Summary
Panelists from DLA Piper, Legal Aid Chicago, and Microsoft urged legal-aid organizations to prioritize the integration of existing tools—such as SharePoint, Teams, Forms, and Power Automate—to reduce email overload, create unified sources of truth, protect client data, and streamline workflows.
Annie Helms, Director and Counsel for U.S. Pro Bono Programs at DLA Piper, opened a morning session titled “Knowledge Management is Not AI.” She emphasized the importance for legal aid organizations to focus on leveraging technology they are already paying for, rather than investing in new systems.
The panel, which included Vivian Hessel from Legal Aid Chicago and staff from Microsoft’s productivity team, described the challenges legal aid groups face: overflowing inboxes, difficulty in locating documents, reluctance to share drafts, and concerns over client-data security all hinder efficient collaboration. “Email is the bane of my existence,” Vivian Hessel remarked, highlighting how email often serves as a chaotic document repository that disrupts work processes.
Why it matters: The presenters highlighted that consolidating documents within SharePoint and utilizing structured intake forms can significantly reduce repetitive messaging, enhance document searchability, and create a single authoritative version for each case. This approach minimizes duplicated efforts and facilitates smoother collaboration with pro bono law firms.
DLA Piper’s approach: Elizabeth Capanz, Director of Knowledge Management at DLA Piper, discussed the firm’s Athena intranet, which is built on SharePoint. She explained that the platform organizes collections of precedents, templates, and practice-specific resources for pro bono teams. Capanz mentioned that DLA Piper enhances Athena with targeted training sessions, consultations, and brief microlearning videos—termed “UPOs,” each lasting under six minutes—to boost user adoption.
Microsoft tools and practices: Erin from Microsoft’s productivity solutions team supporting CELA (Corporate, External, and Legal Affairs) outlined practical steps that organizations can take. These include using Microsoft Forms or SharePoint lists for structured data intake, applying metadata columns to document libraries for cross-site searches, and utilizing Teams transcription for non-privileged brainstorming sessions. Erin noted that SharePoint lists allow for customizable fields, person columns, and version history, while its share/copy link features enable document owners to control access levels (such as edit vs. read, download permissions, and link expiration).
Security and client-data concerns: The presenters acknowledged prevalent concerns surrounding AI and transcription technologies. Erin noted that Teams transcription is accessible only to meeting attendees unless explicitly shared by the host. Elizabeth Capanz elaborated on DLA Piper’s internal information security and privacy review procedures for new GenAI tools, which require training sessions, ethics CLE credits, and a responsible-use policy before granting access to new assistants piloted in 2023.
Practical examples: Vivian mentioned that Legal Aid Chicago has started piloting SharePoint lists, with a dedicated technology trainer allocating approximately 50% of their time to staff training. The panelists shared instances of using firm tools to compile timelines from medical records and to create model forms for immigration or prisoners’ rights cases, significantly streamlining the workflow for litigation teams.
Technical constraints and automation: Audience members raised concerns about partner firewalls blocking SharePoint access. Microsoft recommended that those partners’ IT teams adjust firewall settings and noted that, in some instances, the hosting organization may need to request permissions on behalf of the partner. For lightweight automation, presenters advocated using Power Automate as a complementary solution to SharePoint lists. They also pointed out that certain built-in alerts and notification features could provide basic automation without requiring separate licensing.
Next steps: The panelists indicated they would share session recordings and resource links following the presentation. They also offered to address any questions via the event app and expressed willingness to provide on-site or remote training where possible. The session concluded with an opportunity for further audience questions and a commitment to continue discussions beyond the program.
In conclusion, the integration of existing technology tools in legal-aid organizations presents a vital opportunity to enhance efficiency, protect client data, and foster collaborative workflows. By prioritizing these strategies, organizations can significantly reduce the challenges posed by disjointed communications and document management.
