New ABA Blueprint tool designed to increase solo, small firm efficiency

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
blueprint-15col.jpg (Courtesy of

As American Bar Association President Linda Klein traveled the country to meet with attorneys from dozens of states just before she took office, she noticed a common theme in her conversations with solo and small firm practitioners. Administrative duties are eating into time that could be spent practicing law, the attorneys said, and because they don’t have a large staff, they’re forced to handle those duties themselves.

Klein was struck by that common concern, so when she took office as ABA president in 2016, she began working on the development of a program that could alleviate some of that administrative burden. That program became ABA Blueprint, an online legal tech marketplace tool launched in November 2016 meant to enable attorneys working at solo and small firms to quickly and easily find legal technology that meets their firms’ needs.

“Blueprint, at its core, is an ABA-member benefit that helps solo and small firm lawyers cut through the noise and find the tools they need to run a more modern and efficient practice,” said Chad Burton, CEO of CuroLegal, a legal tech firm that collaborated with the ABA on the creation of Blueprint.

One of the most frequent comments Klein heard during her time as president-elect was that it is difficult for attorneys at solo or small firms to wade through all of the various software available for legal professionals to determine which programs best meet the needs of their firms. Elizabeth Cox, a partner at Cox & Koons LLP and 2017 chair of the Indianapolis Bar Association’s Solo and Small Firm Practice Task Force, agreed. She noted the process of searching out legal tech tools is not only overwhelming, but also time-consuming.

At larger firms, support staff members are often hired based on their professional background, such as technology or human resources, to handle those specific administrative areas, Burton said. But at solo and small firms, Cox said those responsibilities often rest on the attorneys’ shoulders. While her firm employs paralegals to help ease the administrative burden, she and her partner still have a hand in other non-legal tasks, such as processing payroll and maintaining their office building.

“It eats into the time of practicing law, and it also eats into family time and into weekends,” Cox said. “It has to be a labor of love. You have to be called to do this.”

dimos-jim-mug Dimos

Using their own experiences as attorneys, ABA Deputy Executive Director Jim Dimos said he and the CuroLegal team tried to develop software categories within Blueprint that would address the most common needs within the legal profession. For example, Blueprint provides access to digital credit card processing services, QuickBooks for accounting, Office365 for client contact information and Clio, a law firm practice management software that includes features such as billing, accounting and document automation.

Additionally, Blueprint can point attorneys toward other more law-specific tools, such as software to expedite the e-discovery process and marketing tools to grow a firm’s business or presence in a community, Dimos said.

Such legal tech tools can be beneficial, Cox said, but problems arise when multiple software offer the same or similar services, which forces her and other solo and small firm practitioners to take additional time to compare the products. But with Blueprint’s “Build Your Firm” option, attorneys can answer questions about their individual practices, and those answers are used to generate a suite of suggested legal tech tools aimed at meeting the specific needs of their practices.

Blueprint’s ability to customize the selection of applications to an individual practice is what sets the program apart from other legal tech tools, Burton said. And while technical tools are generally beneficial, Blueprint also offers ABA members a live chat feature that enables them to get their questions answered immediately by a real person.

Aside from increased efficiency, Dimos said one of the biggest benefits of Blueprint to solo and small firms is financial.

Investing in legal tech tools has a significant financial impact on law firms, especially solo and small firms, so the decision to purchase practice management software is not made on impulse, Dimos said. Additionally, there are already costs associated with being an ABA member, so Dimos said the Blueprint team worked to negotiate discounts that would make purchasing software through Blueprint a worthwhile investment.

For example, the money saved by purchasing the Clio software through Blueprint as an ABA member would be enough to cover the cost of ABA dues, Dimos said. But those discounts are only available to members. Others can access the Blueprint site, but price reductions would not be available.

Dimos cites Blueprint’s financial benefits as part of the reason for the program’s initial success. Since it went live in early November, Blueprint has been rolled out “from sea to shining sea,” he said, reaching attorneys across the country.

Feedback about the ABA’s newest web tool has been positive, but the product development team is already looking toward improvements for the next Blueprint iteration, Dimos said. For example, the ABA recently discussed Blueprint during a continuing legal education program hosted by the Maine State Bar Association. While in Maine, the team allowed attorneys to test out the web tool and offer suggestions for improvements.

Some ideas for future Blueprint versions include practice-specific tools, Dimos said, such as features designed for specific types of firms, such as intellectual property, trusts and estates, or corporate lawyers.

That ongoing evolution will further distinguish Blueprint from other legal tech tools, Burton said, because many legal software developers roll out new programs without a plan for continuous development.

“We’re not trying to make something static and stale,” Dimos said. “We may add products or may take products out if they’re not popular. We’re listening to users as to what they want.”•


Post a comment to this story

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. OK, take notice. Those wondering just how corrupt the Indiana system is can see the picture in this post. Attorney Donald James did not criticize any judges, he merely, it would seem, caused some clients to file against him and then ignored his own defense. James thus disrespected the system via ignoring all and was also ordered to reimburse the commission $525.88 for the costs of prosecuting the first case against him. Yes, nearly $526 for all the costs, the state having proved it all. Ouch, right? Now consider whistleblower and constitutionalist and citizen journalist Paul Ogden who criticized a judge, defended himself in such a professional fashion as to have half the case against him thrown out by the ISC and was then handed a career ending $10,000 bill as "half the costs" of the state crucifying him. THE TAKEAWAY MESSAGE for any who have ears to hear ... resist Star Chamber and pay with your career ... welcome to the Indiana system of (cough) justice.

  2. GMA Ranger, I, too, was warned against posting on how the Ind govt was attempting to destroy me professionally, and visit great costs and even destitution upon my family through their processing. No doubt the discussion in Indy today is likely how to ban me from this site (I expect I soon will be), just as they have banned me from emailing them at the BLE and Office of Bar Admission and ADA coordinator -- or, if that fails, whether they can file a complaint against my Kansas or SCOTUS law license for telling just how they operate and offering all of my files over the past decade to any of good will. The elitist insiders running the Hoosier social control mechanisms realize that knowledge and a unified response will be the end of their unjust reign. They fear exposure and accountability. I was banned for life from the Indiana bar for questioning government processing, that is, for being a whistleblower. Hoosier whistleblowers suffer much. I have no doubt, Gma Ranger, of what you report. They fear us, but realize as long as they keep us in fear of them, they can control us. Kinda like the kids' show Ants. Tyrannical governments the world over are being shaken by empowered citizens. Hoosiers dealing with The Capitol are often dealing with tyranny. Time to rise up: Back to the Founders! MAGA!

  3. Science is showing us the root of addiction is the lack of connection (with people). Criminalizing people who are lonely is a gross misinterpretation of what data is revealing and the approach we must take to combat mental health. Harsher crimes from drug dealers? where there is a demand there is a market, so make it legal and encourage these citizens to be functioning members of a society with competitive market opportunities. Legalize are "drugs" and quit wasting tax payer dollars on frivolous incarceration. The system is destroying lives and doing it in the name of privatized profits. To demonize loneliness and destroy lives in the land of opportunity is not freedom.

  4. Good luck, but as I have documented in three Hail Mary's to the SCOTUS, two applications (2007 & 2013),a civil rights suit and my own kicked-to-the-curb prayer for mandamus. all supported in detailed affidavits with full legal briefing (never considered), the ISC knows that the BLE operates "above the law" (i.e. unconstitutionally) and does not give a damn. In fact, that is how it was designed to control the lawyers. IU Law Prof. Patrick Baude blew the whistle while he was Ind Bar Examiner President back in 1993, even he was shut down. It is a masonic system that blackballs those whom the elite disdain. Here is the basic thrust: When I asked why I was initially denied, the court's foremost jester wrote back that the ten examiners all voted, and I did not gain the needed votes for approval (whatever that is, probably ten) and thus I was not in .. nothing written, no explanation, just go away or appeal ... and if you appeal and disagree with their system .. proof positive you lack character and fitness. It is both arbitrary and capricious by its very design. The Hoosier legal elites are monarchical minded, and rejected me for life for ostensibly failing to sufficiently respect man's law (due to my stated regard for God's law -- which they questioned me on, after remanding me for a psych eval for holding such Higher Law beliefs) while breaking their own rules, breaking federal statutory law, and violating federal and state constitutions and ancient due process standards .. all well documented as they "processed me" over many years.... yes years ... they have few standards that they will not bulldoze to get to the end desired. And the ISC knows this, and they keep it in play. So sad, And the fed courts refuse to do anything, and so the blackballing show goes on ... it is the Indy way. My final experience here: I will open my files to anyone interested in seeing justice dawn over Indy. My cases are an open book, just ask.

  5. Looks like 2017 will be another notable year for these cases. I have a Grandson involved in a CHINS case that should never have been. He and the whole family are being held hostage by CPS and the 'current mood' of the CPS caseworker. If the parents disagree with a decision, they are penalized. I, along with other were posting on Jasper County Online News, but all were quickly warned to remove posts. I totally understand that some children need these services, but in this case, it was mistakes, covered by coorcement of father to sign papers, lies and cover-ups. The most astonishing thing was within 2 weeks of this child being placed with CPS, a private adoption agency was asking questions regarding child's family in the area. I believe a photo that was taken by CPS manager at the very onset during the CHINS co-ocerment and the intent was to make money. I have even been warned not to post or speak to anyone regarding this case. Parents have completed all requirements, met foster parents, get visitation 2 days a week, and still the next court date is all the way out till May 1, which gives them(CPS) plenty of to time make further demands (which I expect) No trust of these 'seasoned' case managers, as I have already learned too much about their dirty little tricks. If they discover that I have posted here, I expect they will not be happy and penalized parents again. Still a Hostage.