Read Aloud the Text Content

This audio was created by Woord's Text to Speech service by content creators from all around the world.

Text Content or SSML code:

Two parallel schemes Both the OISC competence assessments and the IAAS have used the language of ‘Levels 1-3’ but each scheme means something different by the same terms. This has created significant confusion among practitioners and clients seeking services. This matters because under each scheme the level of competence or accreditation of an adviser determines the type of work they are permitted to carry out. Traditionally the levels of the OISC and IAAS schemes broadly corresponded as follows: OISC (Competence assessments contracted to HJT Training) Level 1 Advice and Assistance Level 2 Casework Level 3 Advocacy and Representation No equivalent IAAS (Law Society / Legal Aid Agency. Formerly administered by Central Law Training) Probationer Level 1 (accredited caseworker) Level 2 (senior caseworker) Immigration Law Advanced (Formerly Level 3 - advanced caseworker) September 2018 changes to the Immigration and Asylum Accreditation Scheme Changes to the IAAS were timed to coincide with the commencement of the new Immigration Legal Aid contract on 1 September 2018. The Law Society has explained the changes: There are significant changes to terminology, the time that members can remain at each stage of accreditation and the work they can perform at each stage. New terminology Changes have been made to terminology to better describe the status of caseworkers at all levels: Previous title: Changed to: Probationer Trainee casework assistant [Also referred to as: Assistant Caseworker] Level 1 Casework assistant [Also referred to as: Assistant Caseworker] level 2 Senior caseworker Level 2 supervisor Supervising senior caseworker Level 3 Advanced caseworker The previous levels of accreditation; probationer, level 1, level 2, supervisor, level 3 (advanced) will be replaced by interim, full and advanced accreditation. It remains the case that practitioners may apply for full accreditation as a senior caseworker without having been previously accredited. Time that members can remain at each stage of accreditation Trainee casework assistants may remain at this stage for up to six months. There is no re- accreditation at this stage. They must become accredited as a casework assistant or a senior caseworker in order to be paid by the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) for work conducted under the 2018 Standard Civil Contract. Casework assistants may remain at this stage for up to one year. There is no re-accreditation at this stage. They must become accredited as a senior caseworker in order be paid by the Legal Aid Agency for work conducted under the 2018 Standard Civil Contract. Senior caseworkers will have to seek re-accreditation every three years. This is unchanged. Supervising senior caseworkers will have to seek re-accreditation as a senior caseworker, every three years. This is unchanged. Duties at each level Casework assistants and trainee casework assistants who have passed the exam • Cannot have conduct of cases/matters. • Can conduct tasks delegated by senior caseworkers from their own case-load, except in reserved matters. Delegated tasks are supervised by, and remain the responsibility of, the senior caseworker who has conduct of the matter. Senior caseworkers • Senior caseworkers have conduct of all matters. • Senior caseworkers should delegate tasks to casework assistants, but remain responsible for the progress and overall conduct of the matter. Supervising senior caseworkers Supervising senior caseworkers and senior caseworkers must delegate tasks to casework assistants (CA) and trainee casework assistants (TCA). Contract-holders must maintain ratio of a maximum 2 FTE CAs or TCAs to every 1 FTE senior caseworker or supervising senior caseworker. Supervising senior caseworkers can have conduct of all matters. Supervising senior caseworkers have responsibility for: • Supervision of up to 4 supervisees (FTE). • Supervision and training of casework assistants and trainees, including ensuring that the allocation of tasks is appropriate by reference to capability, capacity and progress towards accreditation as a senior caseworker. • Supervision and training of senior caseworkers. • Allocation of matters to senior caseworkers, including to themselves. • All matters for unaccompanied asylum-seeking children and other minors. • All matters for those who lack capacity within the meaning of section 2 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. • All matters for clients detained at an IRC (Immigration Removal Centre). • Exercise of delegated function to grant CLR (including when this is conducted at legal help level). (Previously available at: https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/support-services/accreditation/immigration-and- asylum/immigration-and-asylum-accreditation-changes/) Please note that the most recent documents sometimes refer to ‘assistant caseworker’, ‘caseworker’ and ‘senior caseworker’ but appear to be referring to the same three-level scheme. Legal Aid Agency work restrictions - reserved matters and tasks. To be conducted only by senior caseworkers. These cannot be delegated: The Legal Aid Agency has confirmed to the Law Society that tasks in CLR matters can be delegated to casework assistants, provided the matter or task is not reserved. The above restrictions apply only to work undertaken under the new civil contract commencing on 1 September 2018. Work carried out after 1 September 2018 under earlier civil contracts will be subject to current restrictions. The Accreditation Scheme as a ‘passport’ to OISC competence In the April 2018 edition of OISC News, a change was announced to OISC’s former policy of generally allowing those who were members of the accreditation scheme to be exempted from passing the OISC assessment: OISC and the IAAS We have recently changed our operating policy in relation to assessing the competence of applicant advisers. Previously applicant advisers seeking authorisation from the Commissioner, who had the Law Society’s Immigration and Asylum Accreditation Scheme (IAAS) endorsement, were not normally required to take equivalent OISC assessments. However, the content of the IAAS assessments has greatly changed in recent times. The areas of knowledge now assessed by the IAAS scheme no longer reflect the OISC syllabus for applicants who apply for authorisation in our ‘Immigration’ category at any Level. As such applicants who wish to apply for authorisation in ‘Immigration’ will now need to take OISC assessments even if they have IAAS accreditation. ANNOUNCEMENT Prospective advisers who are seeking authorisation only in the category of Asylum and Protection and have successfully completed the Law Society IAAS examinations and gained IAAS accreditation, are not required to sit the corresponding Level OISC competence assessment. These include: • IAAS level 1 accredited caseworker > OISC Level 2 assessment (Asylum and Protection) • IAAS level 2 senior caseworker > OISC Level 3 assessment (Asylum and Protection) • IAAS level 2 supervisor > OISC Level 3 assessment (Asylum and Protection) For OISC exemption at Level 2, the minimum requirement is IAAS accredited caseworker. For Level 3, it is IAAS senior caseworker or supervisor. The relevant certificate must be enclosed with your application for regulation. Please ensure that one certificate for each accredited adviser is submitted. For example, if only one applicant has IAAS accreditation, the others need to sit OISC assessment. Further exemptions from assessments may be given to organisations who have IAAS accreditation at accredited or senior caseworkers level, or supervisor level, who provide immigration advice and services which are entirely limited to work that falls within scope for Legal Aid (for example Domestic Violence and Immigration Bail applications). Such exemptions will be decided on a case by case basis Conclusions about the process of competence assessment and accreditation From the materials published by OISC and those published by the Law Society and Central Law Training in relation to the accreditation exams, it is clear that the schemes are structured and assessed in a similar way. • The purpose of both schemes has always been to formulate scenarios which are as close to real-life as possible. The questions are designed to permit the candidate to show what they would advise clients, what they would submit in representations or appeal grounds and what they would do in practice, rather than an academic understanding of asylum and immigration law or an attempt to catch the candidate out. • Both schemes adopt a system where one requires more specialised knowledge to progress through the ascending levels of assessment. • Both schemes have adopted a system where candidates’ papers are marked according to a strict marking scheme with little opportunity to score bonus marks. The most important differences are: • The subject matter of the accreditation scheme is restricted to the areas ‘in scope’ of Legal Aid. By contrast, the OISC assessments cover the full spectrum of immigration and asylum law. • Under the IAAS, the pass mark in the trainee casework assistant exam is 60 per cent and in the casework assistant and senior caseworker exams is 50 per cent, whereas the pass mark in the OISC assessments is 60 per cent at Level 1 and 65 per cent at levels 2 and 3. • OISC is open book but the accreditation exam is not.