Figure 1
Figure 1, an organization chart showing the roles and responsibilities of various entities involved in the State Bar of California’s (State Bar) governance structure. Four entities appoint members of the State Bar‘s Board of Trustees, and have varying roles in the State Bar of California’s governance. First, the Supreme Court of California appoints five attorney members to the Board of Trustees. The Supreme Court of California also possesses the constitutional and inherent authority to regulate the practice of law in the State. The Governor of California appoints four public or "non-attorney" members to the Board of Trustees. Members of the State Bar from California’s six appellate court districts elect six attorney members. The California State Legislature’s Senate Committee on Rules and the Speaker of the Assembly each appoint one attorney member and one public or "non-attorney" member to the board. The Legislature also annually reviews and approves the State Bar’s budget in conjunction with the State Bar's fee bill. The State Bar’s Board of Trustees sets State Bar policies and oversees its operations. The State Bar is a public corporation and administrative arm of the Judicial Branch. Figure 1 also describes four of the State Bar’s largest programs – the Attorney Discipline System, Admissions, Legal Services Grant Programs, and the Client Security Fund. Figure 1 also generally describes the State Bar’s other programs, such as continuing education.
Figure 2
Figure 2, a bar graph depicting the dollar amount and types of State Bar of California’s (State Bar) expenses between 2013 through 2015. For example, Figure 2 shows that the State Bar’s expenses by type ranged between less than $5 million and $50 million between 2013 and 2015 for the following types of expenses: Salaries, benefits, temporary or outside help, grants, buildings, equipment, and occupancy, other outside services, Client Security Fund, exam costs, travel, and other expenses.
Figure 3
Figure 3, a bar graph depicting the number and status of Client Security Fund applications between 2008 and 2015. For each year, figure 3 shows a blue bar that represents the number of new applications, a yellow bar that represents the number of completed applications, and a red bar that represents the number of outstanding applications at the end of the year. New applications for 2008 through 2015 ranged between 825 and 3,875 between with the largest number of new applications occurring in 2010. Completed applications for 2008 through 2015 ranged between 741 and 3,687 with the largest number of completed applications occurring in 2013. Applications outstanding at the end of each year for 2008 through 2015 ranged between 710 and 7,801 with the largest number of applications outstanding at the end of the year occurring in 2012.
Figure 4
Figure 4, the flowchart begins when the State Bar of California (State Bar) receives an application for payment from the Client Security Fund program. The State Bar first determines whether an attorney either has been disciplined or has an open discipline case. If neither has occurred, the State Bar refers the applicant to the disciplinary process. Client Security Fund staff monitor the attorney discipline case and wait for final discipline from the Supreme Court. Once an attorney is disciplined, the State Bar evaluates the applicant’s claim to determine whether it includes sufficient proof and meets the criteria for payment. If so, the State Bar prepares a notice of intention to pay. If the applicant and responding attorney do not object to the decision, the State Bar pays the applicant and closes the file. If the applicant or responding attorney object to the payment decision, or the State Bar determines the application does not meet criteria for payment, it prepares a tentative decision for review by the Client Security Fund Commission. The Commission reviews the evidence and issues a tentative decision to pay or deny the application. If the applicant or responding attorney objects to the decision, the Commission will review the objection before making a final decision. The process ends with the final decision to pay or deny the application.
Figure 5
Figure 5, a chart showing the change in Client Security Fund claims paid, estimated future payments, amount available for payments, and the fund’s reported year-end balance for 2008 through 2015. The amount the Client Security Fund has available for payments, calculated as revenue less administrative expenses ranged between $5.1 million and $5.6 million for 2008 through 2015. The State Bar of California’s estimated future payments ranged between $4.8 million and $26.7 million for 2008 through 2015 with the largest estimated future payments occurring in 2012. Actual payments from the Client Security Fund ranged between $3.3 million and 11 million annually for 2008 through 2015 with the largest actual payments occurring in 2013. The Client Security Fund’s balance was $4.3 million at the end of 2008 and decreased to negative $7.2 million in 2011. The fund’s largest year-end balance was $11.1 million in 2012, but decreased to $2.2 million by the end of 2015.
Figure 6
Figure 6, a chart that showing the amounts transferred from other funds to the State Bar of California’s (State Bar) Technology Improvement Fund by fund and amount. The chart shows transfers from the State Bar’s General Fund, Information Technology Special Assessment Fund, Discipline Fund, Admissions Fund, and other funds. The transfers ranged between $0.1 million and $10 million. All of the transfers, with the exception of those from the General Fund, came from restricted funds. The largest amount, $10 million of the $13.4 million, came from the Information Technology Special Assessment Fund.
Figure 7
Figure 7, a chart that shows the State Bar of California’s (State Bar) general and administrative expenses as reported in its annual audited financial statements from 2011 through 2015. The State Bar’s general and administrative expenses increased from $14.8 million in 2011 to $34.3 million in 2013. The chart also shows that the State Bar then reported general and administrative expenses of $17 million in 2014 and $17.6 million in 2015.