Managing pro bono: Doing well by doing better

Fordham Law Review

Volumn 78, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 2357-2442

  Cummings, Scott L ^a   Rhode, Deborah L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77952718334     PISSN: 0015704X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (542)

1. David Bario, Recession-Proof?, AM. LAW., July 2009, at 53.
2. Id. at 53.
3. Hours increased by thirteen percent during 2008 among the 135 firms that committed to investing three to five percent of their billable hours toward pro bono work. See Karen Sloan, Pro Bono Hours Rise at Major U.S. Law Finns, NAT'L L.J., July 29, 2009, http:/www.law.com/jsp/law/careercenter/ lawArticleCareerCenter.jsp?id=1202432603666.
4. PRO BONO INST., LAW FIRM PRO BONO STAFFING AND SALARY SURVEY REPORT (2007);
5. Scott L. Cummings, The Politics of Pro Bono, 52 UCLA L. REV. 1, 58-61 (2004);
6. Stephen Daniels & Joanne Martin, Legal Services for the Poor: Access, Self-Interest, and Pro Bono, in 12 SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME, LAW AND DEVIANCE 145, 157-59 (Rebecca L. Sandefur ed., 2009);
7. see also Daphne Eviatar, Pro Bono Pros, AM. LAW., July 2008, at 104.
8. The institutionalization of pro bono programs is related to the broader bureaucratization of large law firms. See RICHARD L. ABEL, AMERICAN LAWYERS 10 (1989) (noting that "[t]he size, internal differentiation, and stratification of [firms] demands more bureaucratic structures").
9. Bario, supra note 1, at 54 ("Now firms are more likely to see pro bono work as a way to take up slack when billables are down⋯.").
10. See ASS'N OF PRO BONO COUNSEL, CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE PLACEMENT OF LAW FIRM ATTORNEYS INTO PUBLIC INTEREST ORGANIZATIONS (2009), available at http://www.abanet.org/legalservices/probono/downturn/docs/apbco-considerations. pdf;
11. PRO BONO INST., LAW FIRM ATTORNEYS DISPLACED BY THE ECONOMIC DOWNTURN: BEST PRACTICES AND GUIDANCE FOR EFFECTIVE PRO BONO ENGAGEMENT (2009), available at http://www.probonoinst.org/pdfs/DisplacedAttorneys.pdf.
12. Steven Boutcher reports that the total pro bono hours for firms in the Am Law 200 in 2005 was just over 3.75 million. Steven A. Boutcher, The Institutionalization of Pro Bono in Large Law Firms: Trends and Variation Across the AmLaw 200, in PRIVATE LAWYERS AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST: THE EVOLVING ROLE OF PRO BONO IN THE LEGAL PROFESSION 135, 144 (Robert Granfield & Lynn Mather eds., 2009) [hereinafter PRIVATE LAWYERS AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST].
13. After the JD, a longitudinal study of newly certified lawyers by the American Bar Foundation and NALP Foundation for Law Career Research and Education, reported that about half of total pro bono hours by private practice lawyers came from lawyers in firms with more than 250 attorneys. RONIT DINOVITZER ET AL., AM. BAR. FOUND. & NALP FOUND. FOR LAW CAREER RESEARCH & EDUC, AFTER THE JD: FIRST RESULTS OF A NATIONAL STUDY OF LEGAL CAREERS 37 tbl.4.3 (2004);
14. see also Rebecca L. Sandefur, Lawyers' Pro Bono Service and Market-Reliant Legal Aid, in PRIVATE LAWYERS AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST, supra, at 95, 101.
15. - Cf,..
16. Elizabeth Chambliss & David B. Wilkins, The Emerging Role of Ethics Advisors, General Counsel, and Other Compliance Specialists in Large Law Firms, 44 ARIZ. L. REV. 559, 576-77 (2002) (discussing the emergence of in-house compliance specialists as another area of law firm organizational development).
17. For representative studies, see DEBORAH L. RHODE, PRO BONO IN PRINCIPLE AND IN PRACTICE 137-53 (2005) [hereinafter RHODE, PRO BONO];
18. Boutcher, supra note 7;
19. Cummings, supra note 4;
20. Robert Granfield & Lynn Mather, Pro Bono, the Public Good, and the Legal Profession, in PRIVATE LAWYERS AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST, supra note 7, at 1;
21. Deborah L. Rhode, Rethinking the Public in Lawyers' Public Service: Pro Bono, Strategic Philanthropy, and the Bottom Line, 77 FORDHAM L. REV. 1435 (2009) [hereinafter Rhode, Rethinking];
22. Rebecca L. Sandefur, Lawyers' Pro Bono Service and American-Style Civil Legal Assistance, 41 LAW & SOC'Y REV. 79 (2007);
23. Maria Twomey & John Corker, Pro Bono at Work: Report on the Pro Bono Legal Work of 25 Large Australian Law Firms, 11 LEGAL ETHICS 255 (2008).
24. Pro bono counsel is the term most prevalent among firms and most occupants of the position; it is also the term chosen by the Association of Pro Bono Counsel. The role, responsibilities, and other practice obligations that attach to this position vary across firms. See infra text accompanying notes 111-17.
25. The Association of Pro Bono Counsel, http://www.probonocounsel.org/about/ (last visited Mar. 17,2010).
26. The Association of Pro Bono Counsel, Membership, http://www. probonocounseI.org/membership (last visited Mar. 17, 2010).
27. To determine what percentage of Am Law 200 firms reported having a "full-time attorney in a dedicated pro bono coordination/oversight role," we consulted the Pro Bono Information section of each firm's Employer Information Page in the NALP Directory of Legal Employers, http://www.nalpdirectory.com/index.asp (search for a firm; then scroll down to its "Pro Bono Information"). We found that seventy-eight firms reported having a full-time lawyer as pro bono counsel. This figure was heavily weighted toward the top hundred firms, which had sixty-three of the seventy-eight positions.
28. The e-mail requesting participation in the survey described its goals and provided relevant human subject information; it assured members that their responses would remain confidential unless they agreed to have their identity revealed for reporting purposes. Members were directed to the survey via an embedded web link. All of the respondents except one (who submitted an electronic copy via e-mail) provided answers online.
29. The directory publishes annual online reports from the firms in a section on "Pro Bono Information." This section provided information on the organization of firm programs for fifty-five of our responding firms.
30. We assigned firms a geographic region based on the city in which the primary U.S. office is located and the regional categories in the Am Law 200. For most firms, we used The American Lawyer's city designation. In those cases in which The American Lawyer did not associate a firm with a specific city, we looked at law firm profiles on Vault.com and, if necessary, firm websites to determine where the firm had its headquarters.
31. The Mid-Atlantic includes Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York State (excluding New York City), Northern Virginia, and Pennsylvania. Rosemarie Clancy & John O'Connor, A Guide to Our Methodology, AM. LAW., May 2008, at 165.
32. New England includes Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Id.
33. The West Coast/Pacific Rim region includes Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington State. Id. The Midwest region includes Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin.
34. Id.
35. The South and Southeast region includes Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Southern Virginia, Tennessee, and West Virginia. Id. The West and Southwest region includes Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming.
36. Id. Many of these firms have offices in multiple states. We did not collect office-by-office data and therefore cannot say how pro bono structure influences activity across jurisdictions. We know that at least some firms use a central coordinator for more than one office, while others have counsel in different cities. For example, DLA Piper, which is structured as a strategic alliance of firms, has five U.S. attorneys who manage pro bono programs on a full-time basis; each focuses on a different region of the country in addition to administering national projects. The firm has also recently hired one full-time and one part-time attorney to manage its international pro bono activities. E-mail from Anne Geraghty Helms, Pro Bono Counsel, DLA Piper, to Scott L. Cummings, Professor, UCLA School of Law (Sept. 11, 2009,14:00:10 PDT) (on file with authors).
37. See generally Paul J. DiMaggio & Walter W. Powell, The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields, 48 AM. SOC. REV. 147(1983).
38. See Robert Granfield, The Meaning of Pro Bono: Institutional Variations in Professional Obligations Among Lawyers, 41 LAW & SOC'Y REV. 113, 116 (2007).
39. Scott L. Cummings & Ann Southworth, Between Profit and Principle: The Private Public Interest Firm, in PRIVATE LAWYERS AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST, supra note 7, at 183, 183.
40. See Cummings, supra note 4, at 18, 110-11.
41. See Leslie C. Levin, Pro Bono Publico in a Parallel Universe: The Meaning of Pro Bono in Solo and Small Law Firms, 37 HOFSTRA L. REV. 699, 701 (2009);
42. see also LYNN MATHER ET AL., DIVORCE LAWYERS AT WORK: VARIETIES OF PROFESSIONALISM IN PRACTICE (2001);
43. CARROLL SERON, THE BUSINESS OF PRACTICING LAW: THE WORK LIVES OF SOLO AND SMALL-FIRM ATTORNEYS (1996);
44. Philip R. Lochner, Jr., The No Fee and Low Fee Legal Practice of Private Attorneys, 9 LAW & SOC'Y REV. 431 (1975).
45. Leslie C. Levin, Pro Bono and Low Bono in the Solo and Small Law Firm Context, in PRIVATE LAWYERS AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST, supra note 7, at 155, 155-56.
46. An analogous institutionalization of pro bono work has occurred within legal services and public interest organizations, and is ripe for additional research. This development affects the volume and the type of cases routed to pro bono lawyers, and the evaluation of their work.
47. Bario, supra note 1.
48. See MARC GALANTER & THOMAS PALAY, TOURNAMENT OF LAWYERS: THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE BIG LAW FIRM 46 (1991);
49. see also ABEL, supra note 4, at 9.
50. See Carrie Menkel-Meadow, Culture Clash in the Quality of Life in the Law: Changes in the Economics, Diversification and Organization of Lawyering, 44 CASE W. RES. L. REV. 621, 629-30 (1994).
51. The percentage of private practitioners working in big firms (over fifty lawyers) also increased, doubling from 7.3% in 1980 to 14.6% in 1988. See Robert L. Nelson, The Futures of American Lawyers: A Demographic Profile of a Changing Profession in a Changing Society, 44 CASE W. RES. L. REV. 345, 392 (1994).
52. See Milton C. Regan, Jr., Law Firms, Competition Penalties, and the Values of Professionalism, 13 GEO. J. LEGAL ETHICS 1, 9 (1999).
53. 2009 Am Law 200 Data (on file with authors);
54. 2002 Am Law 200 Data (on file with authors);
55. 1992 Am Law 200 Data (on file with authors).
56. Compare 2000 Am Law 200 Data (on file with authors), with 1991 Am Law 200 Data (on file with authors).
57. Compare 2008 Am Law 200 Data (on file with authors), with 2001 Am Law 200 Data (on file with authors).
58. Compare 2009 Am Law 200 Data, supra note 32, with 2008 Am Law 200 Data, supra note 34.
59. See Cynthia Fuchs Epstein, Stricture and Structure: The Social and Cultural Context of Pro Bono Work in Wall Street Firms, 70 FORDHAM L. REV. 1689, 1695 (2002) (suggesting that a "laissez faire" approach to pro bono activity works against substantial commitment).
60. For a general overview of the transformation of large firms, see ROBERT L. NELSON, PARTNERS WITH POWER: THE SOCIAL TRANSFORMATION OF THE LARGE LAW FIRM 172-80 (1988).
61. Sandefur, supra note 9, at 93
62. quoting RICHARD M. CYERT & JAMES G. MARCH, A BEHAVIORAL THEORY OF THE FIRM 37 (1963)).
63. See Richard L. Abel, State, Market, Philanthropy, and Self-Help as Legal Services Delivery Mechanisms, in PRIVATE LAWYERS AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST, supra note 7, at 295, 295-96.
64. See Alan W. Houseman, Civil Legal Assistance for Low-Income Persons: Looking Back and Looking Forward, 29 FORDHAM URB. L.J. 1213, 1222 (2002). Although federal funding in actual dollars has risen since then, as of 2008, it was still nearly fifty-three percent below what it was in 1980 when adjusted for inflation.
65. ALAN W. HOUSEMAN, CTR. FOR LAW & Soc. POLICY, CIVIL LEGAL AID IN THE UNITED STATES: AN UPDATE FOR 2009, at 13 (2009) [hereinafter HOUSEMAN, CIVIL LEGAL AID 2009], available at http://www.clasp.org/admin/site/publications/ files/CrVIL-LEGAL-AID-IN-THE-UNITED-STATES-2.pdf.
66. Omnibus Consolidated Rescissions and Appropriations Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-134, § 504(aX7), (11), (13), 110 Stat. 1321, 1321-53 to -55.
67. See BRENNAN CTR. FOR JUSTICE, RESTRICTING LEGAL SERVICES: HOW CONGRESS LEFT THE POOR WITH ONLY HALF A LAWYER 7 (2000), available at http://brennan.3cdn.net/3cbbeedd52806583bl-osm6blo8g.pdf.
68. Primary sources include grants from state and local governments, interest on lawyers' trust fund accounts, and private donors. See ALAN W. HOUSEMAN, CTR. FOR LAW & Soc. POLICY, CIVIL LEGAL AID IN THE UNITED STATES: AN OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRAM IN 2003, at 4 (2003), available at www.clasp.org/admin/site/ publications/files/0153.pdf;
69. Deborah L. Rhode, Whatever Happened to Access to Justice?, 42 LOY. L.A. L. REV. 869, 908 (2009).
70. LEGAL SERVS. CORP., DOCUMENTING THE JUSTICE GAP IN AMERICA 1-4 (2d ed. 2007), available at http://www.lsc.gov/justicegap.pdf;
71. Rhode, supra note 43, at 869.
72. For information about the inadequate resources of public interest organizations, see generally Deborah L. Rhode, Public Interest Law: The Movement at Midlife, 60 STAN. L. REV. 2027 (2008).
73. LEGAL SERVS. CORP., ADOPTION OF PRINCIPLES ON PRIVATE BAR INVOLVEMENT (1981), available at http://www.lsc.gov/pdfs/1981-03.PDF;
74. see also Angela McCaffrey, Pro Bono in Minnesota: A History of Volunteerism in the Delivery of Civil Legal Services to Low Income Clients, 13 LAW & INEQ. 77, 87 (1994). Under the program, Legal Services Corporation grantees are required to use 12.5% of their federal funds to support private attorney involvement. 45 C.F.R. § 1614.2 (2009).
75. See MEREDITH MCBURNEY, THE IMPACT OF LEGAL SERVICES PROGRAM RECONFIGURATION ON PRO BONO 1 (2003), available at www.abanet.org/legalservices/ probono/impact-reconfiguration.pdf;
76. see also Esther F. Lardent, Structuring Law Firm Pro Bono Programs: A Community Service Typology, in THE LAW FIRM AND THE PUBLIC GOOD 59, 75 (Robert A. Katzmann ed., 1995) (putting the number of pro bono programs at about fifty).
77. The American Bar Association's current directory of pro bono programs lists approximately nine hundred groups; there are ninety-six in California and sixty-six in New York. American Bar Association, Standing Committee on Pro Bono & Public Service and the Center for Pro Bono, Directory of Pro Bono Programs, http://www.abanet.org/legalservices/probono/directory.html (last visited Mar. 17, 2010).
78. Sandefur, supra note 9, at 102.
79. MODEL RULES OF PROF'L CONDUCT R. 6.1 (2009).
80. Id.
81. For the frequency of pro bono contributions arising from lawyers' personal relationships or desires to attract paying clients, see RHODE, PRO BONO, supra note 9, at 39, 148.
82. Sandefur, supra note 9, at 91-92.
83. See ABA Standing Comm. on Pro Bono & Pub. Serv., ABA Pro Bono Publico Award, http://www.abanet.org/legalservices/probono/probonopublicoaward.html (last visited Mar. 17, 2010).
84. For example, the California State Bar has organized an annual pro bono awards program to recognize outstanding volunteers. See State Bar of Cal., 2004 President's Pro Bono Service Awards, available at http://www.calbar.ca.gov/ calbar/pdfs/awards/2004-Pres-Pro-Bono-Award.pdf.
85. See Sandefur, supra note 9, at 92.
86. PRO BONO INST., REPORT ON THE 2008 PRO BONO INSTITUTE LAW FIRM PRO BONO CHALLENGE STATISTICS 5 (2009).
87. See ABA Standing Comm. on Pro Bono & Pub. Serv., State Reporting Policies, http://www.abanet.org/legalservices/probono/reporting/pbreporting.cfm (last visited Mar. 17, 2010) [hereinafter ABA State Reporting Policies];
88. see also The Fla. Bar, Pro Bono Publico (For the Good of the Public), http://www.flabar.Org/DIVCOM/PI/BIPS2001.nsf/0/a8e81lc59073e9f68525669e004d21f6? OpenDocument (last visited Mar. 17, 2010).
89. For the states that have voluntary regimes, see ABA State Reporting Policies, supra;
90. see also Kellie Isbell & Sarah Sawle, Current Development, Pro Bono Publico: Voluntary Service and Mandatory Reporting, 15 GEO. J. LEGAL ETHICS 845 (2002).
91. See ABA State Reporting Policies, supra note 58.
92. STANDING COMM. ON PRO BONO LEGAL SERV., REPORT TO THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA, THE FLORIDA BAR, AND THE FLORIDA BAR FOUNDATION ON THE VOLUNTARY PRO BONO ATTORNEY PLAN 3 (2006) [hereinafter FLORIDA PRO BONO REPORT].
93. For an example, see Chicago Bar Association, 2009 Pro Bono Week, http://www.chicagobar.org/AM/Template.cfrn?Section=Pro-Bono-Week- 2009&Ternplate=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfrn&ContentrD=4849 (last visited Mar. 17, 2010).
94. The three most common institutional arrangements were as follows: "(a) a firm committee handled or reviewed intake of pro bono cases, and individual lawyers associated themselves with cases of interest; (b) the firm committed itself to release lawyers for full-time public interest work or maintained a separate office for legal aid work; and (c) individual lawyers determined their own amounts and types of public interest work and felt that the firm supported and encouraged pro bono work." JOEL F. HANDLER, ELLEN JANE HOLLINGSWORTH & HOWARD S. ERLANGER, LAWYERS AND THE PURSUIT OF LEGAL RIGHTS 123-24 (1978).
95. Id. at 45-46;
96. see also JEROLD S. AUERBACH, UNEQUAL JUSTICE: LAWYERS AND SOCIAL CHANGE IN MODERN AMERICA 278-79 (1976);
97. F. RAYMOND MARKS ET AL., THE LAWYER, THE PUBLIC, AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY 204-10 (1972).
98. See Lardent, supra note 47, at 60.
99. See MARKS ET AL., supra note 63, at 114-16;
100. see also Al Kamen & Ed Bruske, Critics See Lawyers Losing Interest in Public-Service Cases, WASH. POST, Dec. 27, 1983, at C1. Covington & Burling's rotation program was initiated in 1969.
101. See Cummings, supra note 4, at 36 n.203
102. (citing COVINGTON & BURLING, PUBLIC SERVICE ACTIVITIES 58 (2002)).
103. Taking this model one step further, Baltimore-based Piper & Marbury established a branch office in a low-income community to provide pro bono services. See ALLAN ASHMAN, THE NEW PRIVATE PRACTICE: A STUDY OF PIPER & MARBURY'S NEIGHBORHOOD LAW OFFICE, at xiii (1972).
104. The urge to rank grew out of a broader movement to use objective indicators to promote better transparency and accountability across a range of public and private institutions. Michael Sauder & Wendy Nelson Espeland, The Discipline of Rankings: Tight Coupling and Organizational Change, 74 AM. SOC. REV. 63, 64, 80 (2009).
105. On the impact of rankings, see Michael Sauder & Ryon Lancaster, Do Rankings Matter? The Effects of the U.S. News & World Report Rankings on the Admissions Process of Law Schools, 40 LAW & Soc'Y REV. 105 (2006);
106. see also Hunter R. Clark, How the U.S. News Rankings Affect American Legal Education, 91 JUDICATURE 80 (2007);
107. Rachel F. Moran, Of Rankings and Regulation: Are the U.S. News & World Report Rankings Really a Subversive Force in Legal Education?, 81 IND. L.J. 383 (2006);
108. Andrew P. Morriss & William D. Henderson, Measuring Outcomes: Post-graduation Measures of Success in the U.S. News & World Report Law School Rankings, 83 IND. L.J. 791 (2008);
109. Jeffrey Evans Stake, The Interplay Between Law School Rankings, Reputations, and Resource Allocation: Ways Rankings Mislead, 81 IND. L.J. 229 (2006);
110. Cass R. Sunstein, Ranking Law Schools: A Market Test?, 81 IND.L.J. 25(2006).
111. The development of law school pro bono programs beginning in the early 1980s reinforced graduate sensitivity to firm pro bono opportunities. See RHODE, PRO BONO, supra note 9, at 22.
112. Methodology: How We Determine the A-List Scores, AM. LAW., July 1, 2009, http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTAL.jsp?id=1202431721833.
113. Methodology: How We Compute Our Pro Bono Rankings, AM. LAW., July 1, 2009, http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTAL.jsp?id=1202431509210.
114. The Am Law 50: America's Fifty Highest Grossing Firms, AM. LAW., July/Aug. 1985, at 89.
115. Sauder & Lancanster, supra note 66, at 130-31.
116. Law school rankings compiled by U.S. News & World Report have led to well-documented gaming, with law school deans hiring back unemployed recent graduates to boost employment numbers or failing to report academic information for lower-performing incoming students enrolled in night programs. Morse Code: Inside the College Rankings, http://www.usnews.com/blogs/college-rankings-blog/ 2009/05/18/what-happened-with-brooklyn-law-school.html (May 18, 2009, 14:53 EST).
117. See RHODE, PRO BONO, supra note 9, at 137-39.
118. Cummings, supra note 4, at 77-78.
119. Eviatar, supra note 4, at 104.
120. For earlier discussions of pro bono counsel in the legal trade press, see Terry Carter, Building a Pro Bono Base: Dedicating Resources Proves To Be Good for Firms and Clients, A.B.A. J., June 2003, at 30;
121. Wendy R. Leibowitz, Full-Time Do-Gooders a Rarity but on the Rise, NAT'L L.J., Aug. 19, 1996, at B9.
122. Fifty-six of fifty-eight responding firms assigned one or more persons to oversee their pro bono programs. PRO BONO INST., supra note 4, at 4.
123. A previous version of the survey, with a higher number of respondents, had found that there were ninety firms with such a position. Cummings, supra note 4, at 59 n.353
124. (citing PRO BONO INST., UPDATE ON THE 2001 LAW FIRM STAFFING SURVEY 1 (2003)).
125. We defined pro bono counsel according to the definition used to determine membership in APBCo. See supra note 12 and accompanying text.
126. In all, there were 271 firms in The American Lawyer pro bono ranking since its inception; 35 of those firms no longer exist due to merger or dissolution, leaving a total of 236. Of the 127 firms that responded, 49 stated that they had no pro bono counsel positions, leaving 78 firms with such positions during the period covered by the rankings. The number of positions reported (91) is greater than the number of firms (78) because some firms had more than one pro bono counsel position.
127. The A-List was first published in calendar year 2003 on the basis of data collected in fiscal year 2002. Aric Press, The A-List, AM. LAW., Sept. 2003, at 84. The pro bono data reported throughout the article is based on fiscal years.
128. Eviatar, supra note 4, at 106.
129. Interview 13 (Aug. 12, 2009).
130. Interview 27 (Sept. 2, 2009).
131. See Sauder & Espeland, supra note 66, at 64.
132. See John W. Meyer & Brian Rowan, Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony, 83 AM. J. Soc. 340, 341 (1977).
133. See Rhode, supra note 45, at 2070;
134. Sandefur, supra note 9, at 85;
135. see also ANN SOUTHWORTH, LAWYERS OF THE RIGHT: PROFESSIONALIZING THE CONSERVATIVE COALITION 173 (2008) (noting that conservative public interest organizations also seek access to pro bono services).
136. AM. BAR ASS'N STANDING COMM. ON PRO BONO & PUB. SERV., SUPPORTING JUSTICE II: A REPORT ON THE PRO BONO WORK OF AMERICA'S LAWYERS 1 (2009) [hereinafter ABA, SUPPORTING JUSTICE II], available at http://www.abanet.org/ legalservices/probono/report2.pdf. This study reported pro bono data from 2008.
137. DINOVITZER ET AL., supra note 7, at 37 tbl.4.3.
138. Sandefur, supra note 9, at 98-100.
139. Id. at 100. Specifically targeted recruitment measures were, however, positively associated with pro bono participation.
140. Id. Sandefur also found that reporting requirements had no influence, a finding inconsistent with other evidence suggesting that such requirements increase participation. In Florida, which instituted mandatory reporting in 1994, the annual average of pro bono service per lawyer increased a decade after the program started from twenty-five to forty-eight hours. FLORIDA PRO BONO REPORT, supra note 60, at 3.
141. Boutcher, supra note 7, at 145 & fig.7.2. Boutcher also notes that while the per-lawyer average has increased for the Am Law 200, it has increased more substantially (roughly fifteen hours) for the top one hundred, while the average for the bottom hundred firms actually declined.
142. Id.
143. Total hours increased from 3,768,510 to 5,567,231; average hours grew from 38.25 to 48.77. The average hour-per-lawyer figure includes those firms that are in the ranking but did not report data and therefore are included as reporting 0 hours. If the average is taken based only on firms that reported data, the increase is 12 hours, from 40.48 in 2005 to 52.73 in 2008. Compare 2009 Am Law Pro Bono Survey (on file with authors), with 2006 Am Law Pro Bono Survey (on file with authors).
144. Aric Press, In-House at The American Lawyer, AM. LAW., July 2008, at 13.
145. See Boutcher, supra note 7, at 149 (finding that "firms mat generate higher profits per partner do more pro bono, precisely because they can afford to do so," but higher firm revenues are negatively correlated with pro bono, suggesting that "[b]illable hours are in direct competition with pro bono hours");
146. see also Sandefur, supra note 9, at 98.
147. For other discussions of the relationship between profitability and pro bono contributions, see Debra Burke et al., Pro Bono Publico: Issues and Implications, 26 LOY. U. CHI. L.J. 61, 82-83 (1994);
148. Marc Galanter & Thomas Palay, Public Service Implications of Evolving Law Firm Size and Structure, in THE LAW FIRM AND THE PUBLIC GOOD 19, 44 tbl.2-3, 45 tbl.2-4, 46 (Robert A. Katzmann ed., 1995).
149. See RHODE, PRO BONO, supra note 9.
150. By "quantity," we mean the number of pro bono hours and their distribution across firm attorneys. Such measures say nothing about the kind of matters in which hours are invested, which is part of what a more qualitative analysis would capture.
151. Rhode, Rethinking, supra note 9;
152. Deborah Rhode, For Whose Good?, AM. LAW., July 2009, at 56.
153. Rhode, supra note 45, at 2071-72 (noting that fourteen percent experienced extensive problems, thirty-three percent experienced moderate problems, and eight percent experienced limited problems)).
154. See, e.g., Noeleen G. Walder, Failure To Supervise Pro Bono Attorney Dooms Divorce Pact, N.Y. LAW., June 18, 2009, http://www.nylj.com/nylawyer/ probono/news/09/061809a.html (discussing a New York case "granting a woman's bid to void a settlement stipulation because her pro bono divorce attorney made serious errors and was inadequately supervised").
155. Rhode, Rethinking, supra note 9, at 1452
156. (citing Paul Brest, Strategic Philanthropy and Its Malcontents, in MORAL LEADERSHIP: THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF POWER, JUDGMENT, AND POLICY 229, 247 (Deborah L. Rhode ed., 2006) [hereinafter MORAL LEADERSHIP]).
157. Eviatar, supra note 4, at 106.
158. Id.
159. (quoting Miriam Buhl, pro bono counsel at Weil, Gotshal & Manges).
160. Id.
161. (quoting Saralyn Cohen, pro bono counsel at Shearman & Sterling).
162. Survey Respondent 55.
163. See Susan Dominus, $80,000 for Year Off from Law? She'll Take It!, N.Y. TIMES, Apr. 13, 2009, at A1;
164. Karen Sloan, Trying To Make Deferrals into Something Positive, NAT'L L.J., Apr. 13, 2009, at 6.
165. Sloan, supra note 103;
166. Debra Cassens Weiss, Situations Wanted: Laid-Off Lawyers Seek Volunteer Work - and Get Rejected, A.B.A. J., Mar. 16, 2009, http://www.abajournal.com/ news/article/situations-wanted-laid-off-lawyers-seek-volunteer-work~and-get- rejected/.
167. The NALP Directory asks a firm whether it employs "one or more of the following structures to manage its pro bono program and to provide training and guidance to participating attorneys?" See NALP Directory of Legal Employers, supra note 13. Firms may choose any combination of "Full-time attorney in a dedicated pro bono coordination/oversight role" (full-time attorney), "An attorney who coordinates pro bono projects as an ancillary duty to other work" (part-time attorney), "Pro Bono Committee," "Non-attorney administrator," and "Other."
168. Id.
169. Accordingly, throughout the article, data gathered from the NALP Directory will be reported based on an n=55.
170. In three of these cases, the firm also had an additional pro bono position, either an assistant director of pro bono or a pro bono fellow.
171. In four of these cases, the firm also had additional support staff.
172. Within this group, one survey respondent described three different collaborative processes for developing pro bono policies distinguished by whether they were "executive-driven" (led by pro bono counsel), "committee-driven" (led by the pro bono committee), or "board-driven" (led by the firm's management committee); executive-driven policy development was the most frequent type and board-driven the least frequent. Survey Respondent 55. A small number of firms had unique arrangements, including one in which the pro bono committee adopted protocols for practice, while the management committee established the associate billable hour credit for pro bono work. Survey Respondent 19.
173. Survey Respondent 55.
174. Survey Respondent 22;
175. Survey Respondent 47.
176. See Kenneth G. Dau-Schmidt et al., Men and Women of the Bar: The Impact of Gender on Legal Careers, 16 MICH. J. GENDER & L. 49, 77-79 (2009).
177. Women are also overrepresented in lower-status roles in the legal profession more broadly. KATHARINE T. BARTLETT & DEBORAH L. RHODE, GENDER AND LAW: THEORY, DOCTRINE, COMMENTARY 476-77 (5th ed. 2010).
178. Cummings, supra note 4, at 60-61 (describing pro bono counsel positions as involving interactions with organizations that refer pro bono clients, development and implementation of pro bono policies, oversight of pro bono participation, and evaluation of firm performance);
179. Eviatar, supra note 4, at 106 (describing pro bono counsel as "matchmakers, meeting with firm lawyers to learn what interests them, collaborating with nonprofits to generate and maintain projects, coaxing firm lawyers to take them on, and ensuring the lawyers get sufficient training, support, and recognition for doing so").
180. Survey Respondent 27.
181. Survey Respondent 23.
182. Survey Respondent 12.
183. Survey Respondent 55.
184. Survey Respondent 26.
185. Survey Respondent 7;
186. Survey Respondent 8.
187. Survey Respondent 6.
188. Survey Respondent 52.
189. Survey Respondent 51.
190. Survey Respondent 16. The other respondent said that the question was hard to answer because "different groups in the firm would weight these factors differently." Survey Respondent 50.
191. MODEL RULES OF PROF'L CONDUCT R. 6.1 (2009).
192. Aric Press, Drawing the Line, AM. LAW., July 2007, at 119, 119.
193. Compare Pro Bono Institute, Law Firm Pro Bono Challenge, http://www.probonoinst.org/challenge.text.php (last visited Mar. 17, 2010),
194. with MODEL RULES OF PROF'L CONDUCT R. 6.1.
195. Pro Bono Institute, supra note 126.
196. Our survey also asked the firms if they set pro bono participation goals. Forty percent (n=22) indicated that they set goals for the percentage of firm attorneys who do pro bono work. Of those, eight had a goal of one hundred percent participation, another six chose between seventy and eighty percent, one put the goal at sixty-five percent, another at a "majority," and the final firm stated, "We aim for at least 40% of our attorneys hitting the 50-hour standard - that's the goal set by the D.C. Circuit's Standing Committee on Pro Bono" (Survey Respondent 52).
197. Survey Respondent 4.
198. Survey Respondent 11.
199. PRO BONO INST., WHAT COUNTS? A COMPILATION OF QUERIES AND ANSWERS 6 (2003), available at http://www.probonoinst.org/pdfs/whatcounts.pdf;
200. see also Carlyn Kolker, The Good Fight, AM. LAW., July 2006, at 105;
201. Amanda Bronstad, Pro Bono Victories Trigger Fee Fights, N.Y. LAW., Feb. 8, 2008, http://www.nylj.com/nylawyer/probono/news/08/020808a.html.
202. According to a 2007-2008 survey of law firms conducted by the Pro Bono Institute, fourteen percent of firms reported keeping all of the fees awarded in pro bono matters, while forty-five percent said that their firms retained a portion of the fees and donated the rest. Of those firms that retained some portion of the attorney's fee awards, one-third said that the retained fees were placed in the firms' general revenue, while the rest used the awards to fund pro bono programs and support charitable groups. PRO BONO INST., ATTORNEYS' FEES AWARDS IN PRO BONO MATTERS 5 (2008).
203. Id. at 1.
204. Press, supra note 125.
205. Survey Respondent 6.
206. Three additional firms stated that their firm "budgeted" for attorneys spending a certain portion of their time, between three and eight percent, on pro bono.
207. Survey Respondent 11.
208. Survey Respondent 15.
209. See Rhode, supra note 45, at 2074. Organizations also give preference to firms that contribute.
210. See id.
211. Survey Respondent 50.
212. Survey Respondent 53;
213. - Cf,..
214. Daniels & Martin, supra note 4, at 152
215. (quoting a pro bono partner in a major firm as stating, "I suspect that if [a law firm gives] that mightily, you might get the better cases").
216. Survey Respondent 53.
217. Survey Respondent 34.
218. Survey Respondent 53.
219. Case selection is also driven by a strong interest in selecting cases that will make a difference in people's lives and have social impact. Our question assumed these factors to be important and focused on organizational considerations.
220. Interview 16 (Aug. 17, 2009).
221. Survey Respondent 53.
222. Interview 20 (Aug. 20, 2009).
223. Id.
224. Id. Conflicts issues also make it difficult for large-firm attorneys to participate in pro bono drop-in centers and hotlines because on-the-spot screening is infeasible. To address that concern, a number of bars have adopted or are considering rules modeled on ABA Model Rule 6.5, which limits a lawyer's liability for conflicts to circumstances where the lawyer knows that a real or vicarious conflict exists. The Rule also limits conflicts imputed to a lawyer's firm as a result of the attorney's participation in a limited legal services program.
225. See MODEL RULES OF PROF'L CONDUCT R. 6.5(b) (2009);
226. see also Limited Pro Bono Work Gets Easier with New Conflict of Interest Rule, CAL. B.J., Sept. 2009, at 4, 14.
227. Volunteers of Legal Service, VOLS Pro Bono Pledge, http://www. volsprobono.org/RTFl.cfm?pagename=NewPageNamel (last visited Mar. 17,2010).
228. JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE D.C. CIRCUIT, RESOLUTION ON PRO BONO LEGAL SERVICES (1998), available at http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/home.nsf/ Content/VL%20-%20RPP%20- %201998%20Resolution%20on%20Pro%20Bono%20Legal%20Services/$FILE/ Pro%20Bono%20Resolution.pdf.
229. Interview 9 (Aug. 24, 2009).
230. Interview 21 (Sept. 1, 2009).
231. Interview 8 (Aug. 11, 2009).
232. Interview 13, supra note 80.
233. Id.
234. Interview 21, supra note 154.
235. Interview 8, supra note 155.
236. Interview 15 (Aug. 21, 2009).
237. Survey Respondent 24.
238. Interview 26 (Aug. 25, 2009).
239. Interview 22 (Sept. 2, 2009).
240. Interview 4 (Aug. 10, 2009).
241. Interview 5 (Aug. 19, 2009).
242. Interview 17 (Aug. 19, 2009).
243. Interview 20, supra note 148.
244. Survey Respondent 22.
245. Interview 22, supra note 163.
246. Interview 25 (Aug. 25, 2009).
247. Interview 22, supra note 163.
248. Interview 28 (Aug. 13, 2009).
249. Survey Respondent 47.
250. Interview 13, supra note 80.
251. Id.
252. Interview 23 (Aug. 19, 2009).
253. Id.
254. Id.
255. Survey Respondent 4.
256. Survey Respondent 25.
257. Interview 17, supra note 166.
258. Interview 18 (Aug. 17, 2009).
259. Interview 13, supra note 80.
260. Interview 21, supra note 154.
261. See sources cited infra note 409.
262. Little other information is available on attorney satisfaction with pro bono work. The 2009 ABA report on pro bono activity did not ask about attorney satisfaction directly, but did ask whether pro bono work was "[c]onsistent with the [a]ttorneys' [e]xpectations and [e]xpertise." ABA, SUPPORTING JUSTICE II, supra note 85, at 18. The ABA study found that "[a]cross settings, most attorneys (94%) reported that they performed tasks that were consistent with their expectations when accepting the engagement."
263. Id.
264. Interview 21, supra note 154.
265. Interview 27, supra note 81.
266. Interview 20, supra note 148.
267. Id.
268. Interview 13, supra note 80.
269. Interview 18, supra note 182.
270. Interview 13, supra note 80.
271. Interview 18, supra note 182.
272. Id.
273. Id.
274. Interview 24 (Aug. 24, 2009).
275. Interview 22, supra note 163.
276. Interview 19 (Aug. 25, 2009).
277. Interview 11 (Aug. 21, 2009).
278. Interview 17, supra note 166.
279. Interview 23, supra note 176.
280. Interview 28, supra note 172.
281. Interview 19, supra note 199.
282. Survey Respondent 55.
283. Survey Respondent 24.
284. Survey Respondent 27.
285. Interview 22, supra note 163.
286. Interview 25, supra note 170.
287. Interview 23, supra note 176.
288. Interview 19, supra note 199.
289. Interview 24, supra note 197.
290. Interview 21, supra note 154.
291. Interview 27, supra note 81.
292. Interview 2 (Aug. 18, 2009).
293. Interview 10 (Aug. 14, 2009).
294. Interview 18, supra note 182.
295. Interview 24, supra note 197.
296. Survey Respondent 48.
297. Interview 23, supra note 176.
298. Interview 5, supra note 165.
299. Interview 15, supra note 160.
300. Interview 13, supra note 80.
301. Interview 8, supra note 155.
302. Interview 18, supra note 182.
303. Interview 22, supra note 163.
304. Interview 18, supra note 182.
305. Id.
306. Interview 21, supra note 154.
307. Interview 1 (Aug. 27, 2009).
308. Survey Respondent 24.
309. Interview 30 (Aug. 19, 2009).
310. Id.
311. Id.
312. Interview 20, supra note 148.
313. Interview 2, supra note 215.
314. Interview 26, supra note 162.
315. Interview 8, supra note 155.
316. Interview 20, supra note 148.
317. Interview 27, supra note 81.
318. Interview 2, supra note 215.
319. Interview 23, supra note 176.
320. Id.
321. Interview 14 (Aug. 24, 2009).
322. Interview 5, supra note 165.
323. Interview 4, supra note 164.
324. Interview 5, supra note 165.
325. Survey Respondent 55.
326. Survey Respondent 42.
327. Survey Respondent 50.
328. Interview 11, supra note 200.
329. Interview 26, supra note 162.
330. Interview 22, supra note 163.
331. Survey Respondent 15.
332. Interview 12 (Aug. 11, 2009).
333. Interview 11, supra note 200.
334. Id.
335. Interview 10, supra note 216.
336. Interview 13, supra note 80. In one example reinforcing concerns about the twenty-hour measure, the most recent pro bono survey by The American Lawyer listed one firm (Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler) reporting that more than 100% of its lawyers did at least twenty hours of pro bono.
337. See 2009 Am Law Pro Bono Survey, supra note 90.
338. Interview 13, supra note 80.
339. Interview 18, supra note 182.
340. Interview 28, supra note 172.
341. Survey Respondent 19.
342. Survey Respondent 24.
343. Survey Respondent 19.
344. Interview 13, supra note 80.
345. Survey Respondent 39.
346. Interview 30, supra note 232.
347. Id.
348. See Dominus, supra note 103;
349. Jonathan D. Glater, The Lawyer Squeeze: Layoffs and Closings in a Field Thought To Resist Downturns, N.Y. TIMES, NOV. 12, 2008, at B1;
350. Weiss, supra note 104.
351. Rachel Breitman, Time Well Spent, AM. LAW., July 2009. at 15, 15.
352. Id.
353. ASS'N OF PRO BONO COUNSEL, supra note 6;
354. see also PRO BONO INST., supra note 6.
355. Survey Respondent 4.
356. Survey Respondent 26.
357. Survey Respondent 7.
358. One indicated the likely loss of a pro bono fellow, Survey Respondent 24; a second said that planned additions were indefinitely put on hold, Survey Respondent 29; a third had experienced one layoff, Survey Respondent 37; and a fourth reported that pro bono personnel were being asked to do some non-pro bono work, Survey Respondent 39. One firm reported increasing staff by turning a senior associate into a Pro Bono Associate. Survey Respondent 47.
359. Breitman, supra note 271, at 15.
360. Survey Respondent 25.
361. Survey Respondent 47.
362. Interview 20, supra note 148.
363. Survey Respondent 42.
364. Survey Respondent 47.
365. Id.
366. Survey Respondent 17.
367. Survey Respondent 29.
368. Interview 20, supra note 148.
369. Survey Respondent 39.
370. Survey Respondent 47.
371. David Marcus, Mixed Blessings, DEAL, July 17, 2009, http://www.thedeal. com/newsweekly/features/mixed-blessings.php.
372. Id.
373. (quoting David Lash, pro bono counsel at O'Melveny & Myers LLP in Los Angeles).
374. Survey Respondent 47.
375. Survey Respondent 22.
376. Five firms were paying full health benefits (Survey Respondents 7, 11, 22, 23, 29); one paid a $5500 stipend to cover healthcare costs (Survey Respondent 39); one would pay "COBRA expenses for current associates" (Survey Respondent 47) and another would "negotiate payment of benefits with the organization" (Survey Respondent 48).
377. Only one firm reported paying administrative costs of the placement organizations (Survey Respondent 23), and none were subsidizing office space. Four were paying for malpractice insurance (Survey Respondents 11, 22, 23, 29), while two reported relying on placement organizations to do so (Survey Respondents 39, 48). Six paid bar fees (Survey Respondents 11, 22, 24, 39, 42, 47), two paid relocation costs (Survey Respondents 11, 42), one subsidized vacation time (Survey Respondent 11), and another paid for student loans up to $1000 a month (Survey Respondent 47).
378. Survey Respondent 2.
379. This view has been expressed to the authors privately on a variety of occasions. It also may be true, however, that some public interest groups have used the downturn as an opportunity to lay off some of their least effective staff, knowing that they could replace them on a short-term basis through pro bono placements.
380. Interview 1, supra note 230.
381. Interview 22, supra note 163.
382. Survey Respondent 3.
383. Survey Respondent 25.
384. See Interview 9, supra note 153;
385. Interview 11, supra note 200;
386. Interview 21, supra note 154;
387. Interview 26, supra note 162;
388. Interview 29 (Aug. 31, 2009).
389. See Bario, supra note 1.
390. Interview 3 (Aug. 12, 2009).
391. Interview 2, supra note 215.
392. Survey Respondent 39.
393. Interview 5, supra note 165.
394. See, e.g., Interview 29, supra note 302.
395. Id.
396. Id.
397. Interview 15, supra note 160.
398. Interview 13, supra note 80.
399. Interview 30, supra note 232.
400. Interview 10, supra note 216.
401. Interview 1, supra note 230.
402. Interview 12, supra note 255.
403. Interview 13, supra note 80.
404. A May 2009 survey by the National Conference on Citizenship found that almost three-quarters of Americans reported devoting less time to volunteering and other civic activities, such as providing food and shelter to those in need. Stephanie Strom, Volunteering Has Waned in Recession, Report Says, N.Y. TIMES, Aug. 27, 2009, at A12.
405. Interview 14, supra note 244.
406. Interview 9, supra note 153.
407. Interview 29, supra note 302.
408. Interview 30, supra note 232.
409. Id.
410. Interview 23, supra note 176.
411. Id.
412. Interview 30, supra note 232.
413. Interview 17, supra note 166.
414. Interview 1, supra note 230.
415. Survey Respondent 3.
416. Interview 13, supra note 80.
417. Interview 20, supra note 148.
418. Interview 17, supra note 166.
419. Interview 30, supra note 232.
420. Id.
421. Interview 20, supra note 148.
422. Interview 24, supra note 197;
423. accord Interview 20, supra note 148.
424. Interview 26, supra note 162.
425. Interview 18, supra note 182.
426. Interview 2, supra note 215.
427. Interview 29, supra note 302.
428. Interview 1, supra note 230.
429. Survey Respondent 47.
430. Interview 26, supra note 162;
431. accord Interview 2, supra note 215.
432. Interview 13, supra note 80.
433. Id.
434. Interview 11, supra note 200.
435. Interview 27, supra note 81.
436. Id.
437. Id.
438. Interview 15, supra note 160.
439. Interview 21, supra note 154.
440. Id.
441. Interview 4, supra note 164.
442. See Daniels & Martin, supra note 4, at 149-51.
443. Interview 13, supra note 80.
444. Interview 20, supra note 148.
445. Id.
446. See Daniels & Martin, supra note 4, at 150 ("Those dispensing resources are likely to be interested in supporting particular areas of legal need and not just legal needs in general.").
447. Counsel identified opportunities for training and appeal to associates as two of the most important in pro bono case selection. See supra tbl.7 and accompanying text.
448. Interview 21, supra note 154.
449. Interview 13, supra note 80.
450. Interview 30, supra note 232.
451. Interview 22, supra note 163.
452. Interview 4, supra note 164.
453. Interview 30, supra note 232.
454. Interview 16, supra note 146.
455. Interview 20, supra note 148.
456. Interview 27, supra note 81.
457. Id.
458. E-mail from Amanda D. Smith, Partner, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, to Scott L. Cummings, Professor, UCLA School of Law (Jan. 22, 2010, 11:49 PST) (on file with authors) (describing APBCo's Responding to the Crisis initiative).
459. Interview 22, supra note 163.
460. Id.
461. Interview 27, supra note 81.
462. Id.
463. Interview 29, supra note 302.
464. Interview 27, supra note 81.
465. Id.
466. For analyses of the relation between pro bono service and careers, see Ronit Dinovitzer & Bryant G. Garth, Pro Bono as an Elite Strategy in Early Lawyer Careers, in PRIVATE LAWYERS AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST, supra note 7, at 115, 127;
467. David B. Wilkins, Doing Well by Doing Good? The Role of Public Service in the Careers of Black Corporate Lawyers, 41 Hous. L. REV. 1, 2-3 (2004).
468. Two were executive directors of legal nonprofit legal groups (Survey Respondents 7, 14) and two had worked for the ABA (Survey Respondents 29, 31).
469. Interview 28, supra note 172.
470. Id.
471. See id.
472. Interview 18, supra note 182.
473. Id.
474. Id.
475. Id.
476. Interview 30, supra note 232.
477. Interview 27, supra note 81.
478. Interview 24, supra note 197.
479. Id.
480. Interview 27, supra note 81.
481. Id.
482. Id.
483. Russell G. Pearce, Lawyers as America's Governing Class: The Formation and Dissolution of the Original Understanding of the American Lawyer's Role, 8 U. Cm. L. SCH. ROUNDTABLE 381, 420 (2001).
484. See Dinovitzer & Garth, supra note 378, at 115 (referring to pro bono as a possible strategy of "demand creation" for law firms).
485. See Daniels & Martin, supra note 4, at 154-55.
486. See supra note 351 and accompanying text.
487. Interview 21, supra note 154.
488. Id.
489. Id.
490. Id.
491. Interview 11, supra note 200.
492. Interview 22, supra note 163.
493. Interview 14, supra note 244.
494. Interview 10, supra note 216.
495. Interview 11, supra note 200.
496. Interview 21, supra note 154.
497. Rhode, supra note 45, at 2072
498. (quoting Mitch Kamin, Director of Bet Tzedek).
499. For the importance of cultural competence training, see Susan Bryant, The Five Habits: Building Cross-Cultural Competence in Lawyers, 8 CLINICAL L. REV. 33 (2001);
500. Nelson P. Miller, Beyond Bias - Cultural Competence as a Lawyer Skill, 87 MICH. B.J. 38 (2008);
501. Nelson P. Miller et al., Equality as Talisman: Getting Beyond Bias to Cultural Competence as a Professional Skill, 25 T.M. COOLEY L. REV. 99 (2008);
502. Deborah L. Rhode, Legal Ethics in Legal Education, 16 CLINICAL L. REV. 43 (2009);
503. Mayia Thao & Mona Tawatao, Developing Cultural Competence in Legal Services Practice, 38 CLEARINGHOUSE REV. 244 (2004).
504. Interview 19, supra note 199.
505. Interview 13, supra note 80.
506. Id.
507. See Deborah L. Rhode, Introduction: Where Is the Leadership in Moral Leadership?, in MORAL LEADERSHIP, supra note 98, at 1, 20.
508. Interview 20, supra note 148.
509. Survey Respondent 50.
510. Id.
511. Interview 26, supra note 162.
512. Id.
513. Interview 22, supra note 163. The practice areas were similar to the first: "[W]e have a homeless advocacy project and a tangled title practice group ⋯. We also have a child advocacy practice group,⋯ an immigrant DV practice group, and a landlord tenant practice group."
514. Id.
515. Id.
516. Id.
517. Interview 27, supra note 81.
518. Id.
519. For an overview, see Rhode, Rethinking, supra note 9.
520. Equal Justice Works, Equal Justice Works Guide to Law Schools: FAQ, http://www.equaljusticeworks.org/communities/lawschools/guide/faq (last visited Mar. 17, 2010). These data include "the availability of clinical and extemship programs, financial aid and loan repayment assistance programs, [and] the number of staff members dedicated to public service programs."
521. Id.
522. See id. All.
523. For the distortions caused by such rankings, see DEBORAH L. RHODE, IN PURSUIT OF KNOWLEDGE (2006);
524. DEBORAH L. RHODE, IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE (2000);
525. Clark, supra note 66;
526. Wendy Nelson Espeland & Michael Sauder, Rankings and Reactivity: How Public Measures Recreate Social Worlds, 113 AM. J. Soc. 1, 13-14 (2007);
527. Colin Diver, Is There Life After Rankings?, ATLANTIC, Nov. 2005, at 136.
528. Building a Better Legal Profession, About Us, http://www. betterlegalprofession.org/mission.php (last visited Mar. 17, 2010).
529. Id.
530. BUILDING A BETTER LEGAL PROFESSION, HOW WE DID THIS (2009), available at http://www.betterlegalprofession.org/pdf/howwedidthis-2009.pdf.
531. For an assessment of the difficulty of finding metrics in many philanthropic areas, see PETER FRUMKIN, STRATEGIC GIVING: THE ART AND SCIENCE OF PHILANTHROPY 55 (2006);
532. Brest, supra note 98, at 237;
533. Bruce Sievers, Ethics and Philanthropy, in MORAL LEADERSHIP, supra note 98, at 249, 253;
534. Jon Gertner, For Good, Measure, N.Y. TIMES MAG., Mar. 9,2008, at 62, 74.
535. See RHODE, PRO BONO, supra note 9, at 167-69;
536. Wilkins, supra note 378, at 83-84.
537. See JEANNE CHARN & RICHARD ZORZA, THE BELLOW-SACKS ACCESS TO CIVIL LEGAL SERVS. PROJECT, CIVIL LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOR ALL AMERICANS (2005), available at http://www.garybellow.org/Text.pdf;
538. HOUSEMAN, CIVIL LEGAL AID 2009, supra note 40;
539. Alan W. Houseman, The Future of Civil Legal Aid: A National Perspective, 10 UDC/DCSL L. REV. 35 (2007);
540. Rhode, supra note 43.
541. See DEBORAH L. RHODE, ACCESS TO JUSTICE 74, 89 (2004);
542. see also Earl Johnson, Jr., Equal Access to Justice: Comparing Access to Justice in the United States and Other Industrial Democracies, 24 FORDHAM INT'L L.J. 83 (2000).