How the Community Legal Centre Sector can be sustainable ... · The second best time is now. ... Her Justice, New York City • Jillian Koes, Manager Events, Her Justice, New York

R o s s l y n M o n r o 2 0 1 5 C h u r c h i l l F e l l o w

How the Community Legal Centre Sector can be sustainable by proactively diversifying funding streams

The Winston Churchill Memorial Trust

Rosslyn Monro 2015 Churchill Fellow

I understand that the Churchill Trust may publish this report, either in hard copy or on the internet or both, and consent to such publication.

I indemnify the Churchill Trust against any loss, costs or damages it may suffer arising out of any claim or proceedings made against the Trust in respect of or arising out of the publication of any Report submitted to the Trust and which the Trust places on the website for access over the internet.

I also warrant that my Final Report is original and does not infringe the copyright of any person, or contain anything which is, or the incorporation of which into the Final Report is actionable for defamation, a breach of any privacy law or obligation, breach of confidence, contempt of court, passing off or contravention of any other private right or of any law.

Signed: Date:

Rosslyn Monro

HOW THE COMMUNITY LEGAL CENTRE SECTOR CAN BE SUSTAINABLE BY PROACTIVELY DIVERSIFYING FUNDING STREAMS

3


Table of Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................................ 5 Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 7 Program ................................................................................................................................................................ 9 Glossary/Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................... 11 The Context ........................................................................................................ 12 Community Legal Centres and Civil Legal Aid ................................................................................... 12 Philanthropic cultures of Australian and United States ................................................................ 15 Organizational Structural Supports ...................................................................... 16 Governance....................................................................................................................................................... 16 Human Resources Support for Fundraising and Development .................................................. 18 Positioning and Communication ............................................................................................................. 21 Funding Diversification Strategies ....................................................................... 23 Private donor strategy ................................................................................................................................. 23 Donor campaigns were targeted at natural allies to the mission and vision of the CLA.. 24 Events ................................................................................................................................................................. 27 Corporate Support and Corporate Social Responsibility .............................................................. 28 Philanthropic Trusts and Foundations ................................................................................................. 30 Pro bono ............................................................................................................................................................ 31 Workplace Giving .......................................................................................................................................... 33 Planned Giving ................................................................................................................................................ 33 Fee for Service and Social Enterprise .................................................................................................... 34 Recommendations .............................................................................................. 35 Leadership ........................................................................................................................................................ 35 Joining the broader philanthropic conversation .............................................................................. 36 Communication .............................................................................................................................................. 36 The legal profession...................................................................................................................................... 36 Training and Support ................................................................................................................................... 37 Time ................................................................................................................................................................ .... 37 Challenges of geography and CLC size .................................................................................................. 38


Introduction

In my 15 years working in community legal centres (CLCs) in Queensland, government funding, or the lack of it, has been a recurring theme. I left my first job in a CLC due to a lack of funding for legal services to older people, lost many nights’ sleep over managing budgets, spent many hours speaking with politicians about the work of CLCs, and, sadly, had to cut services to young people and women due to a lack of funding.

Community legal centres in Australia have a history of relying on a range of resources to deliver services to their communities and to stretch meagre budgets to meet increasing demand for services. Many CLCs were voluntary organizations prior to attracting government-sourced funding. This strong voluntary history is still an important resource base in the sector.

In the 2015 Census conducted by the National Association of Community Legal Centres1, 91.9% of the respondent CLCs reported relying on the skills and expertise of volunteers to the value of 11,057.7 hours per week across the sector. Volunteers provided direct services to clients, administrative support and assistance in the area of policy, advocacy, and law reform.

In the same CLC census, 54.3% of respondents also reported that they had a pro bono partnership. These partnerships contributed a total of 51,896 hours to the sector with 41,775 of those hours being given by lawyers directly providing services to clients.

Despite the capacity to supplement government funding with volunteer and pro bono hours, CLCs reported that 159,220 people were turned away from services; 67.3% of whom were turned away due to insufficient resources.

CLCs were also asked what would be the impacts of the cuts to Commonwealth Government funding to CLCs forecast for the 2017/18 financial year. The reported impact of cuts on direct service delivery to clients included closure of services, service reduction, reduction in staff hours, and cutting or closing branch offices or outreaches.

It is important to acknowledge that government has a vital role in resourcing CLCs to meet the legal needs of Australians. Funds from Federal, State and Local governments are key to keeping the doors open to CLCs and providing essential legal services to the community. However, for many social and community services, government funding will never be enough to meet the need so, 1 National Association of Community Legal Centres (August 2016) National Census of Community Legal Centres 2015 (http://www.naclc.org.au/resources/NACLC%20Census%20-%20National%20Report%202015%20-%20FINAL.pdf)


5


pragmatically, CLCs need to supplement funding with other sources outside government. This report outlines some of the strategies used by the Civil Legal Aid sector in the United States where there is a longer history in undertaking this work.

Acknowledgments

I am enormously indebted to the Churchill Trust for the opportunity to undertake this Fellowship. The opportunity to research broadly and think deeply is not always possible in a busy not-for-profit, but absolutely essential. Throughout my travels, Dwight Eisenhower’s idea about focusing on the important over the urgent was often repeated by interviewees. This opportunity, generously provided by the Trust, has allowed me to focus on the important at a time when reducing resources for community legal centres in Australia is urgent. For that I am very grateful.

I am also very grateful to all the organizations and interviewees that made time in their very busy schedules to meet with me and generously share their knowledge and insights. A list of interviewees is provided in this report. I was warmly welcomed by the Civil Legal Aid sector and was inspired by their work and enthusiasm to share their ideas. I have used these discussions to develop the themes of this report. Any misinterpretation or errors are mine.

The strength and resilience of the community legal centre sector has also been the inspiration for my application to the Trust to undertake this project. The privilege of managing community legal services in Brisbane and being a member of the board of the National Association of Community Legal Centres has provided me with insights into the challenges faced by community legal centres. I hope this project will help progress the sector’s conversation about fundraising strategies.

Finally, and importantly, I want to thank my husband, James, for supporting me in this endeavour. The planning and execution of such an undertaking is invariably a team effort and for a teammate I had the very best.


“The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now.”

– Chinese Proverb

“What is important is seldom urgent and what is urgent is seldom important.”

― Dwight D. Eisenhower

http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/23920.Dwight_D_Eisenhower


7


Executive Summary

This report is the culmination of ideas and information gathered from the Civil Legal Aid sector, fundraising conferences and agencies that support not-for-profit fundraising across the United States. The project was possible as a result of the generous support of The Winston Churchill Memorial Trust of Australia to study how the community legal sector can be sustainable by proactively diversifying funding streams.

In exploring this topic the report is divided into the sections of Context, Organizational Structural Supports and Funding Diversification Strategies.

The Context section examines the Civil Legal Aid (CLA) sector and the state of philanthropy in the United States and compares it to Australian Community Legal Centres (CLCs) and Australian philanthropic culture.

The Organizational Structural Supports section examines organizational components that are essential to the planning and execution of funding diversification strategies, including governance, allocated human resources, communications and positioning work.

The Funding Diversification section outlines the fundraising strategies used by CLA services to generate alternative streams of funding. The main fundraising strategy used by and aimed for? by CLA services was private donation. Lawyers and law firms predominantly provided private donations. Successful fundraising strategies involved a strong integration of pro bono and financial support. Notwithstanding the goal of private donations, other strategies such as events were undertaken and integrated into the private donor strategy.

For Australian CLCs to be successful in generating broad financial support for its work there are challenges and opportunities at 3 different levels of the community:

1. Australian philanthropic culture; 2. The CLC sector; and 3. Individual CLCs.

The report’s recommendations are grouped into the following six central themes:

1. Leadership a. Providing leadership at the CLC level through governance

processes; and b. Providing sector leadership in supporting CLCs to diversify

funding. 2. Philanthropy


a. Becoming involved in the Australian conversation around philanthropic giving; and

b. Working with Philanthropic Trusts and Foundations to promote the social value of legal services in solving the big social problems.

3. Legal Profession a. Broadening the definition of pro bono to include the financial

support of CLCs; and b. Developing incentives for law firms to provide financial support as

well as pro bono assistance to CLCs. 4. Training and Support

a. Training and support at sector and CLC levels; and b. Developing networks for information sharing and support.

5. Time a. Planning long-term diversification strategies at sector and CLC

levels. 6. Geography and size of service

a. Assessing the feasibility of a collective legal profession fund raising campaign to overcome barriers to fundraising such as size of service and geographical location

The report specifically focusses on funding diversification for legal services as there are particular challenges and opportunities for not-for-profits providing legal services. However it must be acknowledged that this work shares common development and fundraising principles and strategies used by other types of not-for-profit organizations both in Australia and the United States.

Rosslyn Monro [email protected] 0407 633 084 Brisbane, Australia

mailto:[email protected]


9


Program

Locations

• Los Angeles (1st June to 4 June) • San Francisco (5th June to 11th June) • Seattle (12th June to 18th June) • Washington DC (19th June to 26th June) • Baltimore (27th June to 2nd July) • New York (3rd July to 10th July) • Boston (11th July to 16th July) • Chicago (17th July to 22nd July)

Interviews

• Betty Norwind, Executive Director, Harriet Buhai Centre for Family Law, Los Angeles

• Kimberly Britt, Communications Assistant, Harriet Buhai Centre for Family Law, Los Angeles

• Jonathon Morley, Senior Development Officer for Institutional Giving, East Bay Community Law Centre, Berkeley, California

• Nana Duffuor, Donor Relations Officer, East Bay Community Law Centre, Berkeley, California

• Jaclyn Pinero, Director Development, Bay Area Legal Aid, California • Erin Lunde Keenan, Development and Communications Director, North

West Immigrants Rights Project, Seattle, Washington • Anne Adams, Senior Donor Relations Manager Major Gifts, United Way of

King County, Seattle, Washington • Elizabeth Arlidge, Deputy Director, Voices for Civil Justice, Washington DC • Camille Ward, Communications Associate, Voices for Civil Justice,

Washington DC • Gregg A Kelley, Director of Development, Legal Aid Society of the District

of Columbia, Washington DC • Julie Price, Associate Creative Director, Impact Communications Inc.,

Washington DC • Amanda Marucci, Impact Communications Inc., Washington DC • Alannah Rosenbloom, Marketing Manager, Impact Communications Inc.,

Washington DC • Impact Communications Inc., Washington DC • Wendy Rhein, Legal Service Corporation, Washington DC • Michelle Daugherty Siri, Executive Director, Women’s Law Centre,

Baltimore


• Michele May, Development Director, Women’s Law Centre, Baltimore • Laure Ruth, Legal Director, Women’s Law Centre, Baltimore • Jennifer Pollit Hill, Executive Director, Hopeworks, Howard County,

Maryland • Catherine V Curry, Director, Institutional Relations, Her Justice, New York

City • Amy Barasch, Executive Director, Her Justice, New York City • Jillian Koes, Manager Events, Her Justice, New York City • Andrea Zigman, Deputy Director, Legal Services NYC, New York City • Marika Dias, Director of Tenants Rights Campaign, Legal Service NY, New

York City • Zoe Cronin, Director of Development, Greater Boston Legal Service,

Boston • Patricia Pap, Executive Director, Management Innovation Excellence for

Legal Aid, Boston

Events

• Association of Fundraising Professionals, Advancement Northwest, WA, First Annual Forum on Strategic Fundraising, Seattle

• Association of Fundraising Professionals Washington DC Metro Area Chapter, Sunset Social

• Management Information Exchange 2016 National Fundraising Conference and Strategic Communications Training, Chicago

Visit

• Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Visitor Centre, Seattle


11


Glossary/Acronyms

CLC Community Legal Centre – independent non-profit community based organizations in Australia that provide free and accessible legal and related services to disadvantaged members of the community and to people with special needs or who are for other reasons vulnerable and at risk.

CLA Civil Legal Aid – not-for-profit legal services in the United States providing free civil legal services

Development Cultivation and stewardship of donor and support relationships

Fundraising Strategies to solicit financial support

NACLC National Association of Community Legal Centres in Australia


The Context

Community Legal Centres and Civil Legal Aid

The legal services in the United States most closely aligned with CLCs in Australia are found in the Civil Legal Aid sector. Civil Legal Aid (CLA) is a diverse not-for-profit sector that provides free civil legal services to their communities. The CLA sector in the United States is in a process of coordinating the identification of legal service organizations within the Civil Legal Aid brand to strengthen its recognition within the broader community.

Civil Legal Aid should be distinguished from Legal Aid Commissions in Australia that also provide free legal services.

The following table broadly outlines the service areas in Australian CLCs and the US CLA as a comparison.

Australian CLCs US CLA2 Areas of Law

Free legal services to the public focusing on disadvantage and people with special needs. Generalist CLCs providing services to people in their geographical area. Specialist legal services targeting particular groups or areas of law such as women, young people, consumers, or tenants.

Free legal services in areas of civil law, including issues relating to health, family, education, consumer experience, employment, and housing.

Target Clients

No means testing of services but note the recent National Partnership Agreement (NPA) requirement for casework to be provided to people experiencing financial disadvantage.

Low to middle income people with civil legal problems

Service Delivery model

Strategic service delivery model: Direct Services provided by employed and volunteer lawyers Law and Systemic reform Community legal education (CLE)

Direct services by employed and voluntary attorneys Identification of systemic issues that could impact on better outcomes for a large number of people Self-help and community education

2 https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/atj/legacy/2014/04/16/civil-legal-aid-101.pdf


13


Resource Base

Volunteer and pro bono resources Funding through Federal, State and local governments Interest on Lawyer’s Trust Accounts or Public Purpose Funds Grants Fundraising

25% of the CLA sector receive Legal Service Corporation (LSC) funding provided by the Federal government Other public funding from Federal, State and Local governments Interest on Lawyers Trust Accounts (ILOTA) Private funding from the Bar, philanthropic and business communities

Types of organization

Independent not-for-profit community based organizations

Non-profit organizations, pro bono volunteers, law schools, court based services and on-line technologies

Access to Justice

National Association of Community Legal Centres (NACLC) 14/15 Census found that approximately 160,000 people were turned away, largely because of the lack of resources for CLCs to be able to provide services

60 million Americans qualify for free legal assistance, but 50% are turned away for lack of resources

A range of CLA services were interviewed for this project, including services with the following attributes:

• Civil legal services provided to a specific geographic area; • Specialized assistance in a particular area of law or to a particular group

in the community; • Legal programs within a broader community service; • Financial turnover of less than $1 million; • Financial turnover greater than $1million dollars and up to a total of $10

million.

Most of the services interviewed were located within a major city and were selected on the basis that they were successfully diversifying their funding sources. However it must be acknowledged that size and geography of a service provides particular challenges to successfully diversifying the resource base.

Some CLA services interviewed have undertaken funding diversification activities for as long as 20 years or more. One of the catalysts for the shift from


sole dependence on government funding to more diversified sources was a result of changes to Legal Services Corporation funding 20 years ago. As a result of those changes some services were ineligible for funding, and/or restricted the types of work undertaken. Funding diversification has been a long-term strategy that has been incrementally grown.


15


Philanthropic cultures of Australian and United States

One of the major challenges for Australian CLCs in translating the fundraising strategies of CLA in the United States is the disparity in the culture of philanthropy and the depth of that financial commitment. Fundraising strategies in the US have a heavy emphasis on giving by private individuals. Focussing on individual donors makes perfect sense when examining the sources of philanthropy in the United States.

In 2014 Americans gave an estimated $354.38 billion to charities. The sources of the 2014 charitable income consisted of 72% from individuals, 5% from corporations, 15% from foundations, and 8% from bequests3. While philanthropic giving in the United States has not increased as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP)4, actual dollar amounts are significant when compared to the Australian context.

However it should be noted that almost 50% of total philanthropy in the United States was to religious or educational organizations and only 12% of total philanthropy was directed at human services organizations5. In interviews with CLA services, it was regularly commented that it was unlikely that giving to religious or educational organizations would be re-directed to legal services.

In 2014 Australian charities had a combined income of $103 billion. The breakdown of the incomes sources was $42 billion from government sources, $6.8 billion from donations and bequests, and $54.5 billion from income and revenue. Only 6.6% of Australian charitable sources came from donations of money from individual philanthropy6. Only 1% of the charities in Australia were in the area of law, advocacy and politics.

3 Giving USA (November 2015) Spotlight (pp5-6) http://givingusa.org/giving-usa-2015-press-release-giving-usa-americans-donated-an-estimated-358-38-billion-to-charity-in-2014-highest-total-in-reports-60-year-history/

4 Camber Collective, Money for Good 2015: Revealing the voice of the donor in philanthropic giving, p5 5 Giving USA (November 2015) Spotlight (pp5-6) http://givingusa.org/giving-usa-2015-press-release-giving-usa-americans-donated-an-estimated-358-38-billion-to-charity-in-2014-highest-total-in-reports-60-year-history/ 6 Australian Charities and Not-For-Profit Commission (2014) Australian Charities report 2014 Summary: All Charities. (http://australiancharities.acnc.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Australian-Charities-Report-Summary-FinalWeb.pdf)

http://givingusa.org/giving-usa-2015-press-release-giving-usa-americans-donated-an-estimated-358-38-billion-to-charity-in-2014-highest-total-in-reports-60-year-history/






http://australiancharities.acnc.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Australian-Charities-Report-Summary-FinalWeb.pdf

http://australiancharities.acnc.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Australian-Charities-Report-Summary-FinalWeb.pdf


While growing the philanthropic base in Australia is important for all not-for-profits including CLCs, it is a long-term strategy. Nevertheless, individual donor programs principles and strategies can be highly instructive for managing any fundraising endeavour. In particular, they raise the challenge of CLCs finding the donor that is most motivated to support the work, rather than appealing to a broad general public base.

Organizational Structural Supports

Governance

At their most effective, CLA boards were critical in driving and supporting funding diversification. An effective fundraising board provided:

• strategic direction to CLA staff about engaging in funding diversification; • personal and business financial contributions; and • new financial supporters through their networks.

Of the services interviewed, boards were along a continuum of maturity in funding diversification, ranging from the board being primarily focussed on fundraising through to organizations still building a board that could be more supportive of fundraising. However, all services were unanimous in the view that boards were critical to the effectiveness of any development and fundraising plan. Most CLA services were actively engaged in strengthening board engagement in development and fundraising work and this was seen as important ongoing development work.

Give or Get

For a board to be primarily or substantially focused on fundraising, board membership was based on the principles of “give or get”, and in many cases “give AND get”.

The “give” was a clear expectation that board members would financially contribute to the CLA service. There were a range of approaches to this sensitive topic including:

• Setting a mandatory level of financial contribution as part of the qualification for board membership; or

• Providing board membership as a benefit of a major gift to the CLA service (conceded by this service that this may not be the best approach); or


17


• Requiring board members to make a “personally meaningful gift” which accommodated a range of board member’s financial circumstances, particularly client group representatives; or

• Making the CLA service a priority in the board member’s family giving.

There were also strong expectations that board members would also “get” by actively encouraging their businesses (usually law firms) and their networks and colleagues to give to the CLA service. These gifts ranged from ongoing private donations to supporting the more transactional aspects of fundraising such as event sponsorship, donations of auction items and event attendance. These expectations were set at the recruitment and induction of board members.

Philanthropic Trusts and Foundations also reinforced board giving with CLA services frequently asked in applications for grants about the level of board giving. The expectation from grant providers is that there is 100% board giving. The rationale for this requirement is that 100% giving from the board is a significant endorsement of the CLA service by members of the community that know the organization best.

There were a number of cautionary tales about having board membership requirements that had a strong focus on fundraising. There were challenges of board diversity, size and skills.

As board membership was largely based on a person’s fundraising capacity, board composition was less diverse, both in skills and representation of the community. Many of the CLA services saw their key fundraising targets to be other lawyers, so boards were a majority of lawyers and mostly senior lawyers who had significant connections in the profession. A number of CLA services conceded a board with a uniform professional background even provided challenges in understanding the skills and work involved in development and fundraising at the operational level.

Boards were large groups--from 20 members up to over 90 members. As the board was seen as the main mechanism for reaching out to the community, it required large numbers of well-connected people. A large board then requires other structures to be in place to effectively carry out governance.

Board members who made major gifts to a CLA service are not necessarily the best qualified for governance work and engagement with CLA can be qualified by the financial support.

Board Structures and Supports


Due to the size of some of the boards, a fundraising committee was seen as an efficient and effective way of focusing governance attention on the area. These committees took a variety of forms:

• A subcommittee of the board; • A subcommittee of the board with other non-board members; or • A committee of non-board members.

The focus of the committees also varied including:

• All aspects of organizational fundraising; and • A single aspect of fundraising, such as a specific campaign or event.

There was no unanimous preference for a particular structure or focus. Some CLA services indicated that a sub-committee of the board provided the necessary leadership for decision-making. Other CLA services found that a specially convened committee for a particular purpose helped get buy-in from the target audience for a particular campaign or strategy.

While board members were largely selected for their fundraising capacity, it was often commented that not all board members were natural fundraisers. Board members may be generous and well connected, but they also needed guidance about how to tap into their networks and how to solicit. Executive Directors and development staff spent considerable time supporting the board to do this. Some services indicated that training by external consultants was more effective than training run by the organization’s own development staff. The Executive Director and the development staff provided support with call lists, materials, messaging, background and the setting of expectations about maximising fundraising opportunities such as at events.

Human Resources Support for Fundraising and Development

Until it’s someone’s job it’s not going to happen

There was universal agreement of all CLA services interviewed that dedicated human resources were required to be effective in fundraising. In smaller services where there were no dedicated human resources or very minimal, the work fell to the Executive Director. It was common for Executive Directors in small CLA services to lament the lack of time they had to give the work. There were some fundraising strategies, such as maintaining a major gift program, that were just not feasible due to a lack of staffing to properly support it. A languishing donor program could do more reputational harm to the CLA service than good.

One service’s development plan was to find enough seed funding to sustain a development staff position for 3-years, a time frame by which a return on


19


investment could reasonably be expected. Small services without dedicated resources talked about it being a catch-22: without a strategic decision to invest in this work, it would never get off the ground and that potentially leaves the organization’s limited resources more vulnerable. While not an easy decision, as it can compromise resources to service delivery in the short-term, it required leadership and a certain level of risk to be entertained.


Development staff skills

Many of the development staff interviewed did not start with a professional background in fundraising and development, but were personally committed to the mission and vision of the CLA service. This personal connection with the mission of the service translated into highly persuasive communication with supporters. However, this commitment is not the only quality required, as it was recognized that many program staff had the same level of commitment, but were not suited to the work of fundraising and development. The skills and attributes described as necessary for the work included:

• Strong data management and analysis; • Attention to detail; • Skilful communication and highly personable presentation; • Knowledge about the services so they could speak on behalf of the

organization and think on their feet; • Thoughtful relationship buildering; • Sensitivity to power and politics; and • Grant writing skills.

Strong integration of fundraising across the service involving executive management and program staff

There was a strong view that there needs to be highly effective working relationships between the board, Executive Director, development team and program staff to ensure fundraising success. Where there wasn’t a shared vision between the board, Executive Director and the development team, fundraising and development stalled7. Variations in focus manifested in a number of ways including differences about target audiences, fundraising strategies and mixed communication.

Many development staff commented that program staff who delivered services were also essential to supporting the development work. Program staff, particularly managing or senior lawyers, were involved in meetings with supporters to provide in-depth information about the work and its impact. Key program staff were ambassadors in conveying the impact of the service. A culture of giving within the organization was seen as critical to ensuring that program staff understood the critical role of fundraising for continuing essential legal services.

7 Note this comment is not reflective of any particular CLA service interviewed, but was a strong theme at both fundraising conferences attended.


21


All Executive Directors interviewed played a key role in cultivating relationships with donors and supporters, and saw it as being essential to their role. The development staff supported and resourced the Executive Directors to undertake this work.

Positioning and Communication

Communication and positioning is a key component of funding diversification as it is integral to developing community understanding about the social value of legal services and ultimately translating that into financial support. The CLA services interviewed were very mindful of the need for effective communication work, even if there were not always designated resources to do it.

Communication and positioning of CLA services was happening at 2 levels: firstly at a sector level in building the community awareness of the social value of CLA service; and secondly by individual CLA services as part of development and fundraising work.

Sector strategy

It was identified about 5 years ago that CLA in the United States had poor recognition in the broader community. When there was media coverage of legal services it was about a funding crisis and not about the social benefit of the services. As a result of this research, Voices for Civil Justice8, a not-for-profit organization, was developed to support the CLA sector to build a national identity for CLA. Voices for Civil Justice raises the profile of CLA through a variety of strategies including:

• cultivating key journalists and providing stories; • assisting with editorial and opinion pieces; • providing support and training to CLA services to undertake media work; • undertaking and commissioning market research to inform

communications and branding strategies; and • involving thought leaders and influencers in supporting the work of CLA.

Voices for Civil Justice works closely with CLA so that the work is informed by and uses client stories of CLA. The key focus on using client stories was demonstrating problems with the system, not on the individual client and how legal services could contribute to a client’s success. The agenda behind raising the profile of CLA is multi-dimensional including influencing public policy, 8 http://voicesforciviljustice.org


cultivating donors and increasing resources for the sector. The value of having a dedicated organization and resources to undertake this work means that there is a consistent media presence about the sector not just at times of funding crisis. The latter has limited sympathetic appeal to a broader community.

Messaging – People give to People

Individual CLA services were clear about the importance of the right messages about the service being given to supporters and the general public. At its most effective, the focus of the message was about the impact of legal services on broader social issues, not the services and programs of the service. The social impact messages included preventing homelessness, improving safety for women and children, and increasing employment opportunities. One CLA described legal services as the bridge with core messages needing to describe what is on the other side of the bridge for the client (e.g. safety, futures, protection) rather than the bridge itself (i.e. details about the legal services and programs provided).

Client stories were a key way of tangibly demonstrating the social benefit. Impact Communication Inc.9 is a fundraising communications firm that assists not-for-profit organizations with telling their stories. Underlying their work with services is that ‘people give to people’ so stories are an important way to connect the community with the importance of the work.

However there were challenges and sensitivities in relying on client stories including:

• the impact on the client of telling their story; • the importance of client confidentiality and obtaining appropriate

releases at the end of their matter; and • the need to highlight that legal services were part of the solution, not

necessarily the only or total solution.

These challenges were not seen as insurmountable, but they required careful handling.

CLA services used client stories and other communications about the service in a variety of ways including in:

• Regular newsletters featuring client stories and pro bono lawyer assistance;

• Annual reports featuring client stories and personal acknowledgment of individual and corporate donors;

9 www.impactdc.com


23


• Fundraising collateral; and • Social media such as Facebook and Twitter.

Organizational structural supports are key to successful development and fundraising. A good fundraising strategy can be quickly undermined by a lack of clarity in the areas of leadership, resources and communication. When staff and/or boards develop momentum around particular fundraising strategies, it can be very difficult to “retro-fit” these foundational supports to a development plan.

Funding Diversification Strategies

CLA services employed a range of fundraising strategies, with each strategy tailored to the unique geographical and service related context. The consistent theme was that relationship building and maintenance is at the core of any successful strategy. The relationship components involved:

• understanding the motivation of the supporter/donor; • giving the supporter a problem they could solve; • asking the supporter/donor to provide tangible support; • connecting with the supporter/donor with regular touch points about the

difference the support is making; • thanking and acknowledging the supporter/donor; and • providing clear opportunities for further engagement.

The most successful strategies had clarity about the goal trying to be achieved in the fundraising process:

• cultivation – introducing potential prospects to the mission and the work of the service;

• solicitation – asking for a gift; or • acknowledgment and gratitude – providing information about the impact

of the support.

It can be tempting to do all three at once when there are limited resources, but it is not necessarily conducive to building long term relationships of support.

Private donor strategy

Donations from private individuals and corporate entities were seen as the most effective and the best return on investment strategy. If CLA services were not


already running successful donor campaigns, they were working towards building the capacity to do so.

CLA services directed their donor campaigns at different levels including:

1. Mass marketing and direct response campaigns; 2. Mid-level donor campaigns; and 3. Major gift donor campaigns10.

There were a number of consistent key features of the donor campaigns.

Donor campaigns had a target audience rather than a “general public at large” campaign

While many of the services provided opportunities for the general public to donate to the service via websites, most of the time and resources spent on donor campaigns were targeted to specific audiences, which in most cases were law firms or other lawyers. There were also strong connections between gift solicitation and pro bono work, which is discussed later in this report.

Donor campaigns were targeted at natural allies to the mission and vision of the CLA

All CLA services interviewed targeted some or all of their donor campaigns at lawyers and law firms. In one CLA service, 95% of their donors were in the legal community.

The common target audiences for donor campaigns were:

1. Law firms and lawyers who were connected to and cultivated by members of the board. It is important to distinguish donations from law firms from personal donations from individual lawyers, as both were essential.

2. Internship Alumni who, during their legal training, had exposure to the work of the CLA service and understood the importance of the work. Alumni were cultivated throughout the various stages of their careers, whether they still practiced in the same area of law as the CLA service or not.

Getting the involvement of and acknowledging alumni champions was important for one service as the reach of the donor program could spread through the alumni’s networks.

10 Perry, Richard and Schreifels, Jeff, “Starting a Successful Major Gift Program”, Veritus Group White Paper, www.VeritusGroup.com


25


3. New leaders or associates of law firms were seen as an important part of the succession planning of donor programs as they were future partners of law firms. One service commented that a major risk to their donor program was their aging donor base. A number of services had campaigns specifically targeted at law firm associates.

It was rare for a target audience to be outside the legal profession or industry; however one service was cultivating a new donor base in the fashion industry, which was initiated by a board member’s contacts.

Donor campaigns were run for a limited time period

A common strategy was to have an annual law firm donor campaign which ran for a limited period of time in the year. One CLA service noted that donors turn their mind to donating during the holiday season (i.e. Thanksgiving and Christmas), which also coincides with the end of the tax year.

An annual law firm campaign commonly involved two stages:

1. A letter to the law firm soliciting the donation. A number of services commented that even law firms (and lawyers) that had been consistently giving over years still needed and wanted to be asked. Receiving a hard copy letter was becoming a point of difference that helped the CLA service’s campaign be supported.

2. A follow-up phone call or visit with the law firm or lawyer. A number of services commented that follow-up with the donor or prospective donor was best done by a board member, or by someone that had the strongest personal relationship with the donor.

Some CLA services also engaged their program staff to talk to donor law firms so that the law firms had a deeper appreciation of the importance of the work.

The consensus was that donor campaigns should be time limited and of reasonably short duration, such as one month. One service ran a campaign of 8 months, and while it achieved its funding target, the development staff of this CLA service indicated that they would not run such a long campaign again, due to the loss of momentum. Limited duration of a campaign also helps build momentum to encourage gifts by a particular deadline.

While a campaign is of a short duration, a number of CLA services ran multiple campaigns over the year, each with a different fundraising focus and slightly different target audience.


Private donor programs are relationship focused and are a better long-term return on investment

All CLA services that relied on donor support agreed that the key to this work was investment in cultivating and maintaining relationships with donors. This investment was seen as the most time-consuming activity in the fundraising process. However time spent on relationship building was seen as providing a better return on investment in the long term, compared with other fundraising strategies. A number of CLA services commented that it was more efficient to keep existing donors than to cultivate new donors, such as through events.

All services relied on members of the board to be actively involved in the donor program process through bringing their networks into the donor program, asking for donations and acknowledging donors. One CLA service attributed much of the success of their donor program to the one-on-one meetings between donors and board members.

Public acknowledgment of giving was an important feature of donor campaigns

Acknowledgement and recognition of giving was very evident in the CLA services that relied on donor programs. A number of services had honour boards in their reception areas with lists of names of firms and people who had donated. Donors were also acknowledged, by name, on websites and in annual reports.

A brochure about one CLA service’s annual campaign set out the levels of donor recognition commensurate with the level of the gift. Recognition ranged from having a video on the service’s website to certificates, donor appreciation events, free admission to CLE events, and listing in the annual report.

It was highlighted that acknowledgment and recognition had to focus on the impact that the donor’s gift had on clients, rather than on what the organization had achieved. This emphasis is a subtle, but important re-focus on the importance of the gift. It cannot always be assumed that a donor wants to be acknowledged in a public way and CLA services who knew their donors best could tailor the thank-you process in the most meaningful way to the donor e.g. visit to the service, outreach or court.

Understanding the personal motivation of donors is important in engaging them in the fundraising process


27


All services conducting donor campaigns acknowledged that understanding the personal motivation of the donor was important to targeting a campaign. There were a range of motivations that influenced donor campaigns including:

• Exposure to an internship in the service meant the donor or prospective donor understood the importance of the work;

• Other lawyers understood how important legal assistance is to alleviating broader social problems; and

• Law firms could discharge their pro bono obligations by making financial gifts to CLA services (an important difference from Australia which will be dealt with in this report).

Events

There was a strong bias against events as a main strategy for fundraising due to the costs and risk associated with holding an event and the overall return on investment for the effort. However, many of the legal services still held events which ranged from intimate house parties for select guests to large annual galas. There were a number of purposes for holding an event including to:

• educate; • acknowledge and thank supporters; • fundraise; and • broaden the financial support base by “converting” one-time attendees to

ongoing supporters of the service.

Events can be time and resource intensive with limited return on investment

The lack of return on investment was the major reason why most CLA services did not rely on events as their major fundraising strategy. For example, one CLA service historically relied on events for fundraising, but decided to re-direct their focus from events to private donors. The rationale for the change was that while they could solicit one-off donations at the event, they were unable to retain the donor beyond the life of the event. Events were regarded as time and resource intensive without a long-term financial return.

Events can be used as a branding base for cultivating greater support

It was acknowledged by CLA services that events are an important way for a service to raise awareness of the service and cultivate the donor base. CLA services can wrongly assume that the broader community knows and


understands the importance of the work of the legal service. In the early years of fundraising, events can build the profile and a more long-term donor base.

Events need to stand out in the crowd in a competitive charitable market

Some CLA services used small exclusive and targeted events aimed at educating donors about their services, rather than fundraising. These events ranged from small office-based lunches to events that placed particular supporters in the “inner circle”. The “inner circle” events required a careful draw card choice of location and host. It was acknowledged that donors and prospective donors have event fatigue and that many events “look the same”, so events needed to stand out from the crowd to be well attended.

One service held an annual stair climb event which enabled them to reach out to a different generation of potential supporters and provided a different touch point with the service. Volunteering was seen as an important entry point to supporting a CLA service and for some services this is not always possible, so diversity in events can provide those important connections that couldn’t otherwise occur.

One service held an “anti-event” fundraising campaign, the “Comfy Couch Soiree” which appealed to supporters to donate the money that they would otherwise spend to attend a gala event (clothes, hair, babysitting) directly to the service.

Events can be a way of harnessing corporate support

One service held a very financially successful fundraising event due to the primary role of sponsorship by corporates. The event was long established within the legal community and was seen as an important way for law firms to provide support through large amounts of sponsorship, that exceeded many-fold the cost of a table. The sponsorships alleviated the need for the transactional fundraising (auctions, direct solicitation) to be held at the event.

Despite the lack of enthusiasm by services for events, it was evident through the interviews that CLA services were holding successful events. However large annual events need to be carefully planned and analysed to ensure the time and effort is warranted.

Corporate Support and Corporate Social Responsibility

There were varying levels of corporate support across the CLA services interviewed. It was widely acknowledged that corporate financial support was difficult to obtain. The most prevalent source of financial support from for-profit


29


entities were law firms, which is to be distinguished from individual gifts from the employees or partners of those firms.

The issue of the ethical challenges of accepting financial support from for-profit corporations was raised as it was potentially at cross-purposes with a CLA service’s social change agenda. One CLA service had a policy of not accepting support from a corporation where there was an active community boycott. However it was acknowledged by that service and others, that engagement with corporates is also an opportunity to influence corporate agendas to better align with more progressive social values and practices that could directly impact the CLA service’s client base e.g. fairer consideration of criminal history checks in employment practices.

CLA services successful in engaging corporate financial support were characterised by a number of factors:

• Most services cultivated corporate support through personal relationships. This focus took the form of a staff member or a board member cultivating a key contact or advocating more broadly within the corporate environment.

• In-house corporate counsels were typical key contacts, as they were corporate employees who understood the value of legal work.

• Successful services had designated development staff who were responsible for cultivating corporate support and had a background in the corporate environment so were better able to advocate.

• There was strong integration with other types of resource diversification. For example, one service gave “preferred supplier” status to corporate law firms for pro bono work or internship opportunities based upon a certain threshold of financial support.

• Corporate support was used to leverage further support e.g. one service had a corporate supporter write to a new law firm supporter congratulating them on the initiative.

There was strong recognition that CLA services need to better understand what motivates a corporate to support a legal service. Dr David Cooke highlights that not-for-profits can be instrumental in helping for-profits solve their problems which are bottom line driven, such as staff retention and attraction, reputational issues, and new business opportunities11.

The types of tangible benefits that CLA services provided corporates includes:

11 Cooke, David, Dr (March 2010) Redefining the epistemology of the corporate/not-for-profit engagement Australian Journal of Business and Social Inquiry.

https://works.bepress.com/david_cooke/4/

https://works.bepress.com/david_cooke/4/


• Pro bono work including court work experience that the law firm can not otherwise provide to more junior lawyers;

• Pro bono work as a way of retaining “Millennial” staff; • Providing draw card network opportunities that bring together business,

the judiciary, government and politicians to whom they wouldn't otherwise have access. It was astutely commented that it can’t be underestimated that many businesses do business through not-for-profits.

• Community kudos, particularly in the law firm environment where some of the donor campaigns particularly capitalized on the competitive nature of law firms.

Philanthropic Trusts and Foundations

All of the CLA services interviewed had some type of financial support through philanthropic trust or foundations. Larger development teams had a dedicated position for identifying, applying and acquitting monies from these sources. There were a number of challenges with these sources that are familiar to Australian CLCs:

• Grants rarely covered overhead and operational costs; • Sometimes the administration of the grant out-weighed the financial

benefit, which was particularly problematic for smaller services; and • There wasn’t always a neat fit between the grant provider’s objectives

and the project the service wanted to fund.

There is a view that philanthropic grants and foundations effectively take tax revenue out of the public revenue system that would otherwise be allocated by an elected government to provide social services to the community12. Effectively, wealthy individuals or businesses redirect capital to the social issues that they determine. Ahn argues that democratization of foundations would broaden the decision-making of foundations to be more representative of the community.

Some CLA services spoke about experiences along the continuum of working with philanthropic trusts and foundations to broaden their community perspective. By developing relationships with foundations, some services were able to persuade foundations that were not supporting legal services that legal services were part of the solution to the social issues that the foundation was looking to address. The cultivation work was similar to that of any other type of supporter i.e. getting to know what motivates the foundation to give, providing a

12 Ahn, Christin (2009) Democratising Philanthropy: Challenging Foundations and Social Justice Organizations, Grassroots Fundraising Journal, November/December pp6-8


31


picture of the solution the service could provide and continuing to maintain the relationship from application through to acquittal.

In some jurisdictions, other non-government sources of funds were channelled directly into services of a particular type through government administration. Examples of the sources of these funds included:

• Court fees and fines for criminal offences; • Fees for specialty licence plates which had messaging about supporting

survivors of domestic violence; • Uncollected restitution when damages are paid to court, but not collected;

and • Government imposed penalties on financial institutions as a result of their

misconduct during the financial crisis.

Pro bono

The professional obligation of lawyers to undertake pro bono work in the United States was a strong and consistent theme. The professional obligation translated into both providing services directly to the CLA service’s clients and to significant financial contributions. The strength of the pro bono commitment was usually driven by the relevant State bar association. This ranged from imposing mandatory quotas on the amount of pro bono work to a more aspirational goal. Where there was only an aspirational goal, CLA services perceived the pro bono commitment of lawyers and law firms as more diluted.

The significant difference between Australia and the United States from a funding diversification perspective is that financial contributions are a legitimate way of discharging the professional obligation to do pro bono work. This issue is already part of the Australian discourse about pro bono with Maguire, Shearer and Field arguing that the Australian definition of pro bono should be expanded to include financial contributions, in kind assistance, and support provided by non-legal staff13. However it does need to be acknowledged that non-financial pro bono contributions were generally a precursor to a financial contribution.

Challenges of pro bono

13 Maguire, Rowena, Shearer, Gail and Field, Rachael (2014) Reconsidering ProBono: A Comparative analysis of protocols in Australia, the United States, United Kingdome and Singapore. 37(3) University of New South Wales Journal 1164.


The strength and usefulness of the pro bono support was variable depending on the type of legal practice and the geographical location of the service. In cities where there were large commercial law firm practices, the pro bono contribution, including financial, was significant. It was less significant for services outside large cities, or where there was a specialized area of work. For example, some services practicing in family law were challenged on how to use lawyers outside their legal area of expertise. Providing pro bono experiences to law firms and lawyers, particularly outside their area of legal expertise, required considerable CLA resources for technical support. Mature pro bono relationships understood this and were therefore more open to providing financial support.

Linking pro bono to financial support

There were 2 different strategies employed by CLA services to engage financial support from pro bono law firms. The strategy depended on the level of pro bono engagement and the availability of pro bono resources. The strength of pro bono support was relative to geographical location, the legal focus of the CLA service, the local strength of the professional obligation to do pro bono work, and the types of issues the law firms were seeking to address in their business.

1. Using pro bono work to cultivate relationships with law firms

A number of services indicated that their relationship with law firms began as a pro bono relationship and later developed into financial support. The direct service delivery interaction took a variety of forms including:

- Secondment or fellowship programs which placed a lawyer within the CLA service;

- Referring pro bono cases to the law firm, with or without ongoing support from the CLA service;

- Clinic settings where pro bono lawyers provided advice to clients supervised by the CLA service.

This was an important strategy for engaging law firms and lawyers in the value of the work and provided information about the types of issues law firms were interested in supporting. CLA services received feedback that pro bono opportunities provided a number of benefits to firms and their employees including assisting staff retention and providing practical legal experience, particularly court experience that the firm could not otherwise provide.

2. Using pro bono referral as an incentive for financial support

This strategy was less common and was more prevalent in large cities where there were many law firms and a long-term engagement with pro bono law firms. It took subtle and less subtle forms. Some CLA services were very clear


33


that a benefit of financial support was quality and supported pro bono referrals. The level of financial obligation required was also clearly stated e.g. $15,000 per annum. In other CLA services the level of financial support guided the referral practices for pro bono cases.

This strategy does rely on there being a level of competition between law firms to do pro bono work and how critical pro bono work meets the law firm’s business needs such as attracting and retaining staff. It also requires CLA services to be highly attuned to the kinds of pro bono work law firms and their staff value. One service commented that the cases law firms liked to take on pro bono were the hard cases that potentially had high social and legal impact.

Workplace Giving

There was limited reliance of CLA services on fundraising through workplace giving where employees make regular donations to charities of choice through a pay roll deduction. Usually, the employer nominates the charities they are supporting through workplace giving and sometimes matches employee donations.

United Way has a strong history of relying on workplace giving as its major fundraising strategy. Some CLA services obtained grant funding from United Way. However workplace giving revenue is in decline. There are some reasons given for the decline:

• Workplaces have changed and are less top down, so company executives are less directive about supporting workplace giving;

• Often committees decide where the company will give and it will often be in line with corporate social responsibility goals; and

• There are multiple levels of decision-making within companies about giving.

Planned Giving

Planned giving programs were not prevalent amongst the CLA services interviewed. However, many CLA services acknowledged that a feature of a mature development plan was planned giving. Some of the difficulties in getting a planned giving program started and maintained included:

• It is a long term strategy of relationship management; • It requires sensitive handling; and • It involves technical skills in estate planning.


Planned giving is a way of maturing the donor program and succession planning with existing donors. Many services commented that their donor base was aging and retiring, so regular gifts are less viable for that cohort of donors. One strategy for encouraging inter vivo giving is to give stock. Any selling of stock attracts capital gains tax, but if it is donated, then it is exempt.

Fee for Service and Social Enterprise

Few services relied upon fee for service as an alternative source of revenue. The limited examples of fee for service included providing specialist training for lawyers in the CLA service’s area of expertise. Another example was providing employment policy advice to a corporate supporter, again in the CLA service’s area of legal interest. Providing policy advice was an activity that provided an opportunity to cultivate the corporation for potentially more long-term and substantial support.

Similarly, social enterprise was not a feature of CLA service’s development and fundraising strategies.


35


Recommendations

The challenge faced by the Australian CLC sector in embarking on fundraising and development work is that it is not resource neutral, when resources are already thinly stretched. A number of CLA services in the US described this as the Catch 22.

The recommendations offered here are not resource-neutral and that is intentional. Fundraising and development cannot be successfully engaged without a whole of organization commitment, as it can impact across the organization. However, low cost inroads can be made to determine the feasibility of some approaches and inform the strategic direction in the Australian context.

Leadership

The first critical step in embarking on a funding diversification strategy is strong leadership that supports a funding diversification strategy, at a CLC level as well as at a sector level.

The strength of the CLC sector in Australia is the federated structure of CLCs and their peak bodies which provides opportunities for these conversations to be started and supported with consistency and continuity. In the US, support came from a range of not-for-profit consultancies which provided high quality assistance, but meant that the sector discussions were more fragmented.

It was clear from speaking with CLA services that the governance bodies of individual organizations were key to providing the strategic direction, leadership and support required. While sector peaks can support and inform those conversations, the direction must ultimately come from the management committee or board of the CLC to be successful.

The key issues for boards or management committees to consider include:

- skills and abilities of the governance structure to support funding diversification;

- leadership through individual financial and network support by management committee members (give or get);

- allocation of resources to funding diversification, particularly human resources, which in the short term may be seen to be at the expense of direct services;

- change management with staff and supporters of the CLC as funding diversification will impact on staff across the organization; and

- sub-committees that support fundraising and development.


Joining the broader philanthropic conversation

Funding diversification for CLCs does not happen in a vacuum. There are challenges of funding-raising for all not-for-profits in Australia. CLCs are relative newcomers to an already saturated charitable fundraising market. So the challenge for CLCs is to be part of the broader Australian philanthropic conversation about the value of giving and how legal services contribute to the solutions to Australia’s big social problems.

This conversation can be potentially started with philanthropic trusts and foundations that want to solve big social problems, but don’t currently support legal services as part of the solution. This conversation would be greatly enhanced by a strong communications plan that raises the profile of the work of CLCs.

Communication

Ongoing communication about the social value of CLCs is critical to raising the profile of the sector and expanding its supporter base. The challenge is devoting resources to communication that is not just about the state of government funding. The strength of the CLC sector is that there is strong brand development and recognition within the sector, which distinguishes the Australian sector from the United States.

Messaging about CLCs needs to be focused on how legal services contribute to the solution of the big social problems and taps into the broader values of the community. In the US, having an organization focused on this work (Voices for Civil Justice) allowed the sector to make significant headway without competing with the breadth of other sector support work.

CLCs also need to develop communications plans that support funding diversification. This work includes branding and crafting messages about the social value of \CLC work that shifts the focus from the services to the outcomes of the services.

The legal profession

The support of the legal profession was key to the funding diversification of many CLA services in the United States. In Australia the legal profession is also


37


the closest ally who understands the value of and the social impact of access to legal services.

The challenge for Australia is the narrow definition of pro bono. There needs to be further incentives for law firms to provide financial support to CLCs, such as it being considered as part of the allocation of government contracts to commercial law firms.

The other differential in the Australian context is the nature of the split profession, which requires different strategies for working with law firms and the private bar. The cultivation of in-house counsels is a potential way of gaining broader corporate support The CLC sector needs to work with legal profession bodies about how CLCs can provide solutions to problems being experienced by the for-profit legal profession.

The challenge for individual CLCs is to be able to provide engagement opportunities for pro bono lawyers as the starting point for developing future financial relationships. This strategy requires CLCs developing a package of options and being proactive about such opportunities in discussion with law firms and the private bar.

Training and Support

There is a range of training and support that can assist CLCs which can be provided by sector peaks, external consultants and the broader charitable fundraising sector. Some of the areas for training and support include:

- management committee and governance support; - fundraising strategies; - funding diversification strategic planning and analysis; - communications and branding; - change management; and - grants writing.

The development of sector networks on funding diversification can potentially be a first step in sharing information and building the capacity in the sector.

Time

An essential ingredient to funding diversification is time. While many CLCs facing government funding cuts need the seeds of funding diversification to bear fruit urgently, these strategies rely on relationships to be built and maintained over the long-term. A minimum requirement of a3-year timeframe for seeing a return on investment is the consensus of CLA services. Given the time investment, leadership and strategic direction is key when results don’t happen immediately. Many of the recommendations in this report are long-term projects.


Challenges of geography and CLC size

CLA services that were most successful at funding diversification were located in big metropolitan centres with an ability to build relationship with lawyers and law firms in their geographical area. Size and location of the CLA service were key factors and these factors present significant challenges for CLCs in Australia.

Any strategy to pursue funding diversification needs to consider how the capacity of the service and its potential supporter base will impact on outcomes. Regionalised services can build strong local supporter bases, but there are also many challenges including the identification of clients by using their stories, limited access to top tier law firms, and the capacity of the CLC.

In the US there are collective fundraising campaigns conducted by the private bar. By working with the respective State Law Societies and Bar Associations, the feasibility of a legal profession sector campaign could be investigated. The disadvantage of this strategy is creating another layer of accountability for funds that might be otherwise directly sourced by the CLC.

A sector fundraising campaign targeted at the legal profession is a possible way to support smaller more regionalized services in raising profile and generating support.

Documents

How the Community Legal Centre Sector can be sustainable ... · The second best time is now. ... Her Justice, New York City • Jillian Koes, Manager Events, Her Justice, New York