Resources / Study / Innovation for Court ADR

Just Court ADR

The blog of Resolution Systems Institute

Archive for the ‘Evaluation’ Category

« Older Entries

COVID’s ERA and Beyond: How Rental Assistance Affects Eviction Mediation

Stephen Sullivan, June 18th, 2026

Recently, we looked back at the past five years of RSI’s Kane County Eviction Mediation Program. When we launched the program during the COVID-19 pandemic, an eviction moratorium was in place and the prospect of mass evictions loomed. Families feared losing their homes, landlords contended with uncertainty over managing property costs, and courts were concerned about their capacity to handle the anticipated volume of eviction cases.

Stock Photo by Nicola Barts via Pexels

The program’s primary goal has been to provide mediation as an opportunity for tenants and landlords to avoid eviction and pursue alternative solutions. One of the key ways we support this work is to connect parties to resources that may help them navigate their situation, including legal aid and information, financial counseling and, crucially, rental assistance. During the pandemic, the Emergency Rental Assistance (ERA) program helped renters who fell behind on payments. In the years since, our staff has continued to reach out to state and local programs to determine what assistance is available and to share this information with parties.

In this article, I discuss the program’s role in sharing resources with parties and how the availability of rental assistance supports positive mediation outcomes. I also discuss recently published research by Eviction Lab analyzing the ERA’s impact across the country.

Sharing Resources with Parties

Most eviction cases that enter our program involve nonpayment of past due rent due to financial hardship. Rental assistance programs provide emergency relief in such cases; funds can cover back rent or a set amount of future rent for eligible applicants. Rental assistance benefits both tenants and landlords. It ensures landlords get the rent they are owed and helps tenants maintain their housing and avoid having an eviction on their record.

However, tenants and landlords often do not know how to access these funds or how to determine their eligibility. Sometimes these programs are also paused as states or localities determine their budgets. These factors may prevent interested parties from knowing about or accessing critical resources to ease their situation. 

This is where the Eviction Mediation Program steps in. As Program Manager Christina Wright shared, “Our program has the opportunity to keep the court and parties informed of these programs, increasing the likelihood of use with or without mediation. Rent assistance is a lifeline for both landlords and tenants and often plays a role in resolving said cases.” Our program staff regularly refers tenants and landlords to rental assistance programs, particularly the Illinois Court-Based Rental Assistance Program (CBRAP), which provides up to $10,000 to cover past due rent and/or funds to cover two months of future rent.

Rental assistance is especially time sensitive because application approval and disbursement of funds cannot happen immediately. At this early stage of the case, self-represented tenants and landlords are often overwhelmed by the amount of information they receive and feel unsure about what they need to do. This is where the mediation program’s intervention can make a meaningful difference. Ensuring parties can effectively and capably access the resources they need remains a core part of the work we do.

Rental Assistance Benefits to Mediation

RSI connects tenants and landlords to resources at various points of the mediation process. Beyond the direct benefits they provide, these resources also help parties better prepare to participate in mediation. As a result, parties are able to develop agreement terms that are practicable.

Without rental assistance resources, the scope of possible solutions narrows. Financial issues may remain unresolved if tenants feel unsure about what they can pay or are pressured to agree to payment plans that they later cannot meet. “We see fewer opportunities for parties to settle with a ‘pay and stay’ agreement,” shares Wright. RSI’s evaluation of New Hampshire’s Eviction Diversion Program found a similar trend. When the state’s rental assistance funding ended, overall agreement rates held, but the proportion of agreements to stay dropped (from 62% before rental assistance ended to 31% afterward).

Research on other eviction mediation programs finds that the availability of rental relief contributes to positive mediation outcomes. For example, an evaluation of Hawai’i’s Act 57 mediation program, established to anticipate the end of the state’s eviction moratorium in August 2021, found that 66% of agreements that involved the repayment of back rent noted the use of rental assistance[1]. Mediators and attorneys interviewed for the study agreed that rent relief helped parties to resolve their disputes[2].

A similar evaluation of an Eviction Diversion Program in Philadelphia found that cases were less likely to result in a subsequent eviction filing if parties received rental assistance (7.4% filing rate) than if they did not (42.2% filing rate). The researchers also note that provision of rental assistance made a meaningful impact in lowering court filing rates whether or not parties mediated or reached an agreement. The lowest rates were among those who received assistance, mediated and reached an agreement (4.2%) and those who received assistance, did not mediate but reached an agreement (1.8%).

When RSI launched our eviction mediation program, ERA was the largest source of rental assistance funds. Eviction Lab recently conducted a study on whether ERA was successful at reaching those who needed assistance most and what patterns emerged in how states distributed funding. Overall, their data suggests that ERA spending was significantly higher in high-risk neighborhoods —where eviction cases were most concentrated before the pandemic. They found that ERA also reached the demographics most at risk for eviction, including renters in majority-Black and majority-Hispanic neighborhoods. Additionally, households with children and those with higher unemployment rates received higher rates of funding than those without children or with lower unemployment rates. States varied in how they distributed funds, but Eviction Lab’s data suggests that these variations had little effect on national patterns: “the distribution of aid matched the geography of housing insecurity.”

Conclusion

These findings point to the benefit of having external support programs such as rental assistance to promote mediation program objectives and help tenants and landlords avoid eviction. Reaching parties who may not know what resources are available or how to access them remains a challenge. This is where effective communications — such as those we identified in our OPEN Project — can make a meaningful difference. The RSI research team is currently working with the eviction mediation program team to update our program materials to ensure parties can effectively learn about the program and access the resources they need. Stay tuned for updates on this project.

[1] The researchers note that it is unclear whether the remaining 33% of cases did not involve rental assistance or if the mediator did not make reference to it in the settlement agreements.

[2] The researchers note that while rent relief availability is an important factor to ensuring housing stability, it alone does not ensure such an outcome. They note that combining rent relief with a robust pre-litigation mediation process strengthens mediation outcomes.

Tags:
Posted in Court Mediation Program, COVID-19, Evaluation, Eviction Mediation, OPEN Project, RSI News | No Comments »

A Look Back at Nearly Five Years of RSI’s Kane County Eviction Mediation Program

Sandy Wiegand, April 22nd, 2026

When RSI launched the Kane County Eviction Mediation Program in May 2021, the Chicago collar county was facing the prospect of an onslaught of evictions as it became evident that pandemic-related eviction moratoria could soon wind down. Having cost so many lives and livelihoods, COVID-19 was also threatening people’s homes.

Today, as the eviction mediation program nears the milestone of five years in operation, we are taking the time to reflect on its goals and share some of its outcomes, including observations from some of the folks involved. Stay tuned in the coming weeks, too, for a more detailed and rigorous report from our Research Team, evaluating the program’s performance in 2025.

Stock photo by Kamaji Ogino via Pexels

Goals and Opportunities

RSI and Illinois’ 16th Judicial Circuit developed the Kane County Eviction Mediation Program together because we saw its potential to help families avoid sheriff’s eviction, as well as to help the court — which had only one eviction judge — manage the “tsunami” of evictions some feared would overtake it when the state’s eviction moratorium ended. Supporters also recognized that the grant-funded mediation program, which was free to participants, could benefit landlords by being cost-effective and potentially helping them to avoid empty units.

One of the program’s early, vital proponents was Judge John Dalton, who presided over Kane County Eviction Court from the program’s inception through December 2023. Judicial support has been key to the success of the program, as a 2022 RSI report stated: “The program can only function if the judges support it both by educating the parties about the resources available to them and by either strongly encouraging or requiring the parties to attend mediation. When tenants and landlords are educated about the benefits of mediation, they are more likely to want to participate.”

Noting that Kane County had been the first in Illinois to launch an eviction mediation program, Judge Dalton commented in 2023: “We have been overwhelmingly pleased with the outcomes. It has been successful in assisting landlords and tenants in reaching mutually beneficial agreements.”

Those with ADR experience, including RSI, foresaw another set of benefits from the eviction mediation program. One was the opportunity for parties to experience procedural justice, elements of which include feeling able to express oneself in mediation, finding the mediation process fair, and feeling satisfied with the process. We also knew that mediation carried the possibility of parties finding creative solutions in a way that was unlikely to occur in court.

Furthermore, because mediation was conducted online, and because the program did not charge parties any fee, it could increase access to justice. 

“(B)eing able to participate in mediation remotely via Zoom has been a huge benefit to all parties,” RSI Eviction Mediation Program Assistant Cathy McCoy noted. “Attending mediation and court in person in Kane County can be difficult without access to transportation, given the layout of the county.”

Mediations, Agreements and Avoided Evictions

Over the course of its existence, the Kane County Eviction Mediation Program has mediated almost 3,000 cases, which led to more than 2,100 agreements that helped parties avoid eviction. RSI program staff has also connected thousands of parties to support such as financial and housing counseling, legal aid, utility assistance and rental assistance.

Cathy, who joined RSI’s staff in 2025, has also been a paid mediator for RSI since the program’s beginning. In 2024, her dedication to providing a supportive process for eviction mediation parties led her to begin volunteering in person at the Kane County Courthouse in Geneva, Illinois, as well. (Although parties can attend mediation and court online, some still choose to attend in person.)

“Eviction mediation can benefit both tenants and landlords, both by shortening the time it takes to resolve their case and by reducing the stress level so that parties can focus on the future and make difficult decisions,” Cathy told us in 2024. “Most importantly, mediation can help avoid evictions and provide a bit of stability during challenging times.”

Tenants in eviction cases are overwhelmingly self-represented, and they often feel overwhelmed and powerless trying to navigate their case. Access to mediators and other support personnel can reduce their barriers to justice. “I often work with pro se parties that express gratitude that RSI mediators help them understand the process and empower them to make decisions, when the expense of an attorney would be a financial burden,” Cathy explained.

Sophie Rexrode is an Illinois Justice Corps fellow who has worked alongside Cathy at the courthouse, providing parties with information about the eviction court process, mediation and rental assistance. Sophie points to the program as a means to improve access to justice, while also noting that promoting dialogue can have additional, less obvious impacts.

“(B)uilding out parallel and alternative ways of resolving issues is tremendously important if we are interested in having a justice system that works for everyone, and the eviction mediation program is a significant step in that direction,” Sophie said recently of the program. “I also think that opening doors for dialogue in the community is critical, and the benefits from that ripple outward even if an individual case doesn’t get resolved.”

Judge and Party Feedback

In 2024, a new presiding judge was assigned to the Kane County Eviction Court and its eviction mediation program. Judge Elizabeth Flood oversaw the mediation program from January 2024 through December 2025. “I think the program was effective in facilitating communication between the parties and giving tenants the possibility of keeping their housing or negotiating more favorable terms to move or decrease debt,” she told RSI recently.

Many on the other side of the bench seemed to agree with this assessment. RSI’s Research Team regularly surveys Kane County Eviction Mediation Program participants as one way to evaluate the program’s effectiveness. Although feedback on the program has not been universally favorable (read full reports on the program’s survey responses on RSI’s website), the great majority of comments have been positive. Here are a few: 

“When people go through a difficult time, this program gives them a chance.”

“This program is a life preserver to a drowning person. Thank you.”

“This process gave me hope that I could get through a difficult time in my life, without having to further upset my life via eviction! I am very grateful!”

And apart from the surveys, just this month, a landlord emailed program staff to say:

“I truly have nothing but incredibly positive things to say so far in the mediation process and [staff member] was beyond helpful.”

The same week, an attorney sent staff the note:

“I generally have nothing but positive things to say about the mediation program. It has helped me resolve [many] cases over the past few years. … I appreciate that the program is available to facilitate resolution.”

Procedural Justice

RSI’s post-mediation surveys of Kane County Eviction Mediation Program participants focus in particular on measures of procedural justice, or the degree to which people feel they have been treated fairly during the process. In addition to being a useful gauge of participant satisfaction, procedural justice is important to the effectiveness of mediation. When people leave mediation with a sense of having been treated fairly, they tend to be more likely to abide by the agreement reached.

RSI’s survey asks questions about voice, fairness, trust in the mediator, respectful treatment by the mediator and more. Throughout the lifetime of the Kane County program, survey respondents have consistently given it high marks for procedural justice. For example, parties who responded to RSI’s surveys after participating in the program in 2025 gave an average rating above 4 on a five-point scale for each of the five procedural justice questions.

Comments from parties often reflect their appreciation for having a voice in the process and feeling respected. For example, tenant comments from surveys on mediations held in 2025 included the following:

“[Staff member] and [mediator] … made me feel important, I was heard, I was treated fairly and it made a stressful situation very comfortable …”

“[Mediator] did a great job at making sure both myself and my landlord were ‘heard.’”

“The mediator was fair with both sides which is all anyone could ask.”

Likewise, landlord’s attorneys who took surveys provided the following comments regarding 2025 mediations:

“Mediator was fair to both sides and not overly pushy toward settlement. Mediator was incredibly inquisitive, prompting both sides to be more honest or consider things they had not considered. Mediator was patient and thorough, made sure the case was settled and worked through tech issues with the tenant.”

“The resolution took into account the requests and needs of both sides.”

Asked about the program’s impact on parties, Judge Flood summarized: “I believe most parties felt they had a greater opportunity to express themselves and be heard than in a busy courtroom.”

Benefits to the Court

Both Judge Dalton and Judge Flood also credit the Kane County Eviction Mediation Program with helping the court run smoothly.

“Around 70% of the cases referred to mediation were resolved with a settlement agreement,” Judge Flood noted, “which streamlined the court process, led to quicker resolutions, and alleviated the need for trial settings on the majority of the cases.”

“Thanks to this program, the court has been able to run efficiently during an eviction surge,” Judge Dalton said.

RSI is grateful to the funders of this program over the years, including the American Arbitration Association – International Center for Dispute Resolution Foundation and the Illinois Equal Justice Foundation.

We hope to see the program continue for many years to come.

Hon. Elizabeth Flood

A Q&A With Judge Flood on ADR, Mediation

RSI has administered the Kane County Eviction Mediation Program in Illinois’ 16th Judicial Circuit since 2021. Hon. Elizabeth Flood, the first woman to be appointed Presiding Judge of the Family Division in the 16th Circuit, presided over the Kane County Eviction Court and oversaw this mediation program from January 2024 through December 2025. During Judge Flood’s time overseeing the program, it mediated over 1,100 cases, reached almost 800 agreements, and avoided eviction in 792 cases. Throughout the life of the program, it has also connected thousands of parties to support such as financial and housing counseling, legal aid, utility assistance and rental assistance.

With Judge Flood having recently been transferred to another courtroom, we wanted to catch up with her while her thoughts on the Kane County Eviction Mediation Program were still fresh.

What were your initial thoughts about the mediation program when you were assigned to the Kane County Eviction Court?

I was curious about the impact it had on the cases and resolutions.

Did you have previous interest in, or exposure to, mediation or other types of ADR?

I had presided over a family/divorce courtroom for six years, and we often used individual mediators in those cases to resolve parenting and financial issues. In the courtroom which handled evictions, I also presided over arbitration cases, in which parties were ordered before an arbitration panel to facilitate resolution before trial.

How would you describe the impact of the Kane County Eviction Mediation Program?

I think the program was effective in facilitating communication between the parties and giving tenants the possibility of keeping their housing or negotiating more favorable terms to move or decrease debt. I believe most parties felt they had a greater opportunity to express themselves and be heard than in a busy courtroom.

Around 70% of the cases referred to mediation were resolved with a settlement agreement, which streamlined the court process, led to quicker resolutions, and alleviated the need for trial settings on the majority of the cases.

What were some challenges for/with the program?

Some counsel representing landlords did not like the intervening step and subsequent three- to four-week delay if a case could not be resolved. A few did not come to mediations prepared with full information or a mindset to negotiate. We had meetings with many of the plaintiffs’ counsel explaining the benefits to both sides and the expected behavior and parameters.

You were also a part of an ADR Task Force created by the Illinois Judicial Conference as part of its 2025 Strategic Agenda Operational Plan. The 2026 Strategic Agenda Operational Plan has a similar ADR initiative Are you still involved?  

The task force is continuing; I am not involved as I recently moved to a courtroom which does not utilize arbitration, so I did not feel I had adequate background and knowledge to meaningfully contribute at this point. 

Why did you join the task force? What did you gain from the experience?

I was nominated to the task force; I gained a better understanding of the challenges and benefits from all stakeholders in arbitration programs.

How has your understanding of ADR evolved after partnering with the mediation program and participating in other ADR projects?

Both programs shed light on the issue of better communication between the parties leading to better outcomes in court, and the role the courts can play in encouraging and facilitating this communication.

Are there any lessons or experiences you bring with you into your new courtroom from your time in eviction court?

I will look for instances in which mediation or arbitration may be helpful in resolving any cases, in order to increase the efficiency of the courtcall for all sides.

Tags:
Posted in Court Mediation Program, Evaluation, Eviction Mediation, Program Evaluation, RSI News | No Comments »

Survey Comments Highlight What Tenants, Landlords Think About Mediation Program

Jasmine Henry, September 16th, 2024

Since 2021, Resolution Systems Institute has administered the Kane County (Illinois) Eviction Mediation Program. Our team works with the 16th Judicial Circuit Court and community services to mitigate the negative effects of eviction filings. We conduct intake, schedule mediations, provide guidance for parties going through eviction mediation, manage the mediator roster, and provide assistance to the mediators as needed. After parties participate in mediation, we ask them to complete a survey about their experience, including answering multiple open-response questions.

Kane County Eviction Mediation Program Survey Comments

Landlord and tenant comments on the program and their mediations illuminate what they value and what falls short for them. We have seen how the process makes parties feel respected and listened to, and what that means for them. We have also learned of issues that arise with power imbalances and with mediators who repeatedly facilitate cases involving the same attorney.

Mediation as a ‘Life Preserver’

Comments from the past year make clear that many parties have been profoundly affected by their experience with our program and their mediation. This is perhaps best exemplified by this comment from a tenant: “Everyone has their own reasons for difficulties. I got a chance to say how this happened and also how I can prevent it from happening in the future. I’m thankful for everyone who has helped me through this and being treated fairly and with respect. This program is a life preserver to a drowning person. Thank you.”

Another tenant shared a similar sentiment, saying, “When people go through a difficult time, this program gives them a chance.”

Mediator Role is Key

As with so many mediation programs, mediators are central to parties’ positive experience in the Kane County program, survey responses show. In fact, the presence of a knowledgeable, impartial mediator is one of the most appreciated aspects of the program. One participant noted that the mediator “listened to both sides of the story.” Another commented: “I really appreciated . . . the way the mediator helped to point out the facts of the situation and allow both parties to express themselves. As a tenant without a lawyer who’s been through a major financial crisis, it gave me the opportunity to be listened to and to get my head above water.”

Many survey respondents praised their mediators’ ability to help parties find compromise. As one tenant put it, “They really try to meet in the middle and make everyone happy in the end. It gives so much clarity and security.” Another tenant succinctly stated, “It gave a compromise to a no win situation.”

Participants noted that both the skills of the mediators and the structured nature of the mediation process ensure that all parties have a chance to contribute to the conversation. A tenant shared: “Both sides were given the opportunity to speak uninterrupted. Everything was explained clearly and the mediator was very pleasant to work with. I came in feeling anxious not knowing what to expect but was pleasantly surprised by the whole experience and outcome.” A landlord shared that it was “good to talk to the other party in the presence of some responsible people.”

“The meeting was not at all stressful once the call was started. Each party received ample time to discuss any offer, explanations of situation, possible resolutions to ensure both parties benefited.”

Tenants in particular mentioned the importance of feeling listened to. When asked what they liked about the mediation, tenants described mediators who “listened to my doubts and questions,” were “helpful and caring and want to hear what you have to say,” or gave all parties “the opportunity to discuss their thoughts and concerns.” A landlord added that their mediator “listened and asked good questions.”

Additionally, mediators were often commended for their patience and thoroughness, as exemplified by this comment: “The [mediator] was very respectful and kind and listened to all my doubts and questions. The [mediator] helped a lot and explained everything in very good detail.” Another participant described their experience this way: “The meeting was not at all stressful once the call was started. Each party received ample time to discuss any offer, explanations of situation, possible resolutions to ensure both parties benefited.”

These comments underscore the program’s success in creating an environment where both tenants and landlords feel they can speak openly, are listened to and are treated equitably.

Resources for Vulnerable Individuals

Several survey responses highlighted the program’s value for vulnerable individuals. For example, a number of comments mentioned the importance of the resources beyond mediation that the program can connect parties with. One tenant wrote that the program “was there to help me [with court paperwork] when they really didn’t have to.” Multiple commenters emphasized that they had applied to the court-based rental assistance program — which the mediation program directed many parties to, and which parties were able to access until funds ran out in June 2024. When asked if they would recommend eviction mediation to a friend, a tenant shared that they would (even though they didn’t settle their case in mediation) because “sometimes tenants are unaware of the resources available due to lack of communication or shame.”

Others expressed more general appreciation for being able to participate in the program as someone in a challenging situation: “Just every single mother that actually works and tries 100% for her and children deserves this opportunity.” Another shared: “I think it is an excellent program for families who are going through difficulties, personally I felt supported and confident in the ability of this incredible program to help.”

Perceptions of Mediator as Biased

Some survey respondents indicated that their mediators worked to minimize the usual power imbalance between tenants and landlords. For example, one commented: “My mediator was a rockstar ! The attorney tried to bully us and was interrupting them but they kept their calm and brought up my rights.”

However, some tenants expressed concerns about potential bias in the mediation process, with one tenant stating, “They are there to mostly help the landlord … It doesn’t help the tenant. At all … The mediator is on the landlord side to help them evicted you.”

“I felt because the lawyer and the mediator were familiar with one another they may have been more partial to the landlord.”

Similarly, a tenant shared, “Not only was I not informed what mediation was going to be like, but also the mediator didn’t take everything I said and just went with what the landlord [said].” And one tenant went so far as to say, “I feel like I was gaslit by the Lawyer, and [the lawyer], as well as the mediator didn’t want to hear my side.”

Some comments about pro-landlord bias reflected a tenant’s understanding that the mediator already knew or had worked with the landlord’s attorney in the past, with one tenant writing: “I felt because the lawyer and the mediator were familiar with one another they may have been more partial to the landlord.”

Another explained: “[I]t’s like the mediator and the landlord and the landlord Lawyer have some kind of friendship already[,] so that kind of singles you out when they’re cracking jokes and laughing with each other[. A]nd then [the mediator is] only hearing [the landlord’s] side and telling you [that] you have to take your side to court.”

Other criticisms related to feeling unduly pressured to reach an agreement. One tenant explained how they felt both unheard and pressured: “I feel as if, regardless what was disclosed, my landlord and his attorney pushed too hard at a hard no to mediation, not giving me a chance, and the mediator seemed to take what I had to say about the situation with a grain of salt.” Another tenant stated, “My concerns were not fully addressed, felt bullied into settling.” One expressed their frustration, saying: “The mediator didn’t listen to my needs and disregarded any of my opinions[. The mediator] listened to every word the lawyer said and also wrote anything they wanted word for word.”

How RSI Uses Feedback

RSI uses party responses to our post-mediation surveys both to evaluate and improve our program, as well as to tell the full story of the eviction mediation process. These firsthand accounts allow us to go beyond statistics to better understand how eviction mediation programs affect real people in our communities. Furthermore, these comments provide invaluable evidence of the program’s tangible benefits. By thoughtfully analyzing and presenting these comments, we strengthen our partnerships, justify program funding and, ultimately, improve our ability to effectively serve the Kane County community.

RSI takes party criticisms of our mediators and program very seriously. Every quarter, we evaluate the participant post-mediation survey responses to determine what is or is not working. Every month, we hold meetings with our program staff to review our findings. We also use our research to train mediators on how to cultivate better party experiences. When necessary, we provide further training and support to mediators with recurring issues. Occasionally, if feedback was provided but no improvement made, we remove underperforming mediators from our roster.

Negative party perceptions, even if not reflective of actual bias, indicate a need to ensure and communicate impartiality more effectively. While it can be demoralizing to read party comments complaining that a mediator was biased, these comments help us to understand the impact that such perceptions have on party experience. Mediation is meant to be a level playing field for all parties — landlords and tenants, unrepresented parties and those with attorneys.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Court Mediation Program, Evaluation, Eviction Mediation, Program Evaluation | No Comments »

Most Give High Ratings for Mediator Fairness, Trust in Mediator in Recent Surveys of RSI’s Kane County Eviction Mediation Program

Jasmine Henry, January 10th, 2024

RSI administers an eviction mediation program in Kane County, Illinois. Every quarter, we provide a report to the court on the participants’ experience in mediation based on their responses to a post-mediation survey.

Between July 1, 2023, and September 30, 2023, 174 eviction mediations were held in the 16th Judicial Circuit of Illinois (Kane County). After every mediation, participants were invited via email or text to complete an online survey about their experience; not all of the participants completed surveys. In our latest survey report, we examined participant responses from those three months. Specifically, we focused on participant opinions regarding fairness, trust and satisfaction. In all, 21 tenants, one landlord and 11 attorneys responded. The participants responded to the questions according to a seven-point scale, which we consolidated into three categories: low (1–2), medium (3–5), and high (6–7). Participants were invited to add comments to some of their responses. Their responses are summarized below.

Trust in Mediator, Perceived Fairness

We asked respondents about their perception of the mediator. Specifically, we asked: “How fairly did the mediator treat you?” And, “How much did you trust the mediator?” Almost two-thirds of participants gave high ratings for mediator fairness and trust. However, respondents tended to rate mediator fairness higher than mediator trust. For example, fewer than 3% of respondents thought the mediator did not treat them fairly, while 15% of respondents had low trust in the mediator. There was a parallel, albeit smaller, difference observed in the positive ratings, with 63% of respondents rating the mediator as very fair, compared with 58% who had high trust in the mediator.

Turning more broadly to respondents’ perception of the mediation process as a whole, we asked: “Overall, how fair was the mediation process?” Most of the participants who responded felt that the mediation was fair overall, with 62% saying it was highly fair. Notably, this is very similar to the percentage of respondents who said the mediator was highly fair. Not all of the respondents were impressed with the process, and 10% of respondents rated the mediation a little fair or not at all fair.

Tenants who rated overall fairness as high focused on the clarity mediators provided them, describing mediators as “helping” and “kind.” An attorney who rated overall fairness high also emphasized the mediator’s “sympathetic demeanor.”

Comments of Tenants, Attorneys

We asked respondents to explain their overall fairness ratings. The landlord did not comment, but many tenants and some attorneys did. Tenants who rated overall fairness as high focused on the clarity mediators provided them, describing mediators as “helping” and “kind.” An attorney who rated overall fairness high also emphasized the mediator’s “sympathetic demeanor.” A quarter of the tenant comments mentioned court-based rental assistance, which tenants were often referred to by the program. Several tenants also saw the mediators as helping, saying, “They stood up for me … They didn’t let [the landlord] push me,” and “[We asked] for what we wanted and [the mediator] basically fought for us to get it.”

In contrast, tenants who gave medium and low ratings on overall fairness tended to focus their frustrated comments on the mediator’s relationship with the landlord. One tenant said the mediator “may have been more partial to the landlord” because they “were familiar with one another”; another tenant said plainly that “they are there to mostly help the landlord.” One tenant felt frustrated that the mediator did not seem to believe what the tenant said at mediation, saying, “The mediator seemed to take what I had to say about the situation with a grain of salt.” Attorneys who rated the overall fairness at a medium or low level focused on efficiency, with one saying, “I was disappointed that the mediator allowed the opposing side to spend valuable time on issues irrelevant to the case.”

Likelihood to Recommend Eviction Mediation

To further explore participant satisfaction, we asked participants: “If a friend or colleague had a dispute like yours, how likely are you to recommend eviction mediation?” Most of the participants who responded were likely to recommend mediation to a friend or colleague, with 67% saying they were highly likely to recommend it. One tenant commented, “I would recommend all mediation options; sometimes tenants are unaware of the resources available due to lack of communication or shame.” However, another tenant who was less satisfied with the process commented, “It doesn’t help the tenant. At all. It helps landlords.”

As was the case with the first question on participant satisfaction, the landlord did not comment on their responses to this question, but we did receive two attorney comments. One attorney who was highly satisfied with the mediation process commented, “We made the exact same settlement offer that was accepted at mediation to the landlord’s attorney months ago, and they never responded in any way despite multiple phone calls. I assume this was on their client’s instructions. Because of the mediation process, I believe they would have continued stonewalling us.” The attorney who was unlikely to recommend mediation to a colleague said: “The lengthy mediation process is not helpful in my view. Before this system was implemented, and still now (in other counties), I am often able to reach agreements with the tenants within 5–10 minutes in the hallway outside the Courtroom. There is no need for the mediator, in my opinion.”

Conclusion

In conclusion, the survey responses indicate that the program continues to provide a positive experience to most participants. Those who completed the survey generally had positive perceptions of the mediators and the program, with the majority giving high ratings on fairness, trust and satisfaction. However, some participants’ comments point to a perception among tenants that mediators are biased toward the other side and a perception among attorneys that the mediation process is not efficient.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Evaluation, Eviction Mediation, Program Evaluation, RSI News | 2 Comments »

« Older Entries
Verified by ExactMetrics