Law for The Poor

2010] MANAGING PRO BONO
2375
2. Systemic: The Social and Professional Impact of Pro Bono Practice
The institutionalization of pro bono through both external initiatives (bar
and ranking efforts) and internal organization (including pro bono counsel)
ultimately seeks to enhance public service by private lawyers. Yet the
effect of institutionalization on outcomes is by no means self-evident.
Some organizational structures may work well in promoting public service;
others may have little or no effect. The latter problem is what experts label
"loose coupling": the formal adoption of rules in response to outside
pressures may not be matched by the results that the rules are designed to
promote. 83 Our inquiry here focuses on the effects of institutionalization on
pro bono service.
a. Economic Forces and Bar Responses
It is impossible to precisely measure the total amount, growth, and social
impact of pro bono activity across the entire U.S. legal profession. What is
clear, however, is that volunteer contributions have become an increasingly
important part of how legal assistance becomes available to the poor and to
public interest organizations. 84 A 2009 study by the American Bar
Association found that lawyers provided on average forty-one hours of pro
bono service annually to low-income clients or organizations that serve
them-up slightly from 2005. 85 Other research indicates that lawyers in
large firms are the most likely to provide substantial assistance. 86
Evidence of the relationship between organizational structures and pro
bono activity is still limited, but at least some data indicate that economic
factors may be more influential than professional initiatives in promoting
pro bono activity. Rebecca Sandefur's study, in particular, found that states
in which lawyers did better financially and felt under greater pressure from
nonlawyer competitors had higher rates of pro bono participation. 87 By
contrast, the pro bono standards in state ethical codes and diffusely targeted
recruitment efforts were not correlated with greater pro bono
participation. 88
83. See John W. Meyer & Brian Rowan, Institutionalized Organizations: Formal
Structure as Myth and Ceremony, 83 AM. J. Soc. 340, 341 (1977).
84. See Rhode, supra note 45, at 2070; Sandefur, supra note 9, at 85; 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).
85. 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.
86. DINOVITZER ET AL., supra note 7, at 37 tbl.4.3.
87. Sandefur, supra note 9, at 98-100.
88. Id. at 100. Specifically targeted recruitment measures were, however, positively
associated with pro bono participation. 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