Alternative Business Structures Evaluation Blueprint

The legal system is slow to change, favoring the way things have always been done. But when the way things have always been done makes it nearly impossible for everyday people to access affordable, quality legal services, something has to change. To spur innovation, the Arizona Supreme Court abolished the longstanding rule that prohibited nonlawyers from owning law firms, allowing firms in Arizona to test new ownership models to increase innovation and improve access to legal services. In addition, Utah, Washington, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico currently permit some version of Alternative Business Structure (ABS) entities, with programs also established in Canada, England, Wales, and Australia. 

IAALS is co-designing an evaluation framework for ABS programs to help leaders assess whether their program is meeting its objectives and explore how the operation of their program can be improved. The evaluation framework will provide an evidence-based and consumer-focused blueprint for states looking to create their own ABS program.

• Co-design an evaluation framework for ABS programs that measures their impact on consumers and if they are meeting their objectives
• If funding is secured, conduct an evaluation of the Arizona ABS program

To develop a robust evaluation framework for ABS programs, IAALS will look towards Arizona’s ABS program—the first of its kind in the United States. As of March 2026, 150 ABS entities are currently licensed in Arizona. The program has generated early insights, but many important questions remain unanswered, including whether the ABS program is meeting its stated objectives.  

As a first step in developing the evaluation framework, IAALS will explore the current state of ABS programs nationally and internationally. IAALS will also speak with key stakeholders in the Arizona ABS program and across the country to shed light on unanswered questions. The insights from these conversations will form the building blocks for the evaluation framework. 

It is critical that we understand what has been successful and what could be improved upon in Arizona’s program so we can apply those learnings to future programs. If IAALS can build a blueprint for how to successfully evaluate programs permitting these innovative business structures, other states can use our evidence-based recommendations to take a more confident step forward in improving how legal services are provided to the public. As more states transform how people can access streamlined and affordable legal services, this people-focused patchwork of state innovations will begin to close our nation’s justice gaps.