was more
83
popular, with mediators on the team reading and contributing to the posts and providing actual articles
for the blog.
Mediators found that their opportunities to exchange information with each other helped them
maintain their interest in providing distance mediation throughout the term of the Project. Some
indicated that their interest was not so much increased by these activities as sustained by them, as they
had been excited to be part of the Project from the start. Others indicated that the activities did
increase their interest in participating in the Project, and in providing distance mediation services more
generally, because they learned so much from other team members, increasing their comfort level and
confidence in their own skills.
Mediators were also asked whether the activities increased their interest in referring clients to distance
mediation. Most agreed that they would be more likely to refer clients to distance mediation, and were
pleased to have this option available for clients who are distant from the other party or mediation
services.
SUMMARY
The following are key findings presented in this Chapter:
The Project and Mediate BC generally promoted awareness of the Distance Family Mediation
service widely with the public, family serving agencies and the legal and dispute resolution
communities.
Just over half of those who contacted the Project had first heard about Project services through
a Family Justice Counsellor and about 10% first heard of the service through a friend or family
member. Other sources included the Project pamphlet or advertisements, Legal Aid, other
Family Justice Services Division staff, a lawyer or the Court.
Most clients who participated in the Project were not represented by counsel. Mediators
confirmed that they recommended independent legal advice for all unrepresented parties, and
over 60% of unrepresented clients surveyed recalled receiving a recommendation. While about
two thirds of clients responding the survey had, or intended to, obtain legal advice, several did
not intend to engage a lawyer – some because they could not afford to do so.
Project activities such as the blog and Twitter feed proved popular and gained recognition for
the Project. Mediators found that team meetings were highly useful for information exchange
within the team, and participation in the other activities served to sustain their already keen
interest in distance mediation and the Project.
84
Chapter Six: Financially Sustainable Distance
Family Mediation Service
INTRODUCTION
This Chapter reviews the results for three evaluation questions related to the Project’s fourth objective
which is:
“To develop and test a financially sustainable, province-wide distance mediation service delivery
model which includes a user-pay feature.”
This Chapter explores the use of fees for distance mediation services, and the views of clients and
mediators about the fee structure used in the Project. Family Justice Counsellors are government
employees, and their services are provided free of charge to families with children, with priority given to
low income families. The Project fees did not, therefore, apply to them, but were charged by the
Projects private mediators. The Project set sliding scale and discounted fee rates to make its services
more accessible for potential clients.
In Phase III, a sliding scale fee model was implemented at the beginning of the Project under which each
client would pay fees scaled with their income level. In February 2012, the Project changed its service
delivery model to one in which the private mediators, and not the Mediation Advisor, would have had to
apply the sliding scale fees. Private mediators’ concerns about the sliding scale, including that its
administration would be onerous and time consuming, resulted in a new fee structure in which all
clients would pay the same reduced Project fee rate, for up to ten hours of mediation. In total, the
Project had seven cases where fees applied.
This Chapter examines three questions related to user payments and a financially sustainable distance
family mediation service:
23. To what extent do fees paid by clients cover the cost of mediator services?
24. To what extent are clients willing to pay for distance mediation services?
25. To what extent are mediators willing to provide distance mediation services at the Project
sliding scale rates?
85
23. TO WHAT EXTENT DO FEES PAID BY CLIENTS COVER THE COST
OF MEDIATOR SERVICES?
Mediators who collected fees for their distance mediation services were asked to track the percentage
of their regular fee rate the Project fee represented for each case. In three cases, the Project fee
represented 25%-49% of the mediators’ usual fees; in two cases it represented 50% -74% and in one
case, 100% of their regular fees78. Mediators were asked to comment on the appropriateness of the
Project fees generally. Two commented that the fees were appropriate for the cases and parties that
they had in Project. Another mediator felt that in one distance mediation case a party could have
afforded to pay the usual fee, but the discounted rate likely enticed the party into opting for distance
mediation.
Mediators were also asked to comment on any challenges they may have had in collecting fees from
clients who were at a distance. Three out of four reported no difficulties while one had encountered
some challenges, commenting that in the future they would arrange to receive payment in advance.
24. TO WHAT EXTENT ARE CLIENTS WILLING TO PAY FOR
DISTANCE MEDIATION SERVICES?
The Mediation Advisor was usually the first person that potential clients would talk to regarding Project
fees. She indicated that clients were seeking a discount and that even the Project’s discounted rates
seemed high to some clients, especially those living in rural communities. The sliding scale rate – used
at the start of Phase III – proved to be cumbersome and difficult to explain. The Project’s subsequent
set rate for a given number of mediation hours was easier to explain and provided families with
certainty.
In the client survey, clients were asked to comment on whether they had saved time and/or money by
participating in the Distance Family Mediation Project. Those who had been through mediation with
private mediators were also asked to comment on the reasonableness of the fees they paid.
Clients were asked, on the survey, if they had saved time and/or money through their participation in
the Project. Those who responded (n=22)79 were mostly in agreement that they had saved both time
and money. Nearly three quarters saved money due to the absence of travel costs, and just over a third
indicated that they saved money because the fees for the Project services were lower than usual fees.
Over half saved time because they did not have to travel to receive Project services. Close to 15% said
78
This information was not recorded for one case where fees applied. 79
Some of the clients who answered this item had been served by Family Justice Counsellors.
86
that they did not save time or money. See Table 6-1 (percentages sum to more than 100% as multiple
responses were permitted).
Table 6-1
Client Views on Saving Time and Money through Distance Mediation
Response Categories: Number of
Response(s) % of
Responses
I saved money because there were no travel costs to participate in distance mediation 16 73%
I saved money because the project fees were lower than the usual fees 8 36%
I saved time because there was little or no travel time for the distance mediation 12 54%
I did not save any money by participating in distance mediation 3 14%
I did not save any time by participating in distance mediation 3 14%
Total 22 Source: Client Survey
Clients who had participated in mediation with the private mediators were also asked about the
reasonableness of the fees that they paid, relative to the service they had received. Most of those who
answered this question felt the fees were reasonable: two felt that the fees were inexpensive, five felt
the fees were reasonable, and two felt the fees were expensive, relative to the service received.
25. TO WHAT EXTENT ARE MEDIATORS WILLING TO PROVIDE
DISTANCE MEDIATION SERVICES AT PROJECT RATES?
Some clients who responded to the survey indicated that they had chosen distance mediation because it
had lower fees. When asked if they would be willing to provide distance mediation services at the
Project rates in the future, two of the Project’s private mediators said yes, one said probably, and one
said no, as it would be undercutting rates for other clients. One commented that fees for distance
mediation should be less than for in-person mediation because there is lower overhead cost involved,
no travel costs and because it lowers the threshold for clients to participate.
87
SUMMARY
Fees applied to only seven of the 46 completed mediation cases in the Project. Mediators indicated that
the discounted fee rate represented 25% to 100% of their usual fee, depending on the mediator. Two to
three out of four private mediators in the Project would be willing to offer distance mediation services
at Project rates in the future.
Most clients indicated that they saved time and money by participating in distance mediation, and most
who had paid a fee for service felt it was reasonable.
88
Chapter Seven: Conclusions
Phase III of the Distance Family Mediation Project saw 46 distance mediations completed over the
course of 14 months. This Phase also targeted an expanded client group – to include all families in
British Columbia – and made use of a wider range of ICTs than it had in Phase II, including extensive use
of web conferencing. The overall objective of Phase III, to enhance the effectiveness and accessibility of
family mediation in British Columbia by further developing the distance mediation approach, was clearly
achieved.
The Project also fully achieved two of its specific objectives, mostly achieved the third, and partially
achieved the fourth objective, as shown in the summary of findings below:
Objective One: To further increase knowledge about distance mediation
through its application to a wider range of family mediation cases
This objective was fully achieved. Knowledge regarding distance mediation was increased in this Phase
through the conduct of additional technology-assisted mediations with a wider client group and the
extensive use of a web conferencing platform.
The expanded target client group of this Phase served to demonstrate that there is a demand for
distance family mediations in British Columbia, not just in the remote and rural areas of the province,
but in medium and large communities as well. Many Project clients were motivated to use distance
mediation to resolve their family issues to bridge the physical distance between themselves, the other
party and the mediator. However, a significant number were also motivated to use ICT-assisted
mediation to maintain distance between themselves and the other party, where being in the same room
would prove too emotionally difficult.
The experience with web conferencing in Phase III was revelatory. Mediators were impressed with an
experience that approximates face-to-face mediation to the extent that they often forgot that a
technological interface was there. Many clients who participated were surprisingly familiar with some
form of web conferencing and some others were willing to try it. At the same time, conducting
mediation through technology cannot ever be exactly the same as face-to-face mediation. The mediator
has several extra things to manage and must respond nimbly to technical problems. The mediator also
has much less control over the mediation setting where the parties are, and must ensure that children
are not present and that confidentiality can be maintained at the remote locations. Finally, there is still
some loss of the richness of an in-person encounter and mediators need strategies to compensate for
that loss, including the use of exaggerated rapport building, checking in and monitoring skills.
Although lacking the obvious advantages of visual information, the telephone still remains a viable and
important option where parties lack the equipment or capacity to use web conferencing technologies.
89
Telephone also has an advantage over web conferencing in situations where even the distance afforded
by the internet is not enough for the parties involved – telephone can sometimes be useful because it
removes visual cues from an interaction, resulting in a more business-like atmosphere.
Safety screening remains a critical component of any family mediation, even where the parties live far
from each other. About 20% of clients indicated that they had safety issues prior to their mediation; the
Project therefore provided distance mediation to a relatively small sample of individuals who had safety
concerns. Most Project mediators were confident that screening at a distance was effective, but also
noted that discussing sensitive issues with clients is often difficult even in person. Again, more intensive
strategies to draw clients out, and to continuously monitor the mediation sessions for possible
intimidation, were used by mediators to compensate for the lack of an in-person connection with the
clients. Mediators were unanimous in their view that only experienced mediators should engage in
technology-assisted family mediation.
Overall, both mediators and clients expressed high levels of satisfaction with their experience in the
Project – with the mediation itself and with the technologies used. The success rate for resolving some
or all issues in the cases completed was very high, confirming that distance mediation can be just as
successful as face-to-face mediation.
The conclusion that Phase III increased knowledge about distance mediation is demonstrated not only
by the results of this evaluation, but also by the extensive additions to the Project’s Practice Guidelines
at the conclusion of the pilot. The additions reflect the increased knowledge and learnings of the team
especially with respect to the use of web conferencing for conducting mediation.
Objective Two: To improve the effectiveness and accessibility of
mediation for all British Columbian families by making distance
mediation available province-wide and offering a support structure and
services through the Society [Mediate BC]
This objective was fully achieved. The Project demonstrated a very important benefit of distance
mediation – the clear improvement in access to service for clients residing where services are limited,
and for parties who are separated by physical distance from each other. While the demographic profile
of Project clients differed somewhat from that of the general adult population in British Columbia, the
Project did attract both younger and older clients and clients with high and low incomes, and greater
and lesser educational levels, indicating that distance mediation appeals to a wide range of individuals.
The reasons that some potential clients chose to not participate in the Project related largely to their
personal circumstances, their lack of readiness to use mediation to resolve family issues, or personal
safety issues. Very few seemed reluctant to participate because of the use of technology. Differences in
client age, education and income were not strongly associated with the preference for certain types of
ICTs over others. While clients tended to use ICTs that they had access to and experience with, some
clients proceeded with ICTs where initially they had neither, suggesting a willingness to try new
technologies to engage in mediation.
90
In many ways, distance mediation with the use of ICTs is a game changer for mediators. It opens up new
ways to serve and connect with clients but also requires new skills and competencies. Mediators in this
Project benefitted from the training, tools and technical support provided through the Project. They
also learned from each other, and gained insights, information and support through their participation
as a team of pilot mediators. But technology is always changing and there will be a need for future
distance mediators to stay abreast of developments that are not necessarily their forte, such as
improvements to a variety of potential web platforms and web security issues.
Objective Three: To work collaboratively with stakeholders in the family
justice system to make distance mediation available to British
Columbians and to integrate it with available legal services.
This objective was mostly achieved. The Project was promoted widely throughout the legal community,
dispute resolution and family service agencies, and with the public. About 20% of those who made
inquiries had heard of the Project from one of these sources. A very close collaboration occurred
between Mediate BC Society and Family Justice Services Division with mediators from Mediate BC’s
family roster and from FJSD working together on the Project team. Cross referrals of clients also
occurred. Information was provided to, and connections created, with a wide range of legal, dispute
resolution, and family serving agencies; the Project achieved its goal of collaboration to promote
awareness and understanding of distance mediation.
Because many distance mediation clients are unrepresented, they need linkages with another service –
independent legal advice. Project mediators always recommended that unrepresented clients obtain
legal advice and provided referrals to available services. However, only about two thirds of clients
surveyed followed through, or intended to follow through, on these recommendations. Some clients
identified cost as a barrier to obtaining legal advice. An independent “distance legal advice” service, as
an adjunct to distance mediation, was suggested by some mediators and clients that would serve to
further the objective of integration with legal services.
A key lesson of this Phase was the tremendous support and learning that mediators drew from each
other – as they tackled and learned new technologies together – and from the Project Coordinator who
researched web technologies, and provided training and technical support.
Objective Four: To develop and test a financially sustainable, province-
wide distance mediation service delivery model which includes a user-
pay feature
This objective was partially achieved. This Phase of the Project did develop and use a user-pay feature
but there were a limited number of cases where clients paid for the service they received, and hence the
Project did not provide a strong test of a financially sustainable distance mediation model. As a result,
while the benefits of distance mediation seem clear, the financial sustainability of a user-pay private
sector distance mediation service remains as a question. Because the Project set discounted fee rates to
make the service more accessible, in most cases the amounts paid were below the mediators’ normal
rates. Nonetheless, some of the mediators indicated a willingness to offer distance mediation services
91
at Project rates in the future. Most clients seemed satisfied with these discounted rates, but their
willingness to pay full rates for distance mediation was also not tested. A further question regarding
how to pay for Project supports, including technical support, remains.
In conclusion, the Technology-Assisted Family Mediation Project was an ambitious and successful
project that clearly demonstrated the benefits of using technology to bring quality mediation services to
families. Perhaps the greatest achievement of the Project is its contribution to the body of knowledge
regarding the practice of distance mediation, achieved through the real life test of technology-assisted
mediations, and the subsequent dissemination of knowledge gained through both the publication of the
Practice Guidelines and the dedicated information sharing with the wider legal and dispute resolution
communities.
The future for the practice of distance mediation is positive – and the results of this evaluation support
the Phase II conclusion that mediation can be provided safely, effectively and competently at a distance.