Success
How participation goals and signature
projects helped five firms ramp up
their pro bono programs.
MORE ONLINE
FOR A LIST OF FIRMS’
five-year change in
pro bono score, go to
americanlawyer.com/
probono.
LAW FIRM ISN’T THE easiest place
to change. Just ask the five firms
listed below. About five years ago, each initiated a more formal, rigid approach to its pro
bono work. The firms replaced weakly implemented, often unspoken, annual performance
expectations with clearly defined, emphatically
stated hours-per-lawyer requirements. They
created signature pro bono projects that would
attract—or at least not frighten—transactions
lawyers, and they established committees and
hired personnel to support their lofty goals.
They got results: When we compared
this year’s pro bono score for each Am Law
200 firm with its score five years ago, these
were the five firms with the biggest increases.
(The score is based on two equally weighted
factors—average number of pro bono hours
per lawyer and the percentage of lawyers with
more than 20 hours of pro bono work.) Here’s
how they did it:
A
PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER Five
years ago, this firm’s management studied its
place on our pro bono survey: 110th, with a
score of 30. 7, and decided that wasn’t where
^
Stories
By Claire Zillman
Photographs By Michael J.N. Bowles
it wanted to be. (In contrast, the top-ranked
firm that year, Covington & Burling, had a
score of 108.1.) Since then, the firm’s turnaround has been dramatic. This year Paul,
Hastings is seventh on our pro bono rankings,
having increased its score by 82. 2 points and
making it our most improved firm over this
five-year period.
The firm began retooling its pro bono program in May 2005, when it established its pro
bono and community involvement committee.
The committee took stock of the firm’s pro
bono connections and interests. Committee
members asked firm lawyers what pro bono
organizations they were involved with and
what their pro bono interests were.
To support its revamped efforts, Paul, Hastings set aside money for a pro bono budget for
the first time in 2006. (
Previously pro bono expenses were drawn
from other areas of the budget.)
A formal pro bono budget meant
that the firm had money to cover
the filing fees and experts required in big-ticket litigations,
enabling it to take on larger,
DECHERT’S ETHAN FOGEL AT
PHILADELPHIA’S COURT OF
COMMON PLEAS. THE FIRM’S
LAWYERS TEAM WITH LAW
STUDENTS TO REPRESENT
TENANTS IN HOUSING CASES.
