Help Chart the Future of Legal Tech: Vote for Your Favorite Startup Alley Finalists Before the Time Is Up

Less
than
two
weeks
remain
to
cast
your
vote
to
help
pick
the
15
legal
tech
startups
that
will
get
to
compete
at
the
ninth-annual
Startup
Alley
at ABA
TECHSHOW
,
April
2-5, 2025,
in
Chicago.

Your
votes
determine
the
15
companies
that
will
be
selected
to
face
off
in
a
live
pitch
competition
on
the
opening-night
of
this
year’s
TECHSHOW.
They
also
get
to
exhibit
in
a
special
Startup
Alley
portion
of
the
exhibit
hall.

Here
is
everything
you
need
to
vote:


DEADLINE
FOR
VOTING
IS
FRIDAY,
FEB.
7,
AT
11:45
P.M.
ET.

AI And Environmental Sustainability: Insights From Pamela Isom – Above the Law


AI
and
environmental
sustainability
might
not
seem
like
the
most
obvious
pairing,
but
Pamela
Isom
is
here
to
prove
otherwise.
As
the
founder
and
CEO
of
Izabayte
Consulting,
Pamela
has
spent
her
career
at
the
intersection
of
technology,
governance,
and
safe
digital
transformation.
She
joined
me
for
a
conversation
that
opened
my
eyes
to
the
powerful
ways
AI
can
drive
sustainability

and
the
work
it
takes
to
make
AI
itself
more
sustainable.


Let’s
dive
into
the
insights
from
our
discussion.
Spoiler
alert:
AI
has
a
lot
more
to
offer
than
you
might
think,
but
it
also
comes
with
a
carbon
footprint
that
can’t
be
ignored.


Watch
the
full
conversation
here:



AI
and
Environmental
Sustainability


What
Does
Sustainability
Have
to
Do
With
AI?


Pamela
broke
it
down
simply:


  1. Advancing
    Sustainability
    Goals:


    AI
    can
    be
    a
    powerful
    tool
    for
    meeting
    an
    organization’s
    environmental
    and
    social
    objectives.
    Whether
    it’s
    improving
    climate
    predictions
    or
    optimizing
    energy
    use,
    AI
    is
    already
    making
    a
    difference.

  2. Making
    AI
    Itself
    Sustainable:


    AI,
    especially
    large
    language
    models,
    is
    energy-intensive.
    From
    data
    center
    power
    usage
    to
    computing
    demands,
    we
    need
    to
    ensure
    the
    tools
    helping
    us
    don’t
    create
    their
    own
    environmental
    challenges.


As
Pamela
put
it,
“Every
organization
should
have
sustainability
goals,
and
AI
can
either
help
meet
those
goals
or,
if
used
poorly,
work
against
them.”


How
AI
Is
Saving
the
Planet
(Or
At
Least
Trying)


Pamela
shared
some
fascinating
examples
of
AI
in
action,
proving
that
it’s
already
an
unsung
hero
in
the
sustainability
space:


  • Real-Time
    Environmental
    Monitoring:


    AI-powered
    models
    are
    helping
    predict
    weather
    patterns,
    track
    climate
    shifts,
    and
    even
    detect
    pollutants
    in
    the
    air
    and
    water.

  • Search
    And
    Rescue
    Missions:


    Thermal-imaging
    drones
    equipped
    with
    AI
    have
    been
    used
    to
    locate
    missing
    individuals
    in
    challenging
    terrains,
    saving
    lives
    in
    the
    process.

  • Energy
    Optimization:


    AI
    aids
    in
    identifying
    renewable
    energy
    sources
    and
    even
    simulating
    weather
    events
    to
    evaluate
    their
    impact
    on
    energy
    grids.
    For
    example,
    simulating
    a
    hurricane’s
    effects
    helps
    communities
    prepare
    for
    and
    mitigate
    infrastructure
    damage.


She’s
also
excited
about
using
AI
to
sort
through
complex
research
data,
identifying
actionable
insights
in
areas
like
renewable
energy
faster
than
any
human
team
ever
could.
“AI
lets
us
cut
through
the
noise
and
get
to
the
data
that
matters,”
Pamela
explained.


The
Roadblocks
To
AI
In
Sustainability


Despite
these
incredible
possibilities,
Pamela
acknowledged
that
not
everyone
is
on
board.
Here’s
what’s
holding
organizations
back:


  • Lack
    Of
    Awareness:


    Many
    leaders
    don’t
    see
    how
    AI
    fits
    into
    their
    sustainability
    strategy.

  • Trust
    Issues:


    Generative
    AI’s
    reputation
    for
    “hallucinating”
    (aka
    making
    things
    up)
    has
    some
    decision-makers
    doubting
    its
    reliability.

  • Resource
    Challenges:


    Implementing
    AI
    solutions
    takes
    time,
    money,
    and
    expertise

    luxuries
    not
    every
    organization
    has.


But
Pamela
is
a
problem-solver.
“Start
with
education,”
she
advises.
“Help
your
team
understand
why
sustainability
matters
to
them
personally.
When
people
see
the
value
for
themselves,
they’ll
support
the
broader
mission.”


What
About
AI’s
Carbon
Footprint?


We
can’t
talk
about
sustainability
without
addressing
AI’s
own
impact
on
the
environment.
Pamela
didn’t
shy
away
from
the
uncomfortable
truth:
AI
consumes
a
ton
of
energy.
Training
large
language
models
can
use
as
much
energy
as
hundreds
of
homes
over
a
year.
That’s

a
lot.


But
there
are
ways
to
do
better:


  • Build
    Smaller
    Models:


    Pamela’s
    AI
    agents
    are
    designed
    to
    handle
    specific,
    targeted
    tasks,
    reducing
    energy
    use
    without
    sacrificing
    utility.

  • Optimize
    Prompts:


    Long
    prompts
    eat
    up
    more
    computing
    resources.
    Keep
    it
    concise
    and
    focused
    for
    a
    more
    sustainable
    interaction.

  • Smarter
    Data
    Centers:


    Transition
    to
    renewable
    energy
    sources
    and
    distribute
    workloads
    to
    off-peak
    times.


As
she
explained,
“Even
small
adjustments

like
writing
efficient
prompts

can
make
a
big
difference.”


Innovations
That
Inspire
Hope


Despite
the
challenges,
Pamela
remains
optimistic
about
the
future
of
AI
and
sustainability.
Some
of
the
innovations
she’s
most
excited
about
include:


  • Climate
    Resilience
    Tools:


    AI
    is
    being
    used
    to
    model
    how
    extreme
    weather
    events
    like
    hurricanes
    and
    wildfires
    impact
    energy
    grids,
    helping
    communities
    prepare
    and
    respond.

  • Accessible
    Solutions:


    AI-driven
    tools
    like
    text-to-audio
    and
    personalized
    learning
    platforms
    are
    making
    sustainable
    practices
    more
    inclusive
    and
    actionable
    for
    everyone.


“These
are
the
kinds
of
advancements
that
make
me
excited
to
get
up
in
the
morning,”
Pamela
said
with
a
smile.


What
Leaders
Can
Do
Today


For
nontechnical
leaders
wondering
how
to
make
an
impact,
Pamela
has
some
simple
but
effective
advice:


  • Ask
    The
    Right
    Questions:


    When
    working
    with
    vendors,
    ask
    how
    they’re
    incorporating
    AI
    responsibly
    and
    sustainably.

  • Educate
    Yourself
    And
    Your
    Team:


    Sustainability
    starts
    with
    awareness.
    Invest
    in
    understanding
    how
    AI
    can
    fit
    into
    your
    goals.

  • Experiment
    With
    Sustainability
    Prompts:


    Tools
    like
    ChatGPT
    can
    help
    you
    brainstorm
    ways
    to
    meet
    sustainability
    goals

    just
    don’t
    forget
    to
    keep
    those
    prompts
    efficient!


Pamela’s
parting
words
were
simple
but
powerful:
“Pick
one
goal
from
the
UN’s
17
Sustainable
Development
Goals.
Just
one.
Then
ask:
How
can
AI
help
me
achieve
this?”


It’s
a
great
reminder
that
the
intersection
of
AI
and
sustainability
isn’t
just
for
tech
wizards
or
environmental
activists.
It’s
a
space
where
every
leader

and
every
organization

can
make
a
difference.


Watch
the
full
conversation
here:



AI
and
Environmental
Sustainability


So,
what
goal
will
you
tackle?
The
future
of
AI
and
our
planet
might
just
depend
on
it.




Olga MackOlga
V.
Mack



is
a
Fellow
at
CodeX,
The
Stanford
Center
for
Legal
Informatics,
and
a
Generative
AI
Editor
at
law.MIT.
Olga
embraces
legal
innovation
and
had
dedicated
her
career
to
improving
and
shaping
the
future
of
law.
She
is
convinced
that
the
legal
profession
will
emerge
even
stronger,
more
resilient,
and
more
inclusive
than
before
by
embracing
technology.
Olga
is
also
an
award-winning
general
counsel,
operations
professional,
startup
advisor,
public
speaker,
adjunct
professor,
and
entrepreneur.
She
authored 
Get
on
Board:
Earning
Your
Ticket
to
a
Corporate
Board
Seat
Fundamentals
of
Smart
Contract
Security
,
and  
Blockchain
Value:
Transforming
Business
Models,
Society,
and
Communities
. She
is
working
on
three
books:



Visual
IQ
for
Lawyers
(ABA
2024), The
Rise
of
Product
Lawyers:
An
Analytical
Framework
to
Systematically
Advise
Your
Clients
Throughout
the
Product
Lifecycle
(Globe
Law
and
Business
2024),
and
Legal
Operations
in
the
Age
of
AI
and
Data
(Globe
Law
and
Business
2024).
You
can
follow
Olga
on




LinkedIn



and
Twitter
@olgavmack.

Diversity Lab Remains Focused On Diversity, Despite Trump Administration’s Gambit To Do Away With DEI – Above the Law

With
diversity,
equity,
and
inclusion
initiatives
under
attack
in
America
writ
large
thanks
to
the
Trump
administration,
the
Diversity
Lab
has
changed
some
of
the
language
included
on
its
Mansfield
Certification
website.
The

American
Lawyer

has
noted
several
of
these
changes,
including
the
removal
of
language
referring
to
candidate
pool
quotas,
as
well
as
the
removal
of
words
within
the
DEI
acronym,
which
have
since
been
replaced
with
words
like
“equal”
and
“fairness.”
Here
are
just
a
handful
of
the
other
changes
that
have
been
made,
per
Am
Law:

While
a
section
of
the
Mansfield
Certification
page
saved
on
Jan.
12
by
Internet
Archive
stated
that
the
“Mansfield
Difference”
helped
boost
“inclusivity,
access
and
diversity”
in
leadership
roles
at
participating
firms,
the
Jan.
27
version
of
the
page
stated
the
certification
boosted
“inclusivity,
equal
access
and
transparency
in
advancement
processes
and
leadership
roles.”

The
word
“equitable”
was
removed
from
the
“Purpose”
section
of
the
Mansfield
Certification
page
during
the
same
time
period,
and
“diversity”
was
removed
from
“leadership
diversity”
in
a
section
detailing
the
expansion
of
talent
pools
at
law
firms.

Diversity
Lab’s homepage also
changed
since
a
Jan.
22 snapshot from
Internet
Archive.
The
first
paragraph
now
omits
an
entire
sentence
that
previously
stated,
“The
more
diverse
the
leadership,
the
more
inclusive
their
decisions
for
the
benefit
of
their
workforces
and
communities.”
The
closing
line
of
the
same
paragraph
now
reads,
“Our
north
star
is
fairness.”

Although
this
looks
like
it
was
perhaps
an
effort
to
de-emphasize
the
“divisiveness”
of
DEI,
Diversity
Lab
founder
and
CEO
Caren
Ulrich
Stacy
chalked
the
changes
up
to
“normal
website
refinements.”
Stacy
continued,
saying
that
prior
to
Trump’s
Executive
Orders
concerning
“illegal”
DEI
programming,
the
site
“changed
almost
every
day,”
and
that
even
now,
the
site
will
“continue
to
change
almost
every
day.”

What
hasn’t
changed
and
won’t
change
is
the
Diversity
Lab’s
bottom
line:
Stacy
notes
that
our
work
remains
the
same:
we
are
focused
on
equal
access,
equal
treatment,
and
equal
opportunities.
We
are
also
keenly
aware
of
the
scrutiny
on
language
right
now
at
a
national
level,
and
we
want
to
be
as
clear
as
possible
on
our
focus
so
there
are
no
misconceptions—with
greater
inclusion,
comes
greater
diversity.”


Diversity
Lab
Alters
DEI-Centered
Verbiage
on
Mansfield
Certification
Website

[American
Lawyer]


Staci Zaretsky




Staci
Zaretsky
 is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to

email

her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on BlueskyX/Twitter,
and Threads, or
connect
with
her
on LinkedIn.

5 Cost Control Strategies to Manage Law Firm Spend


Reducing
your
law
firm
overhead
goes
hand
in
hand
with
better
serving
your
clients.
After
all,
with
more
consistent
cash
flow,
you
can
spend
more
on
the
critical
resources,
tools,
and
staff
that
make
or
break
your
reputation.


Even
with
a
steady
influx
of
clients
and
cases,
many
law
firms
struggle
to
maintain
steady
revenue.
Over
time,
even
small
leaks
can
lead
to
missed
opportunities
and
unsatisfied
clients.


Effective
law
firm
cost
control
management
is
crucial
for
improving
your
firm’s
cash
flow
and
client
experiences
it
also
sets
your
firm
up
to
scale
growth.


You
may
be
wondering:
How
can
law
firms
save
money?
Where’s
the
best
place
to
start
with



reducing
your
expenses


In
this
article,
we’ll
give
an
overview
of
the
unique
challenges
of
managing
law
firm
cash
flow,
why
cost
control
strategies
are
important
for
growth,
and
five
cost
control
strategies
and
best
practices
that
can
help
your
law
firm
achieve
greatness.


What
is
Cost
Control
for
Law
Firms? 


Cost
control
refers
to
the
various
ways
that
law
firms
try
to
optimize
their
processes
and
reduce
expenses
in
order
to
increase
profitability. 


This
is
done
by
tracking
billable
and
non-billable
hours,
law
firm
expenses,
cash
flow,
and
other
metrics,
then
implementing
improvements
based
on
your
findings.


Unique
Challenges
for
Law
Firm
Cost
Control 


Finding
ways
to
control

law
firm
costs

is
a
pillar
of
any
business.
However,
unlike
a
retail
business,
the
ethical
and
financial
limitations
of
legal
finance
management
create
some
unique
cost
control
challenges.


1.
Lack
of
Control
on
Profit
Leakage


“Profit
leakage”
refers
to
the
various
ways
that
businesses
lose
expected
income.
Just
like
a
leaking
pipe,
a
few
small
(but
consistent)
drips
may
add
up
to
a
much
bigger
problem
over
time. 

“Profit leakage” refers to the various ways that businesses lose expected income.


Here
are
the
top
sources
of
law
firm
profit
leakage:


  • Inconsistent
    or
    inefficient
    billing
    practices

  • Manual
    receipt
    tracking
    and
    data
    entry

  • No
    time
    or
    expense
    tracking
    tools

  • Not
    scoping
    work
    correctly


Without
quantifiable
and
accurate
methods
to
track
and
bill
for
your
time
and
scope
work,
you
may
be
undervaluing
your
services—that
adds
up
in
the
long
term.


2.
Lack
of
Insight
Into
Spending


Without
a
clear
view
of
your
monthly
spending,
you
may
be
surprised
by
unexpected
end-of-the-month
expenses.
This
can
be
devastating
for
a
growing
law
firm
and
may
force
attorneys
to
shift
attention
away
from
their
clients.


3.
Uncaptured
Law
Firm
Expenses


To
effectively
serve
clients,
law
firms
employ
many
tools
and
outside
help.
With
so
much
on
their
plate,
oftentimes
lawyers
inadvertently
take
a
set-it-and-forget-it
approach
for
things
like
subscriptions
and
recurring
services. 


Or,
they
forget
to
account
for
some
expenses
altogether,
such
as
not
tracking
mileage
and
parking
fees
when
driving
to
court.


These
uncaptured
and
untracked
law
firm
operating
expenses
can
lead
to
significant
overhead
costs
that
are
hard
to
diagnose
and
fix.
Capturing
and
categorizing
your
firm’s
expenses
is
the
first
step
to
improving
your
firm’s
financial
health.


4.
Reimbursable
Case
Expenses
Missed


Many
lawyers
live
in
fear
of
losing
track
of
an
invoice
or
forgetting
to
enter
billable
work
into
their
case
management
system.
After
all,
why
do
all
that
hard
work
if
you
aren’t
getting
paid
for
it? 


When
your
accounting,
time
tracking,
and
billing
are
spread
across
disjointed
systems,
it
becomes
a
lot
easier
for
billable
work
to
fall
through
the
cracks.
Add
to
that
the
time
wasted
on
manual
data
entry,
invoice
follow-ups,
and
other

law
firm
accounts
receivable
(A/R)
processes
,
and
you
may
find
you’re
consistently
losing
track
of
hard-earned
income.

When your accounting, time tracking, and billing are spread across disjointed systems, it becomes a lot easier for billable work to fall through the cracks.


5.
Inability
to
Enforce
Budgets



Setting
a
budget

is
a
great
way
to
set
quantifiable
revenue
goals,
increase
law
firm
cash
flow,
and
grow
your
business
over
time.
However,
you
may
find
yourself
constantly
playing
catch
up
as
you
try
to
bill
clients,
track
law
firm
operating
expenses,
deal
with
unexpected
bills,
and
more. 


In
other
words,
in
the
absence
of
historical
financial
data
and



key
law
firm
performance
indicators
,
which
serve
as
a
fiscal
north
star,
sticking
to
a
budget
is
nearly
impossible.


6.
Manual
Receipt
Tracking


Some
firms
have
been
slow
to
adopt
digital
financial
tools
—and
it
shows.
Manual
data
entry
and
receipt
tracking
are
error-prone
and
time-consuming.
Lawyers
who
still
rely
on
old-school
spreadsheets
or
antiquated
software
spend
significantly
more
time
on
non-billable
administrative
work.


Why
Is
It
Important
to
Have
a
Law
Firm
Cost
Control
Strategy?


Why
are
you
not
as
profitable
as
expected?
It
might
be
because
you
don’t
have
an
effective
law
firm
cost
control
strategy
in
place.
In
truth,
understanding
how
law
firms
can
save
money
is
one
of
the
areas
where
many
lawyers
struggle.
After
all,
you
went
to
school
to
practice
law,
not
manage
finances. 


Here
are
the
top
reasons
your
law
firm
should
implement
a
cost
control
strategy:


  • Peace
    of
    mind:


    Gain
    confidence
    that
    nothing
    has
    slipped
    through
    the
    cracks
    by
    ensuring
    your
    expense
    management,
    time
    tracking,
    and
    billing
    data
    are
    centralized
    in
    one
    place.
    Using

    law
    firm-specific
    time-tracking
    templates

    is
    one
    way
    to
    standardize
    your
    information. 

  • Increased
    profits:


    Accurately
    tracking
    your
    case-related
    expenses
    can
    help
    you
    identify
    areas
    for
    growth
    and
    improve
    your
    cash
    flow.

  • Reduced
    financial
    risk:


    Even
    unintentional
    misuse
    of
    funds
    can
    land
    law
    firms
    in
    hot
    water
    leading
    to 
    IOLTA
    compliance
    violations
    and
    lost
    reputation.
    Protect
    your
    firm
    by
    taking
    control
    of
    your
    finances.
     


4
Strategies
for
Law
Firm
Cost
Control


Exceptional
work
and
happy
clients
are
the
cornerstones
of
a
successful
law
firm.
Implementing
effective
cost
control
strategies
isn’t
there
to
limit
what
you
can
do,
but
enhance
everything
that
already
makes
you
great.


Below
are
our
top
four
strategies
to
take
control
of
your
finances.


1.
Evaluate
Law
Firm
Costs,
Profitability,
and
Revenue
Leakage


To
establish
a
law
firm
budget,
you
first
need
a
comprehensive
view
of
all
of
your
invoices,
expenses,
and
billable
hours.
Integrating
case
management
software
into
your
daily
processes
is
a
good
way
to
start.
This
will
streamline
things
like
expense
and
hour
tracking
(for
both
billable
and
non-billable
tasks). 

To establish a law firm budget, you first need a comprehensive view of all of your invoices, expenses, and billable hours.


Most
importantly,
it
will
give
you



quantifiable
data


to
work
with.
Once
you
categorize
your
various
expenses
and
revenue
sources,
you
can
hone
in
on
the
areas
where
you’re
underperforming.
Focus
on
setting
financial
goals
that
are
trackable
and
achievable
within
a
set
period.


For
instance,
if
you
find
a
major
area
of
revenue
leakage
is
inefficient
accounts
receivable
(A/R)
management
and
billing,
you
can
set
a
goal
of
reducing
the
hours
spent
on
billing
by
20%
in
the
next
quarter.
To
accomplish
that,
you
may
consider
investing
in
automated
billing
or
digital
payment
tools.


2.
Implement
Law
Firm
Cost-Saving
Measures


Unnecessary
expenses
and
services
will
slowly
but
surely
eat
away
at
your
profits.
With
a
centralized
view
of
your
expenses,
receipts,
billable
hours,
and
other
financial
data,
you
can
determine
the
cost-saving
steps
your
firm
needs
to
take—and
those
it
doesn’t. 


Instead
of
arbitrarily
cutting
costs,
leverage
technology
to
make
data-driven
decisions.
Common
areas
of
focus
when
reducing
law
firm
overhead
include:


  • Manual
    tasks:


    Are
    there
    tasks
    like
    billing
    and
    scheduling
    that
    could
    be
    automated?
    Could
    legal
    software
    help
    you
    save
    time
    in
    areas
    like
    these?

  • Unused
    service
    subscriptions:


    Many
    of
    us
    regularly
    pay
    for
    various
    software
    subscriptions,
    answering
    services,
    and
    more.
    Are
    you
    using
    all
    of
    them?
    Are
    there
    duplicate
    services
    that
    could
    be
    cut?

  • Office
    space:


    An
    increasing
    number
    of
    firms
    are
    going
    remote
    because
    it
    reduces
    real
    estate
    costs,
    and
    clients
    often
    prefer
    online
    interaction. 

  • Ineffective
    marketing:


    Lead-tracking
    will
    help
    you
    determine
    which
    of
    your
    advertising
    methods
    were
    effective
    and
    which
    were
    duds.
    This
    helps
    you
    spend
    more
    strategically
    on
    marketing
    moving
    forward.


3.
Optimize
Law
Firm
Cash
Flow


Law
firms
have
unique
cash
flow
challenges
because,
in
many
cases,
any
profit
from
your
hard
work
is
unrealized
until
it’s
actually
billed
and
paid.
It’s
easy
to
get
caught
up
working
with
current
clients
and
bringing
new
ones
in,
as
unpaid
client
bills
can
start
to
add
up.


An
inefficient
or
outdated
accounts
receivable
process
is
one
of
the
biggest
culprits.
Strict
payment
terms,
unresponsive
clients,
and/or
manual
processes
can
all
account
for
a
consistently
high
A/R. 


Implementing
a
legal
payment
solution
can
significantly
improve
your
cash
flow
by
automating
many
billing
tasks
and
making
payment
more
convenient.
This
removes
the
burden
of
following
up
with
clients
and
provides
the
tools
necessary
to
set
up
client-friendly



alternative
payment
structures
.

Implementing a legal payment solution can significantly improve your cash flow by automating many billing tasks and making payment more convenient.


Having
a
simplified
and
modern
billing
process
can
increase
your
available
funds
and
provide
more
stability.


4.
Monitor
Law
Firm
Financial
Performance


Do
you
know
how
healthy
your
firm’s
financial
outlook
is?
A
lot
of
law
firms
measure
their
success
by
caseload
and
number
of
clients—but
the
truth
is,
that
doesn’t
necessarily
indicate
a
healthy
cash
flow. 


Regular
financial
reports
are
incredibly
important
to
get
an
honest,
bird’s-eye
view
of
your
law
firm’s
performance.
With
custom
reports,
you
can
both
determine
the
financial
health
of
your
business
and
narrow
down
specific
areas
for
improvement.


Leveraging
Technology
for
Cost
Control 


You
can’t
execute
an
effective
cost
control
strategy
on
instinct
or
hunches
alone.
That’s
why
leading
law
firms
leverage
technology
to
track
KPIs
and
optimize
their
daily
processes.
Legal
billing
and
case
management
software
is
helping
law
firms
of
all
sizes
stay
competitive
and
increase
profits.


Here
are
a
few
of
the
ways
technology
can
help
save
money
at
your
law
firm:


Monitor
Firm
Spending
With
Dashboards


Dashboards
are
visualizations
of
various
types
of
data
in
the
form
of
graphs
and
statistics.
Reports
on


modern

spend
management

softwar
e
for
law
firms
can
give
you
real-time
insights
into
all
of
your
expenses.


Combining
spend
and
case
management
solutions
allows
you
to
spot
trends
and
find
actionable
areas
for
improvement.
Many
software
solutions
will
also
let
you
integrate
your
existing
accounting
and
case
management
solutions
so
you
can
have
a
centralized
view
of



all


of
your
data.


Dashboards
are
also
a
great
way
to
monitor
your
firm’s
performance
at
a
glance
without
having
to
spend
hours
manually
inputting
data
and
running
equations
on
spreadsheets.


Digital
and
Paper
Receipt
Tracking


Manual
receipt
tracking
is
one
of
the
primary
forms
of
profit
leakage
in
law
firms.
Receipts
are
often
lost,
which
means
you
can’t
get
reimbursed
for
common
expenses.

Manual receipt tracking is one of the primary forms of profit leakage in law firms.


Law
firm
spend
management
software,
like

MyCase
Smart
Spend
,
can
help
you
simplify
your
expense
tracking
and
facilitate
reimbursement.
In
MyCase
Smart
Spend,
any
purchase
will
send
out
a
text
message
that
prompts
firm
employees
to
categorize
the
expense
and
take
a
picture
of
the
receipt
so
that
it’s
tracked
ASAP.


Automatically
Limit
Spending
in
Some
Categories


Every
day,
you
have
you
pay
for
various
expenses,
from
postage
and
court
filing
fees
to
office
supplies
and
various
other
costs.
Over
time, 
you
may
be
surprised
how
this
can
add
up. 


Credit
cards
are
useful
for
handling
business
expenses
but
can
become
a
source
of
profit
leakage
when
spending
isn’t
carefully
tracked.
Modern
legal
spend
management
tools
can
help
cut
down
on
careless
spending
by
setting
spending
limits.
Spending
limits
can
be
set
per
purchase
category,
employee
or
based
on
the
time
of
day,
reducing
your
financial
risk.


Track
Case-Related
Expenses


It’s
impossible
to
understand
your
law
firm’s
overhead
when
your
expense
tracking
consists
of
a
jumbled
stack
of
receipts,
a
spreadsheet,
and
maybe
an
old
filing
cabinet.
Expense
tracking
software
centralizes
all
of
your
expenses
and
categorizes
them.


A
centralized
view
lets
you
see
what
is
contributing
the
most
to
your
overhead
and
opens
up
areas
to
strategically
cut
costs. 


Law
Firm
Cost
Control
With
MyCase
Smart
Spend


When
costs
get
out
of
control
or
slip
through
the
cracks,
law
firms
are
limited
in
their
ability
to
effectively
serve
their
clients.
In
other
words,
implementing
smart
cost
control
measures
is
about
more
than
profits—it’s
about
achieving
better
client
outcomes.


The
first
step
of
effective
law
firm
cost
control
is
visibility.
Modern
technology
like

MyCase
Smart
Spend

gives
law
firms
of
all
sizes
a
comprehensive
view
of
their
finances,
along
with
actionable
insights
on
how
to
improve
profitability.


MyCase
Smart
Spend
is
the
first
spend
management
tool
built
specifically
for
law
firms,
with
features
that
help
law
firms
simplify
the
way
they
track
expenses
and
bill
clients. 


Ready
to
see
how
it
works
firsthand?



Schedule
a
free
10-day
trial


of
MyCase
today.

The Emperor’s New Associates: ALSPs Replacing Junior Lawyers – Above the Law

Junior
associates
powered
the
engines
of
Biglaw.
Like
the
human
batteries
of
the
Matrix
except
instead
of
the
deluded
bliss
of
the
late
20th
century,
they
survive
on
the
deluded
bliss
of
ever
having
the
time
to
spend
their
bonus
on
something
fun.
They
slogged
through
document
review,
churned
out
first
drafts,
and
otherwise
served
at
the
beck
and
call
of
their
senior
colleagues
while
drowning
under
the
crushing
weight
of
student
loans.

While
artificial
intelligence
generates
a
lot
of
hype
as
a
threat
to
junior
associates,
AI
still
requires
a
junior
user.
Firms
may
not
need

as
many

juniors
in
the
world
of
AI,
but
some
of
those
jobs
will
survive
the
AI
onslaught.
Alternative
legal
services
providers
(ALSPs),
on
the
other
hand,
could
join
forces
with
AI
and
decimate
the
junior
ranks.

The
word
“decimate”
is
often
misused,
but
in
this
case
we
mean
it
literally…
AI
will
one
day
send
centurions
to
publicly
execute
every
tenth
associate
to
enforce
the
discipline
of
Rome.
All
right,
maybe
not
literally
and
realistically
it’s
going
to
be
more
a
lot
more
than
10
percent.

ALSPs
are
increasingly
taking
on
the
grunt
work
that
used
to
be
the
proving
ground
for
new
attorneys.
According
to
the

Alternative
Legal
Services
Providers
2025
Report


produced
by
the

Thomson
Reuters
Institute
,
the

Center
on
Ethics
and
the
Legal
Profession
at
Georgetown
Law
;
and
the

Saïd
Business
School,
University
of
Oxford


35
percent
of
law
firms
already
use
independent
ALSPs
to
deliver
services
to
clients,
with
usage
expected
to
increase
in
the
next
year.
Among
firms
with
their
own
affiliate
ALSPs,
a
remarkable
62%

also

engage
independent
ALSPs
to
handle
tasks
like
eDiscovery,
contract
review,
and
compliance
work​.

The
report
estimates
the
ALSP
market
reached
$28.5
billion
in
2023,
growing
at
an
18
percent
compound
annual
rate,
outpacing
traditional
legal
services​.
While
ALSPs
have
always
offered
corporate
law
departments
a
cost-effective
solution
for
high-volume
work,
those
clients
have
increasingly
overcome
their
hangups
as
junior
associate
rates
climb.
Beyond
the
these
tasks,
ALSPs
are
also
penetrating
niche
areas
like
regulatory
compliance
and
tech-enabled
legal
operations,
markets
that
law
firms
tend
to
neglect​.

For
junior
associates,
this
trend
strips
away
some
of
the
foundational
work
historically
relied
upon
to
develop
professional
skills.
This
outsourcing
is
great
for
clients
looking
to
save
money
and
increase
efficiency,
but
it
deprives
new
lawyers
of
the
opportunity
to
develop
expertise
in
these
areas.
And
while
few
tears
are
shed
over
combing
through
irrelevant
emails,
there’s
something
to
be
said
for
learning

why

something
is
irrelevant.

And
let’s
not
forget
the
joy
of
piecing
together
an
office
affair
from
the
email
dump—one
of
the
last
perks
of
document
review.

Junior
associates
also
used
to
create
legal
content
from
scratch
before
an
avalanche
of
red
ink
created
an
unrecognizable
final
draft.
But
with
AI
and
ALSPs
delivering
polished
drafts,
juniors
spend
more
time
editing
than
analyzing.
That’s
all
well
and
good
until
you
remember
that
they
don’t
actually
know
what
makes
a
good
draft
in
the
first
place.
And
it
will
only
get
worse
as
the
report
found
that
40%
of
firms
anticipate
increasing
their
use
of
independent
ALSPs
specifically
because
it
is
“more
profitable
to
outsource”
such
work​.

It’s
not
that
ALSPs
actually
outperform
junior
associates.
In
fact,
the
report
highlights
lingering
concerns
about
ALSP
quality
and
confidentiality,
with
half
of
corporate
respondents
citing
these
as
barriers
to
full
adoption​.
Yet
the
price
gap
between
ALSPs
and
law
firm
associates
has
made
the
decision
an
easy
one
for
many
corporate
law
departments.

Clients
may
see
ALSPs
as
a
value
play
rather
than
a
skill
play,
there’s
something
to
be
said
for
the
fact
that
ALSPs
are
staffed
with
folks
with
experience

the
experience
that
the
juniors
used
to
get
on
the
job.
For
tasks
like
document
review
and
due
diligence,
where
the
stakes
are
low
but
the
volume
is
high,
ALSPs
offer
efficiency
that
most
law
firms
simply
cannot
match.
Volume
work
is
their
bread
and
butter​.

Which
is
where
the
AI
comes
in.
While
generative
AI
remains
in
its
infancy
within
the
legal
sector,
45
percent
of
law
firms
are
at
least
exploring
the
development
of
GenAI-powered
services…
but
ALSPs
already
lead
the
way
in
adoption​.

The
report
paints
a
sobering
picture
for
the
future
of
legal
apprenticeship.
If
firms
and
ALSPs
continue
down
their
current
paths,
junior
associates
may
find
themselves
doing
less
legal
analysis
and
more
project
management,
overseeing
the
work
of
ALSPs
and
AI
tools.
While
this
might
make
for
more
efficient
firms,
it
risks
creating
a
generation
of
lawyers
as
middle
managers
lack
hands-on
legal
skills
needed
to
progress
to
more
traditionally
senior
tasks.

This
shift
also
has
implications
for
client
service.
Corporate
clients
may
appreciate
the
immediate
cost
savings
ALSPs
and
GenAI
deliver,
but
will
they
still
value
these
savings
if
they
come
at
the
cost
of
eroding
the
next
generation
of
legal
talent?
Clients
have
long
complained
about
paying
for
the
training
pipeline,
but
as
the
report
notes,
clients
already
cite
quality
as
a
significant
concern
when
dealing
with
ALSPs​
and
“decrease
the
quality
across
the
board”
is
a
less
than
efficient
solution.

Or
maybe
the
future
of
law
is
bland
middle
management.
When

Elon
makes
Trump
turn
over
the
judiciary
to
the
robots
,
maybe
we
won’t
need
lawyers
to
think
creatively
or
persuasively.
Just
ones
who
can
click
“approve”
on
a
machine’s
work.




HeadshotJoe
Patrice
 is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer
.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or

Bluesky

if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a

Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search
.

On The Dotted Line – Above the Law

The
overwhelming
majority
of
patent
cases
settle
at
some
point
in
their
lifespan.
Some
settle
quickly
after
a
case
is
filed,
while
others
do
not
reach
their
denouement
until
after
a
trip
up
to
the
Federal
Circuit
or
even
the
Supreme
Court.
No
matter
how
convoluted
a
path
a
patent
case
may
take
to
its
final
destination,
the
reality
is
that
a
negotiated
resolution,
rather
than
with
an
executed
judgment,
is
almost
always
how
a
case
ends.

Considering
the
importance
of
settlement
to
patent
cases,
you
would
think
that
law
firms
would
invest
as
much
into
training
their
less
experienced
attorneys
on
the
set
of
skills
necessary
to
achieve
good
client
outcomes
at
settlement
as
they
do
in
training
up-and-coming
litigators
on
how
to
take
a
deposition,
for
example.
Maybe
some
firms
do,
but
speaking
from
personal
experience,
in
order
to
make
partner
in
IP
litigation
at
my
prior
Biglaw
firm,
I
needed
to
undergo
rigorous
trial
and
litigation
skills
training.
Settlement
training?
That
was
for
figuring
out
on
your
own,
assuming
that
you
were
lucky
enough
to
get
assigned
a
settlement
agreement
to
draft
and
negotiate
in
the
first
place.

Despite
a
lack
of
formal
training
in
the
settlement
arts
as
associates

a
program
for
which
should
be
considered
by
firms
with
robust
patent
litigation
practices,
which
necessarily
also
have
robust
patent
litigation
settlement
practices,
even
if
no
one
thinks
of
it
that
way

we
can
assume
that
most
experienced
patent
litigators
learn
how
to
get
a
settlement
closed
over
the
course
of
their
careers.

In
most
patent
litigation
scenarios,
all
it
takes
is
a
straightforward
settlement
and
license
agreement,
where
most
of
the
negotiation
is
centered
on
the
amount
of
money
changing
hands
and
payment
terms,
if
any
is
at
all.
There
are
of
course
more
demanding
situations,
where
licensing
specialists
may
be
brought
in
to
assist
the
litigation
team
in
an
effort
to
protect
the
client’s
interests
to
their
maximum.
Most
cases
do
not
present
the
complexity
or
importance
to
justify
that
type
of
expense,
however,
which
means
that
in
practice
most
settlement
agreements
are
handled
by
the
litigation
team.
In
practice,
that
often
means
a
more
junior
member
is
given
the
task
of
updating
a
previously
used
agreement
to
at
least
serve
at
the
first
turn
of
a
document
that
will
be
sent
to
the
other
side
for
comment
and
revision.

It
is
understandable,
particularly
in
situations
where
a
case
has
not
yet
gotten
off
the
ground
or
where
many
years
of
intense
fighting
have
fizzled
out
with
clients
willing
to
hang
up
their
gloves,
that
there
can
be
a
distinct
lack
of
focus
given
to
something
as
prosaic
as
an
initial
draft
of
a
settlement
agreement.
That
is
particularly
true
where
the
expectation
is
that
the
initial
draft
will
be
sent
back
with
voluminous
comments
and
redlines
from
the
other
side,
even
in
those
rare
cases
where
all
the
key
terms
are
agreed
to
before
that
first
draft
is
sent.

Sometimes,
that
lack
of
focus
can
come
back
to
create
problems,
as
a
recent
District
of
Delaware

decision

points
out

to
the
chagrin
of
a
branded
pharmaceutical
company
that
sought
to
enforce
a
settlement
agreement
that
they
had
thought
was
a
done
deal.
(As
usual,
there
is
some
great
commentary
on
the
decision
over
at
the

IP/DE
blog
,
which
I
recommend.)
Besides
providing
interesting
fodder
for
the
next
episode
of
“Patent
Settlements
Gone
Wrong,”
a
few
interesting
tidbits
in
the
decision
are
worthy
of
attention.

To
start,
it
was
a
real
pleasure
to
read
a
decision
in
a
patent
case
that
had
hyperlinks
to
both
the
briefing
leading
up
to
the
motion
as
well
as
to
cited
cases
and
statutes.
It
makes
for
a
more
immersive
review
experience
and
I
hope
that
other
judges
decide
to
do
likewise
when
issuing
decisions
of
their
own.
That
aside,
it
was
also
a
curious
artifact
of
the
Hatch-Waxman
litigation
regime
that
you
had
the
plaintiff
here
pushing
to
enforce
the
purported
settlement
agreement

in
effect
arguing
that
its
claim
should
be
dropped
in
favor
of
a
negotiated
resolution.
(While
I
have
been
in
the
position
of
representing
a
patent
owner
trying
to
get
a
recalcitrant
defendant
to
finalize
a
settlement
agreement
after
they
had
agreed
to
a
licensing
payment,
it
is
also
true
that
defendants
sometimes
find
themselves
trying
to
get
a
plaintiff
to
follow
through
on
a
proffered
deal.)

Here,
settlement
discussions
started
about
a
month
before
the
complaint
was
even
filed,
lasting
about
six
months
before
breaking
down
on
the
eve
of
execution
of
the
negotiated
agreement.
Upset
about
the
deal
flying
away,
the
plaintiff
moved
to
enforce
the
settlement
agreement,
on
the
grounds
that
but
for
the
signatures,
the
parties
had
come
to
a
meeting
of
the
minds
on
all
the
relevant
terms.
But
the
court
rejected
that
reasoning,
pointing
to
the
fact
that
a
clause
explicitly
stating
signatures
were
necessary
for
a
final
agreement
had
been
included
from
the
very
first
turn
of
the
settlement
agreement
draft.

Add
in
that
the
initial
draft
was
a
“template”
provided
by
the
plaintiff
themselves,
as
well
as
the
fact
that
neither
party
had
actively
negotiated
any
changes
to
that
provision,
and
it
was
clear
to
the
court
that
both
sides
knew
“that
signatures
were
a
necessary
condition
to
settling
the
matter.”

Boilerplate
language
from
a
template?
Enough
to
sink
a
deal
that
might
have
prevented
many
years
and
dollars
that
have
and
will
be
invested
in
litigation.

Ultimately,
this
decision
highlights
the
continued
importance
of
making
sure
that
each
and
every
draft
of
a
settlement
agreement
is
reviewed
thoroughly
before
being
shared
with
the
other
side.
At
the
same
time,
the
decision
also
reminds
us
that
even
though
the
temperature
around
settlement
negotiations
is
often
much
lower
than
what
we
often
see
in
active
litigation,
everyone
involved
in
settlement
talks
must
bring
their
utmost
attention
and
focus
to
that
effort.
Because
mistakes
happen,
even
to
sophisticated
companies
represented
by
sophisticated
and
able
counsel, and
we
all
have
been
reminded
that
the
deal
may
not
be
done
until
everyone
signs
on
the
dotted
line.


Please
feel
free
to
send
comments
or
questions
to
me
at

[email protected]

or
via
Twitter:

@gkroub
.
Any
topic
suggestions
or
thoughts
are
most
welcome.




Gaston
Kroub
lives
in
Brooklyn
and
is
a
founding
partner
of




Kroub,
Silbersher
&
Kolmykov
PLLC
,
an
intellectual
property
litigation
boutique,
and 
Markman
Advisors
LLC
,
a
leading
consultancy
on
patent
issues
for
the
investment
community.
Gaston’s
practice
focuses
on
intellectual
property
litigation
and
related
counseling,
with
a
strong
focus
on
patent
matters.
You
can
reach
him
at 
[email protected] or
follow
him
on
Twitter: 
@gkroub.

6 Years Of Future Ready Lawyer Reports – Above the Law

Last
fall,

Wolters
Kluwer

released
the
sixth
annual
installment
of
the
Future
Ready
Lawyer
report.
Time
has
flown
and
the
legal
profession
has
moved
just
as
quickly,
if
not
faster.
Consider
the
inaugural
2019
survey
that
asked
700
lawyers
across
the
U.S.
and
Europe
to
“assess
their
current
state
and
future
priorities
and
preparedness
to
identify
what
it
will
take
to
be
future
ready.”
It
found
that
69%
of
responding
attorneys
believed
that
understanding
which
technologies
to
deploy
was
important

which
of
course
implies
that
31%
did
not
find
it
important. 
Additionally,
no
consensus
was
reported
on
which
technologies
would
have
an
impact.

The
2019
survey
also
identified
top
challenges

addressing
technology,
dealing
with
increased
complexity
and
volume
of
data,
and
managing
changing
client
and
leadership
expectations

that
less
than
40%
of
respondents
felt
they
were
prepared
to
address
by
2022.
Additionally,
fewer
than
24%
said
they
understood
transformational
technologies
such
as
AI.
And
only
53%
of
lawyers
indicated
their
organization’s
technology
investment
would
increase
over
a
3-year
period
that
would
end
in
2022.

All
of
this
tracks
with
the
traditional
perception
of
the
legal
profession
as
an
industry
that
proceeds
cautiously

and
slowly

in
the
direction
of
new
technologies.
However,
notable
exceptions
are
present.
Legal
professionals
were
some
of
the
first
to
adopt
online
full-text
research.
The
legal
industry
was
ahead
of
the
curve
in
the
use
of
word
processing
features
and
plug-ins.
And
e-discovery
leveraged
search,
AI,
and
semantic
processing
well
before
the
typical
corporate
IT
department
had
those
items
on
their
radar.

The
respondents
of
the
2019
Future
Ready
Lawyer
report
could
not
have
anticipated
the
seismic
global
events
on
the
horizon
that
would
shape
the
direction
of
legal
services.
In
2020,
lockdowns
due
to
COVID-19
pushed
an
otherwise
cautious
and
deliberate
industry
forward.
Zoom
and
Teams
calls
became
the
norm
as
online
meetings
were
essential
to
preserve
communication
with
staff
and
clients
who
couldn’t
meet
physically.
Online
research
spiked
as
attorneys
who
might
have
still
reached
for
a
printed
publication
were
unable
to
access
content
in
any
other
way
but
electronically.
And
digital
signature
platforms
like
DocuSign
became
cemented
as
the
de
facto
way
to
complete
and
memorialize
transactions.

The
changes
driven
by
the
pandemic
kept
firms
and
law
departments
busy
while
the
world
prepared
to
change
once
again.
On
November
30,
2022,
ChatGPT3.5
Turbo
was
released
and
promptly
went
viral.
For
the
first
time,
managing
partners
at
firms
began
to
truly
care
about
technology.

Case
in
point:
The
2023
Future
Ready
Lawyer
survey
demonstrated
a
consensus
among
a
wide
majority
of
respondents
(87%)
that
technology
had
improved
their
work,
while
91%
of
lawyers
surveyed
felt
that
access
to
the
latest
tools
and
technology
was
important.
One
year,
the
2024
Future
Ready
Lawyer
report
would
show
that
76%
of
law
department
attorneys
and
68%
of
law
firm
attorneys
use
GenAI
at
least
once
per
week

a
frequency
that
suggests
lawyers
may
be
experimenting
with
GenAI
technology
on
a
personal
level,
that
lawyers
are
actually
using
the
technology,
which
is
extremely
important.
Many
well-intentioned
technology
projects
die
because
of
a
lack
of
adoption.

Meanwhile,
even
as
the
number
of
new
technology
startups
and
GenAI
products
continues
to
multiply,
AI
governance
remains
an
emerging
topic.
Firms
and
law
departments
will
need
to
keep
ensuring
users
are
trained
and
informed
in
how
to
use
GenAI
technologies.
They
will
need
to
understand
the
ethical
use
and
have
an
awareness
of
AI
bias.
And
transparency
will
be
required
so
that
clients
and
firms
alike
know
when
AI
was
used.
Some
clients
demand
that
firms
stay
away
from
GenAI
on
their
engagements.
Others
express
interest
in
the
technology
if
it
can
provide
better
outcomes
or
reduce
spend.

The
pace
of
technological
advancement
has
been
tremendous,
with
new
startups
and
a
constant
flow
of
new
GenAI
products
to
evaluate.
The
change
has
been
tremendous,
and
the
demands
on
staff
to
evaluate
and
keep
pace
have
been
overwhelming
for
many.

Last
year,
I
suggested
the

Future
Is
Now

when
it
comes
to
legal
technology.
As
we
move
past
the
AI
hype
cycle
in
the
coming
years
organizations
will
need
to
focus
on
return
on
investment
and
aligning
staff
to
deliver
results.
Talent
training
and
attracting
the
right
talent
that
is
“AI
Ready”
will
become
more
important.

2025
will
be
an
exciting
year
for
the
legal
profession.
Legal
work
must
continue
to
be
accurate
and
correct
so
the
industry
must
continue
to
be
deliberate
in
the
adoption
of
technology.

The
past
five
years
represented
significant
change
for
legal
professionals
and
there
continues
to
be
much
speculation
over
disruption.
As
the
hype
dies
down
a
bit,
we
will
continue
to
see
significant
change
and
a
steady
evolution.
Will
that
be
true
disruption?
Let’s
discuss
in
another
five
years!

Note:
For
each
of
the
past
six
years
the
“Wolters
Kluwer
Future
Ready
Lawyer
Survey”
has
included
insights
from
700
lawyers
in
law
firms
and
corporate
legal
departments
across
the
U.S
and
Europe.
The
survey
examines
how
client
expectations,
technology,
and
market
trends
are
affecting
the
future
of
the
legal
profession
and
how
legal
organizations
are
prepared
to
address
these
challenges.
For
the
latest
report

click
here
.




Ken
Crutchfield
is
Vice
President
and
General
Manager
of
Legal
Markets
at
Wolters
Kluwer
Legal
&
Regulatory
U.S.,
a
leading
provider
of
information,
business
intelligence,
regulatory
and
legal
workflow
solutions.
Ken
has
more
than
three
decades
of
experience
as
a
leader
in
information
and
software
solutions
across
industries.
He
can
be
reached
at 
[email protected].

Are ICHRAs Actually Good for Employers and Employees? – MedCity News

ICHRA

Individual
Coverage
Health
Reimbursement
Arrangement

seems
to
be
the
new
buzzword
of
2025. 

ICHRAs
allow
employers
to
provide
their
employees
pre-tax
dollars
to
cover
the
cost
of
individual
health
insurance
premiums
and
qualified
medical
expenses.
They
were
created
under
the
first
Trump
administration
in
2019
and
became
available
in
2020.
According
to
the

HRA
Council


an
advocacy
organization
for
Health
Reimbursement
Arrangement
administrators
and
more

ICHRA
adoption
rose
29%
between
2023
and
2024
among
the
organization’s
members
(though
it’s
difficult
to
say
for
sure
how
many
employers
are
offering
them).
Multiple
startups
that
help
employers
administer
ICHRAs
have
also
recently
gained
funding,
including

StretchDollar

and

Remodel
Health

The
interest
in
ICHRA
stems
from
dissatisfaction
with
traditional
group
health
insurance.
The
general
consensus
among
those
interviewed
for
this
article
appears
to
be
that
these
plans
present
employees
with
more
choice,
but
at
least
one
employer
advocate
views
them
as
merely
a
temporary
fix
to
a
broken
healthcare
system.

“They
are
a
Band-Aid
that
addresses
a
symptom
that
will
have
no
positive
systemic
benefit,
in
my
view,”
said
Elizabeth
Mitchell,
president
and
CEO
of
Purchaser
Business
Group
on
Health.
“For
reasonably
healthy
people
with
low
healthcare
costs,
I
can
see
why
it
would
be
attractive,
and
maybe
for
some
populations,
it
does
make
sense.
But
we
still
have
to
solve
quality
and
affordability
for
the
system
at
large.”


How
do
ICHRAs
work?

The
creation
of
ICHRAs

came
after

the
launch
of
another
insurance
option
for
employers
with
an
even
longer
acronym:
Qualified
Small
Employer
Health
Reimbursement
Arrangements
(QSEHRA).
QSEHRA
was
created
in
2016
by
the
Obama
administration
and
allowed
small
businesses
with
fewer
than
50
full-time
employees
to
offer
pre-tax
funds
to
their
employees
to
purchase
health
insurance
plans.
However,
there
were
limits,
including
how
much
they
can
offer
and
it
only
applied
to
small
businesses.

So
the
Trump
administration
created
ICHRAs
in
2019,
permitting
employers
of
any
size
to
provide
a
pre-tax
fixed
benefit
of
no
limit
to
their
employees.
And
there
are
several
reasons
why
ICHRAs
have
become
attractive
to
employers,
particularly
small
employers,
according
to
Robin
Paoli,
executive
director
of
the
HRA
Council.
For
small
employers,
it
mostly
has
to
do
with
rising
healthcare
costs,
which
have
made
it
increasingly
difficult
for
them
to
offer
health
insurance.
But
for
larger
employers,
ICHRAs
give
them
more
flexibility
and
allow
their
employees
to
choose
the
plan
that
best
suits
their
needs,
such
as
a
plan
offered
by
their
preferred
carrier,
one
that
covers
their
preferred
hospital
or
a
plan
that’s
tailored
to
a
specific
condition.
With
group
insurance,
employees
at
a
4,500-person
company,
for
example,
may
only
have
a
handful
of
plans
to
choose
from.

When
employers
offer
an
ICHRA,
they
are
able
to
separate
their
employees
into
different
classes,
such
as
full-time
employees,
part-time
employees
or
by
different
geographic
areas,
for
instance.
Then
they
decide
what
amount
each
employee
class
will
receive.
Reimbursements
can
be
increased
for
older
employees
and
those
with
more
dependents. 

Employees
can
then

purchase

individual
health
insurance
through
a
provider,
through
the
ACA
exchange
or
even
Medicare,
if
eligible.
They
can
use
the
funds
for
qualified
medical
expenses,
like
to
diagnose,
treat
and
prevent
a
disease.

It’s
important
to
note,
however,
that
while
employers
can
offer
one
class
of
employees
an
ICHRA
plan
and
another
class
a
group
health
insurance
plan,
they
cannot
offer
both
to
one
class
at
the
same
time.
For
example,
a
business
can
give
full-time
employees
group
health
insurance
and
part-time
employees
an
ICHRA,
but
full-time
employees
can’t
be
offered
both
group
health
insurance
and
an
ICHRA.

While
small
employers
have
been
the
biggest
adopters
of
ICHRA,
large
employers
are
the
fastest-growing
cohort,
HRA
Council’s
data
shows.

An
executive
at
a
tech-enabled
insurance
company
that
has
been
a
major
advocate
of
ICHRA
agreed
that
there
is
increased
interest
among
large
employers.
Louis
DeStefano,
senior
vice
president
of
growth
at
Oscar
Health,
anticipates
seeing
large
employers
test
out
ICHRA
plans
with
certain
subsets
of
their
population
first,
such
as
those
in
geographic
regions
with
good
ACA
plans. 

“I
don’t
think
you’re
going
to
see
a
100,000-life
employer
move
their
entire
population
tomorrow
to
ICHRA,
but
I
think
they
are
asking
the
questions
and
trying
to
understand
what
pieces
of
their
population
this
could
serve
the
best,”
he
said.

However,
administering
ICHRA
plans
may
be
confusing
to
employers,
and
choosing
a
plan
on
the
ACA
exchanges
could
be
burdensome
to
employees.
That’s
where
startups
like

Thatch
,

StretchDollar

and

Take
Command

are
coming
into
play.
These
companies
help
educate
brokers
and
employers
on
ICHRA,
as
well
as
assist
them
in
setting
up
ICHRA
plans
for
their
employees.
They
also
help
employees
shop
for
the
right
health
plans
for
them.

“On
the
educational
front
there
is
still
much
work
to
be
done,”
said
Kyle
Estep,
senior
vice
president
of
strategy
at
Take
Command.
“Job
one
has
been
to
educate
insurance
agents
and
large
brokerage/consulting
firms
in
the
employee
benefits
space.
These
folks
drive
the
market.
In
addition,
we
are
still
in
the
early
days
of
building
traction
with
HR
&
finance
professionals
that
sit
at
the
decision-making
table.”


Are
ICHRAs
beneficial
to
employers
and
employees?

The
main
benefit
of
ICHRAs
for
employees
is
that
it
provides
them
with
choice.
For
example,
someone
who
has
diabetes
can
choose
a
plan
that
fits
that
need,
or
a
Spanish-speaking
individual
can
select
a
plan
that
caters
to
that
language.
DeStefano
equated
it
to
the
transition
from
pensions
to
401Ks.

“You’re
putting
the
power
back
into
the
employees,”
he
said.
“And
I
think
what’s
so
telling
about
ICHRA
is
that
three
plans
for
a
large
employer
doesn’t
really
fit
the
needs
of
all
their
families.

Everything
we
buy
in
this
country,
we
have
tons
of
choices.
We
just
came
out
of
the
holidays
and
there
was
an
unlimited
amount
of
choices
for
what
we
would
purchase,
but
I
can’t
do
that
with
my
healthcare
plan.
I
think
that’s
really
the
shift,
and
I
think
that’s
why
in
the
long
term,
it’ll
be
successful.”

Another
benefit
is
that
people
can
potentially
keep
their
plan
even
if
they
leave
their
employer,
versus
traditional
insurance
in
which
employees
lose
their
coverage
after
leaving
their
job,
according
to
Christina
Farr,
managing
director
at
consulting
firm
Manatt
Health.

Still,
employees
need
to
be
sophisticated
to
shop
for
their
needs
and
in
that
sense
ICHRAs
place
a
heavy
burden,
argued
Mitchell
of
PBGH.

“Choosing
a
health
plan
or
choosing
a
health
system
is
Byzantine
and
incredibly
challenging
to
compare
and
to
understand,”
she
said.
“The
entire
problem
with
U.S.
healthcare
is
it
is
an
absolutely
dysfunctional
non-market,
where
there’s
no
information,
there’s
no
way
to
compare
quality
or
cost,
there
is
almost
no
way
to
even
get
an
appointment
half
the
time,
and
that’s
when
you
are
part
of
a
larger
group.
…It
is
not
a
fair
thing
to
ask
a
consumer
to
navigate
an
unnavigable
system.”

In
a
recent

LinkedIn
post
,
another
healthcare
expert
questioned
whether
ICHRAs
actually
give
employees
access
to
quality
healthcare.

“I
really
wonder
if
any
of
these
ICHRA
evangelists
have
ever
bought
an
individual
health
plan?”
said
Ari
Gottlieb,
principal
of
consulting
group
A2
Strategy
Corp.
“What
they
would
find,
generally,
are
plans
that
have
Medicaid-based,
limited
provider
networks,
with
most
lacking
out-of-state
coverage
and
excluding
leading
health
systems.”

Paoli
of
HRA
Council
did
note
that
while
she
believes
ICHRAs
work
for
a
variety
of
consumers,
she
can
see
why
someone
with
complex
conditions
may
prefer
receiving
coverage
through
traditional
group
insurance.
That
said,
she
thinks
ICHRA
works
for
the
majority
of
people
because
it’s
ACA-compliant
insurance.

The
benefits
to
employers
are
much
clearer. 

To
them


especially
smaller
businesses

ICHRAs
offer
the
potential
to
lower
healthcare
costs,
believes
Molly
Chidester,
deputy
director
of
health
care
innovation
at
Morgan
Health,
a
business
unit
of
JPMorgan
Chase
focused
on
employer-sponsored
insurance.

“Rising
health
care
costs
are
especially
burdensome
for
small
and
mid-size
businesses
and
ICHRAs
could
potentially
help
alleviate
that
impact

particularly
in
states
where
the
individual
market
is
competitively
priced
relative
to
group
plans,”
Chidester
said.
“ICHRAs
make
health
care
costs
more
predictable
and
have
helped
some
small
businesses
offer
health
benefits
for
the
first
time.”

However,
Mitchell
doesn’t
entirely
agree
that
ICHRAs
will
have
a
meaningful
impact
on
healthcare
costs
for
employers. 

“My
question
about
ICHRAs
is,
what
do
people
think
will
hold
costs
down
with
an
ICHRA?”
she
argued.
“If
jumbo
companies
spending
literally
billions
of
dollars
a
year
are
challenged
to
negotiate
lower
costs,
how
would
an
individual
with
a
defined
amount
of
cash
do
that?
So
it
might
be
a
nice
short-term
off
ramp,
but
there
is
no
mechanism
that
would
actually
drive
affordability
or
have
any
downward
pressure
on
costs.”

In
other
words,
by
putting
the
responsibility
on
the
employee
to
pick
health
plans,
it’s
giving
up
the
bargaining
power
that
employers
have
with
health
systems
and
insurers.
That
said,
this
argument
mainly
applies
to
large
self-funded
employers,
as
small
employers
don’t
have
a
lot
of
negotiating
power. 

While
it’s
difficult
to
say
just
how
many
employers
are
turning
to
ICHRAs
as
there
is
no
reporting
requirement,
Paoli
anticipates
adoption
to
continue
to
increase.
The
evidence
is
clear
from
market
trends.

“Investors
are
very
interested
in
companies
that
are
administrating
and
implementing
and
enrolling
ICHRAs,
and
more
and
more
insurance
companies
are
hiring
and
training
staff
in
the
rules
and
regulations
around
ICHRA
and
QSERHA
and
HRAs
generally,”
she
said.
“With
the
insurance
companies
doing
that
and
with
investors
being
interested,
you
know
that
a
bunch
of
employers
are
making
this
move.”


Photo:
sdecoret,
Getty
Images

Morning Docket: 01.28.25 – Above the Law

*
Administration
fires
career
DOJ
lawyers
who
worked
on
Trump
cases,
claiming
that
the
non-partisan
attorneys
“could
not
be
trusted”
because
they
weren’t
down
with
private
citizens
stealing
nuclear
codes.
[Reuters]

*
Reese
Witherspoon
served
on
a
jury
and
everyone
was
convinced
Elle
Woods
was
real.
America
is
cooked.
[Variety]

*
Tom
Goldstein
pleads
not
guilty.
Released
on
bond
secured
by
his
residence…
a
residence
that
is
implicated
in
the
loan
fraud
part
of
the
complaint.
[Bloomberg
Law
News
]

*
Law
firm
halts
trading
of
its
shares
as
internal
management
remains
a
mess.
[Financial
Times
]

*
White
House
considering
“God
Squad”
loophole
allowing
cabinet
officials
to
exempt
individual
actions
from
species
regulations.
[NY
Times
]

*
State
AGs
threaten
legal
action
against
Costco
after
private
corporation’s
shareholders
nix
measure
to
reject
diversity
commitment.
[Newsweek]

*
Biglaw
struggles
with
partner
pay
as
the
top
rainmakers
blow
the
roof
off
the
model.
[American
Lawyer
]

Alina Habba Did What She Does Best (Lie) – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Julia
Demaree
Nikhinson

Pool/Getty
Images)

Alina
Habba
is
back,
baby.
And
she’s
better
than
ever!

And
by
“better”
we
mean
even
more
hilariously
indignant
and
wrong
about
the
law
than
when
she
was
just
a
rich
bitch

harassing
a
waitress

at
the
breakfast
bar.

Here
she
is
on
Fox
this
morning
doing
her
best
90s
mean
girl
act
in
an
attempt
to
dunk
on
Senator
Chuck
Schumer.

“First,
Chuck,
your
attorney
general
is
not

the

attorney
general.
We
have
an
attorney
general.
That
would
be
Pam
Bondi,”
she
huffed.
“And
what
your
opinion
is
on
what
the
law
is
doesn’t
really
matter.
It’s
what
the
White
House
Counsel
says
and
what
our
attorney
general
of
the
United
States
says.”

Habba’s
interpretive
dance
was
in
support
of
Trump’s
wildly
illegal
freeze
on
virtually
all
federal
loans
and
grants.
As
first

reported

by
independent
journalist
Marisa
Kabas,
the
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
put
out
a

memo

yesterday
“pausing”
the
disbursement
of
already
allocated
and
contracted
funds.

The
letter
starts
off
strong,
suggesting
that
“In
Fiscal
Year
2024,
of
the
nearly
$10
trillion
that
the
Federal
Government
spent,
more
than
$3
trillion
was
Federal
financial
assistance,
such
as
grants
and
loans.” 

The
actual
spending
was

$6.75
trillion
,
but
what’s
a
couple
trillion
one
way
or
the
other,

amirite
?

“Financial
assistance
should
be
dedicated
to
advancing
Administration
priorities,
focusing
taxpayer
dollars
to
advance
a
stronger
and
safer
America,
eliminating
the
financial
burden
of
inflation
for
citizens,
unleashing
American
energy
and
manufacturing,
ending
“wokeness”
and
the
weaponization
of
government,
promoting
efficiency
in
government,
and
Making
America
Healthy
Again,”
it
went
on.
“To
the
extent
permissible
under
applicable
law,
Federal
agencies
must
temporarily
pause
all
activities
related
to
obligation
or
disbursement
of
all
Federal
financial
assistance,
and
other
relevant
agency
activities
that
may
be
implicated
by
the
executive
orders,
including,
but
not
limited
to,
financial
assistance
for
foreign
aid,
nongovernmental
organizations,
DEI,
woke
gender
ideology,
and
the
green
new
deal.”

Yeah,
they’re
shutting
down
the
government
so
they
can
get
rid
of
any
mention
of
“pregnant
people”
and
let
Elon
Musk
take
a
machete
to
the
budget.
Meanwhile,
Medicaid
and
Head
Start
payment
portals
are

closed
down
,
people
in
Africa
are
being

cut
off

from
the
antiretrovirals
that
have
been
keeping
them
alive,
and
no
one
knows
if
school
lunches
or
Meals
on
Wheels
are
going
to
get
the
axe.
It’s
a

flagrant
violation

of
the
Constitution,
which
gives
Congress
the
power
of
the
purse,
as
well
as
the
Impoundment
Control
Act
of
1974,
which
specifies
the
narrow
circumstances
under
which
the
president
can
refuse
to
spend
funds.
It’s
also
a
violation
of
thousands
of
individual
contracts
with
organizations
which
are
counting
on
getting
the
money.

Meanwhile,
among
the
people
with
the

actual
power

to
set
the
federal
budget,
there
seems
to
be
general
confusion

or
a
group
decision
to
fake
it,
anyway

about
whether
the
federal
appropriations
bill
is
really
A
LAW.

But
our
pal
Alina
is
an
IRL
lawyer,
or
plays
one
on
TV
anyway.
And
so
she
should
understand
that
the
last
word
on
LAW,
HOW
DOES
IT
GO???
does
not
belong
to
the
White
House
Counsel
or
even
the
Attorney
General

although
seeing
the
amazing
horseshit
they’re
going
to
cook
up
to
defend
this
clusterfuck
may
be
worth
the
price
of
admission.
(JK,
it
will
not.)

Luckily,
it’s
just
Fox,
so
the
only
pushback
she
got
was
from
a
dead-eyed
John
Roberts
(the
reporter,
not
the
feckless
jurist
at
One
First
Street),
who
pointed
out
that
Pam
Bondi
hasn’t
been
confirmed
yet. 

In
the
meantime,
everyone
and
their
mother
is
filing
suit
to
stop
this
insane
power
grab.
Maybe
the
White
House
will
deputize
Habba
to
defend
them.
Her
record
is
less
than
stellar,
but
she’s
willing
to
say
literally
any
dumb
thing,
so…





Liz
Dye
 lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.