Many states offer the opportunity to become a Continuing Legal Education Accredited Provider or Sponsor (Provider). This is not to be confused with Accrediting a Live Course or Conference in all Mandatory Continuing Legal Education States, though it is no less burdensome.
If putting on more than an occasional course, then it would be prudent to apply for Provider status so that all courses are presumptively accredited. It make economic sense and saves time. But does it?
Not all states offer a Provider option. So right off the bat, discount Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Minnesota and Wyoming where each course must be separately approved.
Standards of Accreditation. A Provider must submit proof that they presented a prescribed number of courses over the prior one to three years. In some states those courses are eligible only if they were previously accredited.
New Mexico’s RESTRICTION: Providers are limited to institutions whose primary purpose is to provide CLE.
Washington’s BURDEN: Have a minimum three-year track record of providing at least 30 unique, high-quality CLE courses per year. That’s 90 courses!
Cost of Accreditation. A handful of states have no application or annual fee while the others range from $10 to $750. And there there’s Illinois.
Illinois’ UNCONSCIONABLE fees: Annual Provider fees range from $100 to a whopping $4,000 depending on the number of course offered. And these fees are for Providers that do not charge attorneys for attending any of the CLE programs.
Contrast this with New York where it costs exactly zero dollars!
Continue Reading →
With only a handful of states still holding out on passing a mandatory continuing legal education (MCLE) requirement for their attorneys, the conversation has shifted from debating the merits of mandatory rules to addressing the need for reform.
But how? Do we wait for generations of bureaucracy to play out? Abide turf battles to maintain and protect the status quo? Voice our dissatisfaction and frustration via the range of media outlets available to us?
How about the million strong licensed attorneys lobbying their states supreme courts, continuing legal education (CLE) boards and regulators directly as individuals, law firms, in-house legal departments, state and federal law departments? Or come together as a group? An MCLE lobby, if you will.
During a particularly meaningful panel discussion at the 2010 CLE Association (ACLEA) conference in Orlando, it was recommended that we form relationships with the rule makers and directly petition them. Let’s go for it!
The recent confluence of events including changes in the legal profession spurred by economic concerns, emerging technology and the recent Critical Issues Summit make this an opportune time to organize and push for change.
A few action points to consider:
- Identify MCLE rules in need of reform (on-demand, distance learning, social media and marketing course accreditation, uniformity, reciprocity, etc)
- Identify MCLE Board members of each state (I’ve started the process of compiling a state-by-state directory of CLE Boards)
- Figure out the most effective way to “lobby” (petition drive? network with CLE regulators as liasons?)
Is forming an MCLE Lobby to Advocate for Continuing Legal Education Rule Change viable?
Continue Reading →
Tagged as:
Accreditation
