State Bar of California Mentoring Task Force Preliminary Report and Recommendations

State Bar of California Mentoring Task Force Preliminary Report and Recommendations

PLEASE NOTE:  Publication for public comment is not, and shall not, be construed as a recommendation or approval by the Board of Trustees of the materials published

SUBJECT:

State Bar of California Mentoring Task Force Preliminary Report and Recommendations

BACKGROUND:

The Board of Trustees approved the creation and appointment of the State Bar Mentoring Task Force in September 2014. The Task Force was designed to bring together the State Bar Sections, the California Young Lawyers Association (“CYLA”), the Council on Access & Fairness and the Board of Trustees to explore, create and develop mentoring programs and initiatives for young or new lawyers.  

The Task Force was charged with coordinating the past and present efforts of each group, and exploring and promoting best practices to be implemented in mentoring programs.  The aim of mentoring of young or new lawyers is to increase the education and training of these attorneys and to promote competency, professionalism and ethics.

At its initial meeting, the Task Force reviewed its charge and created four working groups focused on surveying current state, local and other mentoring programs and identifying key issues that will need to be considered as it develops recommendations for new and young attorney mentoring programs in California. The four working groups included:  (1) statewide mentoring programs, (2) mentoring programs associated with local bars, minority bars, specialty bars, law firms, law schools and other law related mentoring programs, (3) online platforms and (4) marketing and recruitment. The Task Force held three in-person meetings and the working groups met  by conference calls in the interim.

The report includes full and summary Working Group Reports, data from mentoring programs, new lawyer demographics, and other research results.

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Mission Statement: The Proposed Mentoring Program Mission Statement is as follows:

“The goal of the State Bar Attorney Mentoring Program is to further public protection through mentoring, education and the training of young lawyers to promote the pursuit of excellence, professionalism, and ethics in the practice of law.”

Program Goals:  The Proposed Program Goals are as follows:
  • Support the State Bar’s public protection mission by helping to develop new lawyers’ practical skills, and educating new lawyers in professionalism, civility and ethical issues
  • Avoid or reduce the number of complaints concerning services provided by new lawyer
  • Provide training in law practice management skills
  • Prevent isolation of new lawyers, especially those in solo practice
  • Promote strong, professional relationships within the legal community
  • Encourage support for and delivery of pro bono services
  • Provide role models of professional behavior to new lawyers
  • Build skills for maintaining good attorney-client relationships
  • Support underserved areas, especially where new lawyers do not have access to training and mentoring services
Pilot Program:  

The Task Force agreed that whatever the final program recommendation, the program should be implemented initially on a pilot basis, with ongoing review and evaluation and ultimate program revisions to ensure ongoing effectiveness and stability.  For the pilot program, the Task Force recommends that the potential pilot include 100 mentees and either one or two mentees per mentor.

Proposed Program Features:

1.     The final State Bar Mentoring Program should be mandatory for new lawyers.

2.    A new lawyer could opt out of the mandatory State Bar Program if s/he (a) is enrolled in or has completed another State Bar approved mentoring program,
(b) is employed in a law firm or other organization that provides a comparable approved mentoring program or (c) has participated in a State Bar-approved mentoring program sponsored by a bar association or other professional organization for lawyers.

3.    A new lawyer would be exempt from the State Bar Mentoring requirement if s/he (a) has practiced in another state or jurisdiction for more than 5 years or (b) has completed a comparable State Bar-approved mentoring program in another state.  

4.    There should be a mentoring certification fee for support and educational programs provided to new lawyers.

5.    The preference is for the mentor-mentee matches to be one-to-one or one-to-two, but given the potential numbers of new lawyers who will be required to participate (estimated over 6,000 new lawyers each year) and the geographic regions to be served, it is also contemplated that group mentoring, e-mentoring, tech platforms and social media could be made available for mentor-mentee meetings and communications.

6.    The matching process could incorporate a number of options including (a) a centralized administrator approving the pairings based on data provided by mentors and mentees, (b) mentor selection of mentees from a potential pool of mentees, (c) mentee selection of mentors from a potential pool of mentors, or (d) a combination of any of the above options.  

7.    The program should incorporate data collection and outcomes measures for ongoing program evaluation including annual review of the effectiveness of the mentor-mentee relationships; periodic feedback from mentors and mentees about the relationship; compliance with program requirements and certifications; to the extent possible, impact of mentoring on mentees’ professional conduct and practice; and reporting and monitoring of mentee MCLE credits.

8.    The use of online technology will be necessary to collect program data, facilitate mentor-mentee relationships, coordinate and distribute program offerings and conduct program performance evaluations.

9.    The program should incorporate a combination of centralized features including staffing and other program resources to ensure support for program operations, compliance and standardized recordkeeping and evaluation, as well as localized features to provide feedback from geographic areas throughout the state and the flexibility to meet program needs of new lawyers statewide.

10.    Initial mentor qualifications would include:  a minimum number of years in practice (e.g. more than 5 years); no disciplinary record; State Bar membership “in good standing”; no suspension or disbarment in any state; completion of the basic mentor training; and, in some instances, meeting additional requirements for designation as a “certified mentor”.

11.    Mentor recruitment would incorporate a focus on incentives including: MCLE credit for certain mentor activities, waiver of the first year of membership fees for State Bar Section membership, mentor certifications, judicial recommendations, recognition/awards for mentor contributions, professional development, public service and role in influencing the next generation of lawyers

12.    Orientation would be provided to mentors and mentees regarding the program goals, outcomes, and expectations.

13.    Additional mentor trainings would be provided to focus on attributes of good mentors, the mentor-mentee relationship, and creating mentoring plans.

14.    Additional mentee training would be provided to focus on how to be a mentee and on practical, professional, and ethical aspects of the practice of law.

15.    Marketing strategies would be employed to recruit mentors and outreach would be implemented through key entities and organizations including the CYLA network, State Bar Sections, local/minority/specialty bar associations, and leadership in law firms, governmental entities, and key institutions that employ lawyers.

16.    The State Bar would have to determine sources of funding and secure such funding and other resources to support the program on an ongoing basis.

ANY KNOWN FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT:

To be determined

ATTACHMENT:
Mentoring Task Force Preliminary Report and Recommendations

(Note: The number of potential new attorneys actually admitted to practice each year is over 6,000, as opposed to the estimated average of 4,000 per year as indicated in the attached preliminary report.)

SOURCE:

Board of Trustees Executive Committee

DEADLINE:
5 p.m. Wednesday, Sept. 9, 2015

DIRECT COMMENTS TO:
Patricia Lee
Executive Offices
180 Howard St.
San Francisco CA 94105-1639
Phone: 415-538-2240
Email:  patricia.lee@calbar.ca.gov