ILNews

IBA: Section CLE Pilot Program Launched for 2013

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Times are changing in the world of mandatory continuing legal education (CLE). At one time, few providers for continuing legal education existed in the state. Now, a simple Google search for continuing legal education in Indianapolis nets more than 80,000 results.

At the same time, membership dues invoices for associations across the board are increasingly being scrutinized, and the ability to articulate clear member benefits plays a more important role than ever in attracting and retaining members. IndyBar leadership takes the responsibility of communicating a clear value proposition to members seriously and is committed to a constant self-evaluation of the bar’s delivery of benefits and services to members.

Though the IndyBar’s membership remains robust, increasing year after year, and attendance at CLE programming is steady, consideration of these factors recently propelled bar leadership into a discussion on how the bar can continue to deliver unparalleled value to Indianapolis practitioners. Out of this discussion came a pilot program to test the waters of bundling section membership and continuing legal education.

The pilot program, which will be tested in 2013 with four IndyBar sections—the Appellate Practice Section, the Family Law Section, the Government Practice Section and the Real Estate and Land Use Section, will call for a small increase in section dues, which will in turn allow section members to attend all one-hour brownbag programming presented by the section at no cost. The participating sections have committed to presenting a minimum of four one-hour programs in 2013.

Through this pilot program, the IndyBar hopes to help members:

Save money. While section dues will increase by a small amount, members of participating sections will see savings of at least $100 per year versus paying per credit hour for each section program.

Save time. No more pulling out a credit card to pay for individual programs or submitting individual invoices for payment.

Invest their money in what matters. Members can pay one lump sum for their section affiliation, providing identity for their practice area and CLE that is meaningful and relevant.

“This is an effort aimed at enhancing member value, providing more reasons to attend the IndyBar’s popular one-hour CLEs, and increasing the flow of substantive legal information through our sections,” says IndyBar President Scott Chinn. “It is also part of the IndyBar’s multi-phase communications plan to diversify the ways we communicate substantive information to our members.”

By bundling CLE programs with section membership, section leadership will also be empowered to take an active role in achieving section member engagement and involvement. Rather than viewing planning and presentation of CLE programming as an expected function, section leadership will be asked to consider how their programming is serving their members, in addition to considering additional member benefits that could arise out of CLE programming, like resources or articles that relate to a seminar topic.

“Over the past several years, our section has generally made it a point to present six one-hour CLEs on an annual basis. Since one hour CLE is one of the focuses of the pilot project, we thought it was a great way to incorporate what we were already doing with our continued effort to provide more value to our section members,” says Eric Engebretson, current chair of the IndyBar Family Law Section. “We believe that the low cost CLE offered via the pilot program, coupled with the various other events we offer for free to our members throughout the year, make membership in the Family Law Section a great value and benefit to our members.”

Bar leadership recognizes that this change brings with it numerous challenges and opportunities, which resulted in the decision to test the program with just a small portion of the bar in the upcoming year. The results of the pilot program will be closely monitored throughout the year, and careful consideration will be given at the conclusion of the pilot program to determine whether it will be expanded to all IndyBar sections in subsequent years.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Whilst it may be true that Judges and Justices enjoy such freedom of time and effort, it certainly does not hold true for the average working person. To say that one must 1) take a day or a half day off work every 3 months, 2) gather a list of information including recent photographs, and 3) set up a time that is convenient for the local sheriff or other such office to complete the registry is more than a bit near-sighted. This may be procedural, and hence, in the near-sighted minds of the court, not 'punishment,' but it is in fact 'punishment.' The local sheriffs probably feel a little punished too by the overwork. Registries serve to punish the offender whilst simultaneously providing the public at large with a false sense of security. The false sense of security is dangerous to the public who may not exercise due diligence by thinking there are no offenders in their locale. In fact, the registry only informs them of those who have been convicted.

  2. Unfortunately, the court doesn't understand the difference between ebidta and adjusted ebidta as they clearly got the ruling wrong based on their misunderstanding

  3. A common refrain in the comments on this website comes from people who cannot locate attorneys willing put justice over retainers. At the same time the judiciary threatens to make pro bono work mandatory, seemingly noting the same concern. But what happens to attorneys who have the chumptzah to threatened the legal status quo in Indiana? Ask Gary Welch, ask Paul Ogden, ask me. Speak truth to power, suffer horrendously accordingly. No wonder Hoosier attorneys who want to keep in good graces merely chase the dollars ... the powers that be have no concerns as to those who are ever for sale to the highest bidder ... for those even willing to compromise for $$$ never allow either justice or constitutionality to cause them to stand up to injustice or unconstitutionality. And the bad apples in the Hoosier barrel, like this one, just keep rotting.

  4. I am one of Steele's victims and was taken for $6,000. I want my money back due to him doing nothing for me. I filed for divorce after a 16 year marriage and lost everything. My kids, my home, cars, money, pension. Every attorney I have talked to is not willing to help me. What can I do? I was told i can file a civil suit but you have to have all of Steelers info that I don't have. Of someone can please help me or tell me what info I need would be great.

  5. It would appear that news breaking on Drudge from the Hoosier state (link below) ties back to this Hoosier story from the beginning of the recent police disrespect period .... MCBA president Cassandra Bentley McNair issued the statement on behalf of the association Dec. 1. The association said it was “saddened and disappointed” by the decision not to indict Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson for shooting Michael Brown. “The MCBA does not believe this was a just outcome to this process, and is disheartened that the system we as lawyers are intended to uphold failed the African-American community in such a way,” the association stated. “This situation is not just about the death of Michael Brown, but the thousands of other African-Americans who are disproportionately targeted and killed by police officers.” http://www.thestarpress.com/story/news/local/2016/07/18/hate-cops-sign-prompts-controversy/87242664/

ADVERTISEMENT