Wow what a sense of balance for a big animal !
Image [cc] vipez

From time to time I run across things within law firms that I find simply amazing… and not in a good way. Whether it is basic time entry or matter reporting or even expense reimbursements, it just seems that there are simple processes that are either overly complicated at a law firm, or are just flat out missing within the firm. I got to thinking that there is no way I am alone in this frustration. Therefore, since we’ve already brought the Elephant Post back from the graveyard for the recent Nina Platt Challenge, I will bring it back again to ask our readers to let us know:

What Basic Processes Do Law Firms Still Struggle With??

Here’s the rules:

  • Fill out the form below, or email me (xlambert at gmail dot com) with your answer
  • You can give us your real name or stay anonymous
  • I’ll put out the answers on Friday (and maybe even ask a new question)
  • Just let us know what you think… it’ll make you feel better, and it will help your peers by knowing they are not alone in their pain.
  • You can see what others have answered here

Loading…

Image [cc] sinisterbluebox

Dan: One of our partner’s sons took the bar exam recently. Reminded me of my turn at that challenge. Jane, it also reminded me to shove in your face that I scored the highest on the bar exam that year. How well did you score?

Jane: As I recall the bar exam is a pass / fail exam. Not one where you get grades. Who cares what your score was?

Dan: Hah! Just as I assumed. You were one of the lesser-thans with an average score. See. This is why I always win our debates.

Jane: Dan – there you go again, bragging about yet another of your traits that actually has little use in the real world. What exactly did you get for being #1?

Dan: I was featured in the bar journal. Whereas I am sure you are more prominently featured on bathroom walls.

Jane: Dan – you ignoramus. If you are that smart, why did you spend so much time preparing for a pass/fail exam? That’s like spending loads of extra time winning a case, that really doesn’t need that much effort. Wait a minute! Now it all makes sense.

Dan: What makes sense? That I am smarter and richer than you? Oh … and better looking?

Jane: That your need to overcome other obvious shortcomings means you are compelled to win. I bet you brag about how many billable hours you have each year too.

Dan: 2800 last year. Highest in my practice group.

Jane: Wouldn’t it make more sense to brag about getting things done faster and more efficiently and therefore more profitably than everyone else? I think the person who scored the lowest passing score on the bar exam should be the one we celebrate. They were smart enough to expend just the right amount of resources to get the job done.

Dan: Oh you mean like a “Participation Award?” I’m sure you have a room at your parents’ house full of those. Jane – you are the kind of person who gets a warm, fuzzy feeling about being good enough.

Jane: And you are the kind of person that needs to see a proctologist for a dental exam.

No matter what your opinion is of Carl Malamud, he definitely keeps things interesting when it comes to making public information public. Malamud has been the focus on this blog recently when he told Georgia “no thanks” when the state asked him to take down their official state code. This time around, it seems that a number of professional societies and trade associations are suing him and Public.Resource.org in the US District Court for DC for copyright infringement stating that:

Public Resource has copied en masse Plaintiffs’ copyrighted standards in their entirety, posted them to its public website, and encouraged the public to disregard Plaintiffs’ copyrights and to copy, distribute, and create derivative works of those standards at will.

The entire PDF version of the complaint is available here.

This is the same old argument of “should laws be copyrighted” only with a bit of a twist. Usually when we think of “laws”  we think of the legalese written out and approved by members of the legislature. Legal Codes, on the other hand, are usually produced by a private organization, and then adopted by state and local governments. The idea behind having the private organization write the standards that are turned into law is that these are the professionals that understand the technical aspects at a much deeper level than those in the legislature. It has been viewed as a private/public blend that uses the knowledge and efficiency of the private industry and the power to enforce regulations held by the state. One of the trade offs with this type of collaboration is that the government doesn’t take on the expense (directly) of writing the standards, and the private organization keeps the copyright and gets to sell the standards to those required to follow it.

As you might expect, Carl Malamud’s opinion on this topic is very simple. “Code is Law”:

The law belongs to the people, and cannot become the private property of some governmental or non-governmental organization, no matter how seemingly well-deserved are the rents one could extract from winning a monopoly concession on a parcel of the law. While standards bodies need money to carry out their valuable work, and while it is clear that these standards bodies create high-quality documents that are essential to our public safety, one cannot cordon off the public domain simply because of an institutional desire for funds. 

So, the fight is on. The Associations are looking to have their material removed, attorney fees paid, and any other compensation that the court deems fit. Some of the Plaintiffs have posted their own, read-only (no printing) version of their codes on their own websites. See ASTM and NFPA.  Malamud says this is just not enough and seems to be ready to tell the Association to ‘bring it on.’

Should legal codes be copyrighted? Or, should they fall under the traditional rule that laws are public and if the public is required to obey them, then they should have free access to them? I have a feeling that the DC Circuit won’t be the last word on this issue.

Drying books
Image [cc] Windward CC Library

Ohio County West Virginia has finally emptied out the county law library and has given away, or sold the old state Supreme Court regional collection in the Wheeling, WV branch. According to the Herald Star, some of the collection will be recycled into pulp and eventually turned into products like paper towels.

I’m going back and forth on the idea that a county would close a number of law libraries and essentially give away the 75,000 books housed there for decades. However, reading a little bit further into the story, it does seem to make sense, even if it causes a law librarian’s stomach to churn a bit while running down the list of facts behind the closings:

  • A three-month study of the Huntington library showed not one person used the library (it was shut down
  • Lawyers were not using it and seemed to be happy with purchasing their own collections or using online resources
  • The Parkersburg, Beckley, Clarksburg, and Martinsburg branches had already been closed
  • Total cost of running the branch libraries was estimated at $110,000.00 per year
  • The main law library in Charleston will remain open
  • Space is a premium, and it seems that many of the decision makers wanted to open up that space for their own departments

County law libraries are unique. Perhaps it has undergone the most change of any type of law library due to the fact that the customer base has shifted almost completely away from supporting the local bar members, to being almost completely a resource for pro se litigants and the incarcerated. The even trickier part is that those that run the county law library (usually a Board of Directors) are usually made up of members of the local bar and members of the local government. So, the leadership is comprised of people that may have used it at one time, but no longer do, or have competing interests that may influence them into viewing the space occupied by the library as wasteful (and would be much better used by whatever department they happen to run.) Perhaps this is an oversimplification of the situation, but having lived this, I can at least anacdotally back it up.

County law libraries have a tough situation on their hands. Some are adjusting to the shift in the customer base and are attempting new business models. Travis County, Texas, for example, has created a very successful Pro Se self-help clinics, and seem to be moving away from traditional methods of supporting the bench and bar through the collection, and support them in other ways by reducing the demand placed upon the courts and bar by unrepresented litigants. I think that this is the type of thinking that successful county law libraries are adopting to survive.

No longer should the library be about the linear feet of National Reporters. It must be about the service to the community, finding ways to reduce the stress on the courts, and finding ways of engaging with the bar members beyond the idea of having books available for them to read. If county law libraries do not adopt these new methods, many more will see their collections broken down into pulp and turned into paper towels.

Ruby the Painting Elephant
Image [cc] leesean

I wasn’t sure if dusting off the old Elephant Post idea would work, but I’d have to say that we had a lot of people step up and answer the call. Nina Platt threw out the challenge to Law Librarian Bloggers, and like the true delegator I am, I asked all of you to step up and answer that challenge. There are still many outstanding questions, but this was a good start.

I will have to say one personal note about the challenge, from the standpoint of a blogger. I blog, and many of those that I know that blog, do so simply as an outlet for our own personal ideas and experiences. We sometimes stumble upon a suggestion that helps others, but we tend to ask more questions than we answer. All of our situations are unique, and we all have the ability to step up and solve most of our own problems.

Blogs like this one create a quasi-community. However, most of the conversation in this community is one-sided. It helps with getting the idea out there, but it takes someone on the local level to actually do something. In order to make that happen, I suggest that we all go beyond the writings found on a blog and find someone that you can bounce your own ideas off of. That might be a peer within your firm, a peer or friend outside your firm, or even a consultant if the issues are really tough. The key is to find someone to have that conversation and will act as your sounding board.

It was fun bringing back the Elephant Post idea for an ad hoc issue like this. Hopefully, we’ll have additional reasons to do it again in the near future. Now, enough of my waxing nostalgic, here are the answers that you provided:

Brian L. Baker
Better Treatment and Help for Those Laid Off in 2009

Having been on the outside, for almost 4 years, after being laid off in 2009, I wish the profession would have done a couple of things.
  1. Better prepared librarians who were laid off, with survival skills. I was adrift, and I know many others went through the same thing.
  2. Be more open, when hiring, to older applicants who used to make a lot of money. We just want a chance to prove ourselves. We would reward that chance with loyalty, because, no matter what the salary cut would be, it is better than unemployment, minimum wage, or spending retirement money to survive.
Maybe I’m to sensitive. Who knows? 🙂

Anonymous

How will libraries need to be staffed in the future?

Be responsive to internal pressures on expenses by outsourcing all non-core services. Ensure that each member of the library team spends the majority of their time directly supporting the business of the firm. 
Al Podboy
How we can support changes in the legal industry

By using our voice. Speak up, share ideas, be fearless. Tell them (employers, bosses, vendors, educators etc.) what you need and what you think. Honesty and the best policy. Being a ʺyesʺ person does not grow anyone or anything.
Anonymous
Digital Transition

Our libraries will not be a physical place very soon and yet many of us have never figured out how to replace the visual field that would allow a user to see what is actually available on a given topic. Instead we live in vendor silos and endless link lists. We need better visual graphic skills. If we don’t figure this out, our users certainly won’t.

Rebecca C.
What skills will librarians need to have that they don’t have now?

I have two years post MLIS experience in special libraries, but no experience in law libraries, nor do I possess a J.D. Would someone like me have a shot at a future working in a law library, or is the existing barrier too difficult to breach?

Tony Chan

How we can support changes in the legal industry?
I would rephrase the question as “What can we do in our individual roles to support firm initiatives that are catered to changes in the legal industry?”
As information (I) & technology (T) professionals, we must collaborate with our firm’s COOs, CFOs, CIOs and other relevant business units to ascertain how IT affect practice efficiency and firm economics in response to market changes.
The firm as a whole must identify and ready to tackle those changes and a cultural consensus among the firm’s stakeholders is critical for its success.
So my suggestion is to:
  1. Start/restart conversations with the firm’s leadership with the goal of identifying knowledge gaps that would help bridge the firm’s business solutions.
  2. Educate yourself on technology issues by staying current on new tools/services.
  3. Keep your finger on the pulse of various practices by dropping in on meetings and organizing CLEs.
At the end of the day the dotted I and the crossed T mean little when there’s no real impact on improving current practices to meet the clients’ wants and needs.

Shirley Crow
What staffing, research, resources, services, processes, etc. will we need to have in place?
Clients are declining to pay for first and second year lawyers (the people who generally do legal research). There is an oversupply of lawyers in the marketplace, and many of them are available to put their skills to work in ways other than the traditional. I don’t think it is feasible for law firms to do without research resources. Putting those pieces together, I see the librarian of the future being a revenue-producing resource, who conducts legal research efficiently and cost-effectively, the way clients want their law firms to do their work. It is possible that law firm library managers need to prepare themselves to manage a cadre of JDs who are qualified to research efficiently as well as interpret the law. In my opinion, wise is the law firm library manager who starts *now* to promote her staff’s ability to conduct efficient, cost-effective, and *valuable* research.
Lucy Curci-Gonzalez
What staffing, research, resources, services, processes, etc. will we need to have in place?
And how to get C levels to understand the receptionist can’t do this at all!
Casanova
What staffing, research, resources, services, processes, etc. will we need to have in place?
I think what depresses me most is how little actual control we have over any of these changes. Publishers are going around us to the end user with their e-books; they dictate the licencing; in my experience, my budget gets cut, but the demand for texts / services doesn’t diminish. I guess the skill we’d best learn is juggling. In the end, you can run the perfect library, have your clientele bowing in gratitude before you, and it all goes to heck when some 5yr associate decides he/she wants your job, because you’ve made it look easy, and its an easy way to guarantee his/her longevity. Maybe the best skill we can learn is schmooze and schmooze HARD!!!
Steve Lastres
Rebooting Legal Research in a Digital Age [See PDF article]
Law Librarians need to partner with publishers and others in the
legal profession. We cannot stand alone as an isolated profession. ILTA is a
good example where IT, KM, Librarians, Records, Conflicts and lawyers all come
together. Below, is a white paper I just published based on research
underwritten by Lexis but independently conducted by a research firm. In order
to understand how we can be valuable to the practice and business of law, we
must be intimately aware of the pain points. Lack of research skills is one of
the pain points. This white papers seeks to address these pain points and
provide an opportunity for law librarians to fix the problem. Our clients will
no longer pay for training our young lawyers.

Business Research and Competitive Intelligence Skills
Anonymous
I am surprised no one mentioned the tremendous opportunities librarians have to leverage their skills toward the development of business research and competitive intelligence. Of course, this career move is interesting to those who have both an analytical bent and training that prepares them for this work.
I would like to hear more from law firm librarians who have made this transition to business research/intelligence. I know of only a few firms that have utilized their library staff well in this way. I also know some librarians who have transitioned completely from the library to research/intelligence units. However, most librarians don’t seem vert interested in playing this kind of role. Why not?

How Will Library Eduction Need to Change?
Chris Graesser

Many experienced librarians who are back in the job market are seeing jobs requirements they never had to learn on the job and for which training is rarely offered by association programs.
Proposition #1:

Change the basic library degree to a four year undergraduate BS, with graduate degrees in library management, law, medicine and others I can’t think of.

The economics don’t support requiring a librarian to get an undergrad degree in something else, then a Masters (and in many cases a JD, Masters in Biology, or other discipline) just to land a job that might start at 35K.

Besides, I think there is a lot more to learn to be an effective librarian these days, enough to fill four years. Multidisciplinary stuff like accounting, IT, communications and marketing, effective writing and presentation. Stuff that will make a librarian valuable right out of the gate.

Proposition #2:

Library schools should offer continuing education courses to librarians in the field. Much of what I see in library school curricula and in job requirements these days don’t match what many librarians have been able to learn on the job or in association programming.

Proposition #3:

Close the gap between library schools and the profession. In my experience, the twain never meet once a librarian has graduated. The schools rarely make an effort to interact with practicing librarians, at least not in the law library world. Maybe it’s different for public and academic libraries.

 

Olifant
Image [cc] ScreenPunk

[Note: The Answers are now posted]

In case you’re wondering, it was November 28, 2011. That was the last time we rolled out the Elephant Post here on 3 Geeks. However, there was a message in my email in-box this morning that made me think that it might be time to travel into the Elephant Graveyard and resurrect the platform one more time and cover something important as a Parade of Elephants. Therefore, we trot out the Elephant Post one more time.

PinHawk “Librarian News Digest” Editor, Nina Platt, threw out the following challenge to law librarian bloggers today:

I don’t know if you’ve noticed this but many of best and most prolific law library bloggers have been publishing posts that are almost exclusively about the future of law or legal publishing news rather than writing about the issues we, as law librarians, need to deal with to assure a place for us in the future. After thinking about this, I decided to make a plea to all law library bloggers to take a step back and think about what topics are most important for us to be writing about. [emphasis added]

Nina lists a number of topics that she thinks are important to the law librarian profession, but are not covered extensively enough by the bloggers within the profession. I think there are some legitimate reasons why some bloggers do not go deep into some of these subjects, but let’s see what we can do as a group and share some thoughts on some pretty important issues.

Here are the topics she lists:

  • How we can support changes in the legal industry?
  • What technology will help get us through these changes?
  • What staffing, research resources, services, processes, etc. will we need to have in place?
  • How we will need to deal with licensing, copyright, budgets, marketing, management, and other issues that face administrators within law firms?
  • What skills will librarians need to have that they don’t have now?
  • How will library education need to change?
  • How will libraries need to be staffed in the future?
  • [insert your own question to answer] 

So we will take Nina’s challenge and see if we can crowd source some of the possible answers, in the old Elephant Post style. For those of you that may not remember how it works, we offer you a few ways to post your responses. First of all, you can simply pick one of the questions and email me directly (xlambert at gmail dot com) with your response. If you’d rather just jump in and answer one of these directly, then you can edit the embedded form below, or go to the Google Docs site directly and fill out the form. I’ll pull these together throughout the week and post the results at the end of the week. If we get really good responses, we may post those up separately as a stand alone answer.

You now have a platform. The Elephant Post only works if you’re willing to share your thoughts with others. We even give you the chance to share them anonymously. Stop stalling, and start writing!! [click here to see the ongoing responses]

Image [cc] MyLifeStory

Dan: My Law Firm Right-Sizing idea received so much positive feedback, it encouraged me to think even deeper on the subject.

Jane: “Deeper” as in all the way to the bottom of the kiddie pool?

Dan: “Kiddie Pool” as in where your limited thinking keeps you Jane? So here’s my next great idea for law firms. We all want to cut costs so we can make more money. So why stop at non-lawyer staff?

Jane: “We” must mean the Gang of Benevolent Partners.So this is already shaping up to be another top idea from Dan The Great Thinker.

Dan: Now we’re paddling in the same boat! So here’s the thing. All the reports show firms have more lawyers than they need – something in the neighborhood of 10%. So firms should “let go” of 20% of the lawyers. Wallah! More profits!

Jane: So top level thinking and the use of New Math all at the same time, eh? If your firm is 10% overstaffed in the lawyer ranks, why would you fire 20%? Is this another “hire back what you need scheme?”

Dan: Jane – Your limited brain is showing … again. No, we wont be hiring them back. That’s the beauty of the whole idea. In the Good Ole Days, we thought 1900 hours of billable time was good. In my new plan, 2500 hours is going to be even better. I’ve been reading up on this profitability thing. Basically all the hours above 1900 are gravy. So why would we stop there? We want to be “above average” as a firm. Not some run-of-the-mill shop.

Jane: Ahh – yes, your brilliance is yet again emerging from the clouded haze of your bodily gasses.

Dan: Again – we’re in the same boat. It’s so wonderful to watch when you finally “get it” and embrace my New Normal Thinking.

Jane: Your New Normal, is like actually more like 19th Century Sweat Shop Normal. Let’s do some more math and see if you can keep up. To bill 2500 hours, an associate will need to work 3000 hours at a minimum. To work that much, each lawyer will need to work 11.5 hour days and not take any vacations or holidays off. Or in a slightly better sounding version, they could work 8 hours a day, seven days a week, every week.

Dan: Again … same boat. This is working out well. “Our” new firm is going to be the profit envy of BigLaw. I say “our” firm since you are starting to sound like partner material Jane.

Jane: By “partner material” you must mean someone willing to employ abusive labor practices in order to get rich.

Dan: Wow. It’s like we’re sharing the same brain Jane. I’m drafting your partner acceptance letter as soon as we’re done with this stimulating conversation.

Jane: The only stimulation you need is electroshock therapy Dan. With any luck that will loosen your bowels and take some of the pressure of your brain. Sometimes I wonder how you actually make it through the day without accidentally shooting yourself.

Dan: Now we’re back to normal – typical ignorant hussy talk. Your feeble attempt to change the subject to gun control, just killed your partnership opportunity.

Jane: Point well made.

In the “my eyes rolled so far into the back of my head, I saw my brain” department today, comes this Elberon, Iowa Public Library Director job posting.

Hat-tip to Andy Woodworth for pointing this ad out, and for clarifying that the town of Elberon has just 196 people, and that the ad should be taken into context with the size of the town. However, that doesn’t mean I can’t have a little fun at Elberon’s expense.

I would imagine that some of Elberon’s other public employment ads go as follows:

  • Public Health Clinic, Director – High School or GED required, previous experience placing band-aids on children is helpful.
  • Public Works Director – … ownership of a full set of socket wrenches and a shovel is a definite plus.
  • Public Parks Director – … must own a lawn mower and gas can (full gas is preferred.)
  • Elberon Mayor – … centrally located house with a room where a few people could meet every once in a while would make you a shoe-in.
I hope that Elberon finds someone to fill the position. Woodworth even suggests that it might be a good opportunity for an MLS student to get their start in the market. 
Image [cc] J. Gabas Esteban

Jordan Furlong takes on PPP in a recent post. In his usual fashion, he methodically explores what PPP is and makes a strong case for why it needs to be abandon as a profit metric for firms.

But, in typical Dan and Jane fashion, I feel compelled to raise my voice and retort, “Jordan, you ignorant slut.”*  Although he makes many arguments for why and how PPP might be a negative force, he misses the main point of why PPP or any other law firm profit metric exists. They exist to drive behavior. Firms need their partners to behave in profitable ways and need to set clear expectations of what those ways are. Without a clear expectation, firms can fully expect partners to perform in whatever way enhances their self interest, regardless of its impact of the economic health of the firm.

Giving Jordan credit, currently firms seem to only have the goal of improved profits (however they might be defined). I am in complete agreement that for firms to be successfully for the long haul, they need a better goal: something like being the best and most cost effective at addressing their clients’ legal needs. Focusing on client needs does lead to success. But then we still need to define success. And ‘profitable’ needs to be part of that definition.

The fact that a given PPP number is not a true mean or median is beside the point. The real point is whether profits are healthy. PPP is actually a fiction, like most profit methodologies. However, without having profit be part of ‘success’, then a firm risks going out of business and ending its ability to be the best at addressing client legal needs.

I would add I believe there is a need for a real debate over which profit methodologies do make sense for law firms. The Law of Unintended Consequences is quite strong so a poor choice can lead to bad outcomes. For traditional business this same challenge shows up in how sales people are compensated. Various sales bonus incentives drive different behavior. When deciding on which approach to use, a business has to be very thoughtful of which behaviors will motivate salespeople while still driving a ‘successful’ business. This is why sales comp packages are constantly being re-tuned. Partner comp will need to strike the same balance alongside a thoughtful profit approach.

To our good fortune, the upcoming P3 Conference on Pricing, Practice Innovation and Project Management has a session on this topic. For those interested in participating in such a dialog, I encourage you to consider attending this excellent program.

Now it’s Jordan’s turn to make a questionable reference to my parentage.


 *Jordan and I are good friends so he knows this is made in jest and with full expectation of a similar, Jane-like retort from him.

(This is part 4 of a 4 part series. You can download the entire series below.)

Just as the NCQA established standards and elements for evaluating and regulating PCMH applicants, any number of alphabet soup entities could fulfill the same type of role in legal: the ABA, the LMA, ILTA, AALL, or my personal favorite the ACC. It doesn’t much matter who is evaluating or what authority they have, just that they are evaluating consistently and publishing an updated list of CCLP qualified firms and their associated levels achieved.  We could even create a new not-for-profit organization with CCLP certification as it’s sole purpose.  (Hint, hint.)

Once one firm is certified using an open standard, how long before large clients begin asking outside counsel why they aren’t certified?  If a first level certification is relatively easy to achieve, as it is with the PCMH, then what excuse will firms have for not doing it?  Of course, a level 1 certification begs the questions, “Why are you only a Level 1?  Which elements don’t you adhere to? And why not?”  A well-defined and open set of standards and elements, if evaluated fairly, should lead to an all-out arms race for firms to achieve a top-level CCLP certification. Which, if done correctly, should correlate to a better all-around experience for clients.

The hardest part will be defining those standards and elements.  Here again, I think we can look to the PCMH as a guide.  Of course the individual elements to achieve will be wildly different for legal, but the standards will have some overlap. The 6 PCMH standards are to: 1) Enhance Access and Continuity, 2) Identify and Manage Patient Populations, 3) Plan and Manage Care, 4) Provide Self-Care Support and Community Resources, 5) Track and Coordinate Care, and 6) Measure and Improve Performance.

Adjusting for legal specific terminology, these all kind of work as is.  We would want a CCLP certified firm to meet the minimal obligations to Enhance Client Access to firm resources, Identify and Manage Client Populations (Business Intelligence), Plan and Manage Matters, Provide Self-help Legal Support and Resources, Track and Coordinate Matters, and Measure and Improve Performance over time.  There are probably better ways to phrase these standards and there may be more or different standards we should add, but even with this simple translation a proto-CCLP could begin to take form.

My intention is not to say that the legal industry should immediately adopt this concept as pioneered by the medical industry and run with it, but to suggest that maybe a more holistic approach to imagining the future of law is called for.  Here on the 3 Geeks blog we each have our areas of interest and we all attend our separate conferences to discuss the roles of technology, knowledge management, library and information management, project management, pricing, competitive intelligence, and on and on and on… But maybe we need to think a little bigger.  Rather than trying to fix the law firm model one discipline or one system at a time, maybe we should put the client in the center and rebuild the firm around them.  If we can imagine and define that type of firm, then we can give firms a path to follow and a goal to strive toward, and we can give clients a series of metrics with which to evaluate the quality of the legal services they are receiving.

For more information on the Patient Centered Medical Home concept
see the following articles and resources:
Rittenhouse DR, Shortell SM. The Patient-Centered Medical Home: Will It Stand
the Test of Health Reform? JAMA Vol. 301, No. 19 May 20, 2009 
Nutting PA, Miller
WL, et. al. “Initial Lessons From the First National Demonstration Project
on Practice Transformation to a Patient-Centered Medical Home” Annals
of Family Medicine Vol. 7, No. 3 May/June 2009
NCQA
Patient Centered Medical Home webpage 
NCQA PCMH Brochure
Download the
complete NCQA
PCMH Standards and Guidelines (2011) in PDF format for free.  Requires
registration.