Tailored to fit: Florida pro bono programs.

• Author: Rauch, Kelly Vaughn
• Position: Pro bono legal services

The staff director of one local program compares diverse approaches to meeting legal aid needs

Just like law firms, pro bono programs come in all shapes and sizes, and the role of the pro bono coordinator can be just as varied. Depending on the location of the program, the pro bono coordinator may have the only position of that kind in the area. To address the many issues that confront these programs every day, a Florida Pro Bono Coordinators Association was formed. This peer group meets several times a year to share ideas and challenges that arise in the pro bono world. These pro bono programs enable Florida attorneys to fulfill their aspirational goal of annually performing 20 hours of pro bono work, and help low income people increase their access to the judicial system.

"There, but for the grace of God, go I. I believe it is my responsibility to help others because I am so blessed. Serving my community by serving as a pro bono attorney is the least I can do," said attorney Terry Bledsoe on why she performs pro bono work for the Seminole County Bar Association's Legal Aid Society.

Some Florida pro bono programs are part of the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) funded legal aid offices, and as such, are funded by the federal government and must abide by certain restrictions and rules. Other programs are operated by local bar associations or may be free-standing. The non-LSC funded programs have a little more flexibility in the type of cases they can accept, but most programs are limited to helping people who have a gross monthly household income that is within 125 percent of the Federal Poverty Guidelines ($1,672 a month for a family of four).

One of the main sources of funding for pro bono programs and legal aid programs is the Florida Bar Foundation's Interest on Trust Accounts (IOTA) program.

The Florida Bar Foundation uses interest generated from attorney trust accounts to fund these pro bono programs for low income people, and the programs are required to follow the Foundation's guidelines and reporting procedures. Although the June 1998 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Phillips v. Washington Legal Foundation held that the interest earned on these trust accounts is the property of the client, it did not hold that the IOTA program is unconstitutional or that it should be eliminated. Rather, the case, which was decided by a 5-4 majority, was remanded to the lower courts to determine whether there is a taking of the client's property and...