Charles Beresford - Brown University



[pic] |

A BROWN UNIVERSITY CASE STUDY Spring 2005 | |

Admin Matters

The individual lawyer and the small firm are the keys for middle class and lower class people to have access to the legal system.

George Soros

Finally relaxing in his Newark, New Jersey home, Steve Massarsky gently sipped a glass of cognac. He was thinking about Admin Matters, his new start-up. The company would scale the back office of small law firms, making smaller practices more profitable and more efficient. But how would the company be organized? Would it be centralized or decentralized? How would it be staffed?

Background

Steve graduated from Brown University in the 1970’s and earned his J.D. from Rutgers. He spent twenty-five years in the music business where he managed the Allmann Brothers Band and, later, discovered Cindi Lauper. In the early 1980’s he left music for law, where he represented Aerosmith, Nintendo, and Cabbage Patch. Later he started what became the third largest comic book company in the country, Valiant Comics. Valiant was sold to Acclaim Entertainment in 1994, and a few years later Steve started a business incubator. By 2003 he was ready to retire. Who can blame him!

But it wasn’t meant to be. In October 2003, Rutgers Law School approached Steve with a problem brought to their attention by billionaire investor George Soros. The problem is one of legal accessibility – it is estimated that more than 80% of the civil legal needs of the poor go

unmet.[1] Soros saw the individual lawyer and the small law firm as the keys for these middle and lower class people to have access to the legal system. However, such smaller practices were less profitable than larger practices, and as such constituted a minority percentage of total U.S. law firms. Soros wanted to change that. Rutgers law school, as part of a consortium of twelve law schools around the United States, was charged with this task of incentivizing lawyers to work individually or in smaller law practices, with the goal of ultimately changing the legal landscape of the United States.

The consortium had been working on this problem for two years with no luck, but Steve felt the solution was simple. He started with a basic analysis of the situation – why were small law firms less profitable than larger firms? For Steve, there were three main problems to address.

If you are a small law firm, there are three holes in your practice. The first hole is that law school trains you how to be a lawyer; not how to run a business; consequently, all the administrative tasks of running a law firm are foreign to you. Second, if you are an individual practitioner, every hour spent on administrative work is an hour you can’t spend on your clients cases. Therefore, you aren’t trained to run a law firm as a profitable business and the time to spend running the business end is limited.

The second issue is expertise. [Small law firms] don’t necessarily have the expertise in all the areas of law to be able to answer every question that a client would walk in with. That’s one of the reasons people go to larger firms, for both economies of scale and expertise from other in house partners.

The third issue faced by small law firms is quality of life. If the lawyers in small firms are spending all of their time either practicing law or handling the administrative responsibilities, when do they see their family? When do they take part in their hobbies? When do they have the time to market themselves? When do they think about their career or, whether they’re heading in the right direction? So there is also a quality of life issue. I said [to Rutgers], ‘In order to solve these problems, the simplest approach would be to create a company that virtually manages the back end of law firms.’

Steve’s envisioned company, Admin Matters, would free up a lawyer’s time to either spend with his or her families or on their clients. Essentially, the company would remove the incentive for law firms to become larger through the provision of a “back office” common to all small law firms. This would grant them the scalability enjoyed by large law firms (i.e., maintaining low fixed costs) while enabling them to retain the flexibility of being small.

While hesitant to commit to another business venture, Steve was excited about the possibility of changing the current status quo of the legal world. He met with a Dean at Rutgers University and presented his plan. Filled with enthusiasm, the Dean asked Steve what he needed to make his vision a reality. Steve requested the services of four extremely competent law students to help get Admin Matters off the ground. The business project was soon underway: the four interested law students were selected and Steve was given an office at Rutgers. Retirement seemed far away now!

Competition

Steve’s first step in creating Admin Matters was to ascertain the level of competition in the market. While there were currently no firms filling Admin Matters’ niche catering to the outsourcing needs specific to law firms, such outsourcing firms have existed in the business world for decades, addressing tasks like human resources, payroll, and information technology. Human resources outsourcing companies included firms such as Paychex and Administaff, and information technology outsourcing companies included firms such as Affiliated Computer Services. While these companies would not be direct competitors of Admin Matters, they shared a similar function, and might prove valuable when determining Admin Matters’ future structure.

Paychex () Paychex is a national provider of payroll, human resource, and benefits outsourcing solutions for businesses in the United States. Paychex’ services include payroll processing, tax filing and payment, employee payment, retirement services administration, employee benefits administration, regulatory compliance (new-hire reporting and garnishment processing), workers' compensation insurance, and bundled human resource administrative services.

Paychex is based in Rochester, NY, and today has more than 100 locations around the country. Paychex has 1,850 employees and took in $1.1 billion in revenue in fiscal 2003.

Administaff () Administaff is a Professional Employer Organization (PEO) that serves as an off-site, full-service human resources department for small and medium-sized businesses. As a PEO, it is a co-employer of its clients' workers. The company provides such services as payroll and benefits administration, workers' compensation programs, personnel records management, and employee recruiting. Most of Administaff’s client companies are engaged in the business, financial, and computer services industries.

With corporate offices located in Houston, Texas, Administaff provides its services to more than 4,500 client companies and 75,000 worksite employees nationwide. Administaff maintains four fully staffed regional service centers strategically located across the country. Additionally, a complete service team is located within each of Administaff’s 38 sales offices, found in 21 major metropolitan markets.

To compliment its standard services, Administaff offers Web-based services through its Employee Service Center. The Employee Service Center is an online extranet that provides human resources support, personal employment history, paycheck history, and online training and development courses. Administaff also operates the business-to-business e-commerce site My Marketplace, offering its clients discounts to goods and services offered by Administaff alliance companies. The company took in $900 million in revenue in fiscal 2003.

Affiliated Computer Services (acs-) ACS is a provider of business process and information technology outsourcing solutions to hundreds of commercial and government clients worldwide. From its beginnings in 1988 when it served a single financial industry client, ACS has expanded into the education, energy, financial, government, healthcare, retail, travel, and transportation industries. The company, headquartered in Dallas, Texas, now has more than 75 offices nationwide supports operations in nearly 100 countries.

Building on its core competency of technology infrastructure outsourcing, ACS expanded early on into Business Processing Outsourcing (BPO). The function of BPO is to manage non-core, resource-intensive functions, such as administration, accounting, human resources, payment services, sales, marketing, customer care, and supply chain management. The company has 40,000 employees and took in nearly $4 billion in revenue in fiscal 2003, 22% of which came from contracts with the Federal Government.

Market Size

There were approximately 504,370[2] lawyers in the United States in 2002, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (exhibit 1). More than 90,000 of these lawyers worked for the largest 200 law firms in the country. Exhibit 2 lists the breakdown of United States law offices by size for 2001. In 2001 there were 144,029 law firms in the United States consisting of less than ten employees.

Initial research done by Steve’s team indicated that lawyers practicing for longer than 15-20 years were not likely to utilize Admin Matters’ outsourcing services. Therefore, Admin Matters’ target market would be younger lawyers and firms. A conservative estimate indicated that 30,000 such firms in the United States met the criteria of being both young and small. Regarding future growth, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics estimated the number of lawyers in the United States to increase by 10 to 20 percent between 2002 and 2012.

Services

Persuading law firms to outsource their administrative tasks to Admin Matters would not be easy. As members of a profession steeped in tradition, “convincing the lawyers to do something differently than how they’ve done it, how their father or mother have done it, how their mentor has done it, and say guys here’s a new way of doing it,” would be difficult. Knowing this, Steve felt that he had to put together the right mix of services to make outsourcing to Admin Matters worthwhile.

At its most fundamental level, Admin Matters would provide services that streamlined the backend of their client law firms. To Steve, there would be no end to the services Admin Matters could provide, the only constraints would be client demand and legal considerations. He envisioned a whole host of services. Anything that was ancillary to a law firm’s core services could be handled by Admin Matters.

Service Description

|Billing |Handle billing and collection of lawyer fees from firms’ clients |

|Bookkeeping |Manage firms’ finances to ease accounting |

|IT Support |Assist clients in setting up office networks and running software |

|Purchasing |Handle purchases of office supplies, furniture, etc. with discount rates based on being |

| |able to aggregate demand and negotiate supplier agreements |

|HR Support |Offer support to clients about human resource questions, including staffing issues, |

| |legal support |

|Credit Checks |Ensure that firms’ clients are able to afford legal services |

|Escrow |Provide escrow services for law firms by managing accounts so law firms do not run into |

| |legal issues concerning the co-mingling of funds. |

|Instant Payments Receivables |Stabilize firms’ cash flow by providing them up-front payments and collecting bills from|

| |clients later. |

By specializing in administrative tasks, Admin Matters would be better positioned to perform these services more efficiently. This efficiency in turn would allow the company to price its services competitively, saving law firms money but still creating significant revenue opportunities. Steve explains:

Let’s say it’s costing [lawyers] 40% of their gross to administer the law firm. And that number I’ve researched enough to know that I am right on. So let’s assume for the moment that I can do it for 20%. Let’s assume again for the moment that the average lawyer is billing $200,000 a year. So if I am getting $40,000 from a thousand lawyers, that looks like forty million dollars to me.

However, Steve’s concerns did not end at profit margins. His entrepreneurial philosophy made certain that Admin Matters would be a socially-conscious organization. He felt that by providing these support services, lawyers would have less overhead and be better positioned to take on lower-income clients. Steve would build incentives directly into his pricing structure:

[We’ll give] discounts for pro-bono work. We’ll make the percentage that we charge firms for our services a sliding scale. If you do no pro-bono work, we’ll charge 20%. If they do all pro-bono work, we’ll charge 5%. And anything in-between is graded. With this we’ve actually found a way to pay lawyers to do pro-bono work, which has never been done before. So there are all these little ideas that we can put in there to make this appealing to people.

Steve continued to brainstorm innovative services and pricing mechanisms, knowing fully well that as Admin Matters moved along, the types of services the company offered would undoubtedly be modified. Nevertheless, he was determined to maintain his vision of being the turnkey administrative solution for small law firms. In turn, he hoped that this sliding scale pricing would help to fulfill George Soros’ goal of providing legal services to lower-income demographics by saving firms money and time, therefore allowing them to pass on their savings to these lower income clients.

Staffing

To correspond with its variety of services, Admin Matters would need a variety of staffers with specialized skills. Steve made a quick mental calculation. He would need bookkeepers to manage records, IT technicians to handle client questions, purchasing managers, and billing agents to manage attorney accounts. Of course, as the Admin Matters idea moved further along, Steve knew that his list would most likely change and be refined. Nevertheless, he also knew that how he planned on staffing his organization would fundamentally affect the startup’s chances for success.

While the idea of having services that manage the administrative tasks for law firms was appealing, Steve had trouble deciding how best to implement these services. Primarily, he was unsure about how to staff his organization. If a client called the company, where would the call go? Who would answer? There were several choices available to Steve that he found appealing. As an experienced and innovative entrepreneur, he had a few models in mind already.

The first thing that came to mind was the most intuitive. He could hire all of his staff members as employees, who would work out of the office and handle all requests. If Admin Matters was staffed in this way, Steve would get maximum control over employee work and output. Since the company is young and its reputation unformed, Steve knew that maintaining high levels of quality would be crucial to succeeding. Having dedicated employees would ensure that the implementation of Admin Matters would closely adhere to Steve’s vision for the company. Then again, there were certain costs associated with hiring employees. Under U.S. law, employees are given certain benefits, including Social Security payments, medical coverage, and other legal entitlements (exhibit 3). With employees, Steve would exert maximum control over his services, though this would come at the price of increased overhead.

Steve’s experiences gave him another model to look at as well. When he was president of Valiant Comics, he staffed his organization differently. The dynamics of the comic book industry made freelancing, or independent contracting, an appealing option. Instead of employing full time comic book writers, Steve would hire as many as he needed for any given release. Unlike full-time employees, independent contractors are not actually part of the organization for which they work, giving Steve the flexibility to scale his staff up and down as necessary. Furthermore, independent contractors received none of the fringe benefits given to employees. This added bonus made independent contracting an attractive option, but Steve knew that the distinctions between employees and independent contractors were many and could affect the culture and services he wished to perform. The big benefit was flexibility but if Steve classified his staff incorrectly, there were tax implications.

It’s a test of independence that makes you an employee versus an independent contractor, and it has far ranging consequences for a company. Let’s say I start this and everyone is an independent contractor, and the state comes in and says they’re all employees. I haven’t taken out taxes, then suddenly I am responsible for paying their taxes- if I pay them 100 dollars an hour, and then I have to pay taxes like 25 dollars on that, then I’m paying something like 500,000 dollars more per year just on taxes.

There was a third model that Steve had been toying with as well. One of the latest innovations in staffing services was called “virtual assistance.” Virtual assistants were independent contractors, but instead of working in a central office, they worked from their own homes. Since many of these assistants had experience in the services Steve was looking for, including bookkeeping, accounting, and so forth, Steve pondered whether virtual staffing might be a better option. One company he admired, JetBlue, used virtual staffing and had experienced few side effects.

The original JetBlue model was set up so that when you call JetBlue and make a reservation, or you do it on computer, you’re not talking to somebody in a big call center somewhere, you’re talking to people who are in their homes. JetBlue is giving them a computer and an 800 number, and they get the calls.

In 2004, JetBlue was rated “Best U.S. Airline” by a survey conducted by the University of Nebraska.[3] For JetBlue at least, virtual staffing paid off. Steve had a general idea about how he would implement virtual staffing, if this became his staffing option of choice. “The way I would staff this is I would have a head of each department and a few key people in each department, and make everything else virtual.” Virtual staffing would come from several resources. Steve could attempt to set up his own network of virtual assistants by looking for each of them online, or go through one of the virtual assistant organizations. One of these organizations was called the International Virtual Assistants Association (IVAA). The IVAA functioned as a guild for virtual assistants. Members belonging to the association were entered into a database which employers could search. (exhibit 4).

Virtual assistants came with their own pros and cons. On one hand, there would be much less overhead for Steve to deal with, since there would be no need to provide office space for workers. Secondly, like independent contractors, Steve would not be responsible for covering social security and other benefits. Furthermore, scaling up his business could be made much easier. Depending on the workload and services desired, Steve could vary the number of assistants working for the organization. During tax time, for example, there may be a higher need for bookkeepers, who could all be found via the IVAA.

On the other hand, staffing his company with virtual assistants would lead to many unknowns. While scalability is a positive feature, Steve did not know how well this translated when put into practice. The IVAA, for example, served only as a central repository for finding virtual assistants. Unlike a temp agency, which works with an employer to fill the employer’s needs, the IVAA had no control over the decisions individual IVAA members made. Steve would have to negotiate with every virtual assistant from whom he contracted work, potentially affecting the ease of scalability. Other concerns remained. Steve would have even less control over the output his virtual assistants produced, making quality control more difficult. However, as JetBlue’s award-winning model demonstrated, these problems may never arise.

Steve’s staffing concerns were not just limited to employees, independent contractors, and virtual assistants. The way he decided to staff was also affected by the actual physical presence of Admin Matters. Where and how would Steve decide to locate his office or offices?

Location

Steve had several choices available to him. Like his staffing concerns, no location setup stood out as an obvious best choice, so he would have to delicately weigh the costs and benefits of different location options. With a company like Admin Matters, which handled all of its services remotely and automated much of its processing through software, location had less to do with service and more to do with marketing and customer relations.

The first setup Steve considered was having a single central location. With a central location in a major metropolitan center, Admin Matters could position itself as a nationwide organization without the costs associated with having multiple, fully-staffed offices. Workflow would be smoother, since the key people of the organization would all be located in the same place. Furthermore, Steve felt he would have better control of the company, considering he would only have to manage one location.

However, knowing that the “comfort” factor in having the company near the clients it serviced was not to be underestimated, Steve pondered a second setup. If a law firm did not feel comfortable with Admin Matters being in a different state managing its finances and billing, it would not use them. Steve explained:

If I come to you, as a lawyer in California, and say I’m a company in New Jersey and I can manage your law firm, you say I [wouldn’t] know how to manage a company in California and I’m not here, what happens when you have a problem, you can’t come look at me and yell at me.

Therefore, a potential option for Admin Matters would be to locate regionally across the country. Regional offices could be small, conducting only customer support and marketing, but would serve as a physical presence for a company that managed large portions of a law firm’s business. Furthermore, all regional offices do not have to be made equal. Steve considered having one large central office with key staffers, and then several, smaller offices staffed only with customer relations representatives. Either way, however, would bring in more overhead, more staff, and more difficulty in managing standards from office to office.

Conclusion

Steve Massarsky sighed, and sipped his cognac once again. He was weary after multiple meetings and brainstorming sessions with lawyers, law students and the like. Admin Matters had the potential to become one of the few noble businesses that was both profitable and socially-conscious. Admin Matters strove to improve access to legal services for low-income demographics and made it easier for small law firms to focus on what they do best, all while succeeding in an untapped market. But taking an idea and bringing it to life took a lot of work, and this was no exception. Steve did not even have a concrete business plan – his only guidelines were his intuition and experience. If the company was going to be successful, Steve had to iron out several implementation issues. For the moment, he decided not to worry about the services the company would provide; with so many ideas, he assumed the market would eventually dictate which services would work and which would not. Instead, he needed to figure out exactly how he should deploy these services.

The different staffing and setup arrangements all held their own advantages and disadvantages. How should Steve staff Admin Matters, and in what geographical setup? He knew that this decision would shape the outcome of the company, and realized he must answer this question before moving forward .

This is a well written case. It addresses both entrepreneurship and issue of management. You focus well on the choices offered the student to examine. At the same time, I think the students need to address whether or not the overall idea is a good one. In this regard, is there enough information for them to debate that issue too? There are some notes in the text to review.

1 2 3 4 5

Poor Fair Good Very Good Excellent

Critical Issue(s) Clearly Defined ___4.5_____

Grammar, Syntax, word choice _____4.5___

Adequate Decision Options _______4.5_

Background information relevantly presented ________5

Protagonist Well Developed ________5

Professionalism of case (presentation and format) ________5

Readability (engaging, case flows) ________4.5

General Impression of the case ________4.5

Total Points ____37.5____

Class Grade 22/22.5

Exhibit 1 U.S. Bureau of Labor – U.S. Lawyers 2002 Statistics

Lawyers

SOC Code Number: 23-1011

Represent clients in criminal and civil litigation and other legal proceedings, draw up legal documents, and manage or advise clients on legal transactions. May specialize in a single area or may practice broadly in many areas of law.

2002 Employment estimate and mean wage estimate:

|Employment (1) |Employment RSE (3) |Mean Hourly Wage |Mean Annual Wage (2) |Wage RSE (3) |

|504,370 |1.5% |$50.91 |$105,890 |1.0% |

1) Data for detailed occupations does not sum to the totals because the totals include data for occupations not shown separately. Estimates do not include self-employed workers.

2) Annual wages have been calculated by multiplying the hourly mean wage by a "year-round, full-time" hours figure of 2,080 hours; for those occupations where there is not an hourly mean wage published, the annual wage has been directly calculated from the reported survey data.

3) The relative standard error (RSE) is a measure of the reliability of a survey statistic. The smaller the relative standard error, the more precise the estimate.

About 3 out of 4 lawyers practiced privately in 2002, either in law firms or in solo practices. The 200 largest firms now employ over 90,000 lawyers. Most of the remaining lawyers held positions in government and with corporations and nonprofit organizations. For those working in government, the greatest number were employed at the local level. In the Federal Government, lawyers work for many different agencies, but are concentrated in the Departments of Justice, Treasury, and Defense. For those working outside of government, lawyers are employed as house counsel by public utilities, banks, insurance companies, real-estate agencies, manufacturing firms, and other business firms and nonprofit organizations. Some salaried lawyers also have part-time independent practices; others work part time as lawyers and full time in another occupation.

Employment of lawyers is expected to grow between 10 and 20 percent through 2012, primarily as a result of growth in the population and in the general level of business activities. Employment growth of lawyers also will result from growth in demand for legal services in such areas as elder, antitrust, environmental, and intellectual-property law. In addition, the wider availability and affordability of legal clinics and prepaid legal service programs should result in increased use of legal services by middle-income people.

Exhibit 2 U.S. Census Bureau – U.S. Offices of Lawyers 2001 Statistics

|Employment Size of |Firms |Establishments |Paid Employees |Annual Payroll ($1,000) |

|Enterprise | | | | |

|All Firms |161,875 |167,852 |1,045,794 |64,738,245 |

|Firms with no employees |15,055 |15,083 |0 |1,034,710 |

|(as of March 12, 2001) | | | | |

|Firms with 1 to 4 |105,751 |105,893 |203,939 |7,561,879 |

|employees | | | | |

|Firms with 5 to 9 |23,223 |23,499 |149,532 |6,457,123 |

|employees | | | | |

|Firms with 10 to 19 |10,427 |11,030 |138,246 |7,535,476 |

|employees | | | | |

|Firms with 20 to 99 |6,451 |8,608 |239,223 |15,916,155 |

|employees | | | | |

|Firms with 100 to 499 |791 |2,483 |151,454 |11,641,122 |

|employees | | | | |

|Firms with 500 employees |177 |1,256 |163,400 |14,591,780 |

|or more | | | | |

Explanation of Terms:

Enterprise - An enterprise is a business organization consisting of one or more domestic establishments that were specified under common ownership or control. The enterprise and the establishment are the same for single-establishment firms. Each multi-establishment company forms one enterprise - the enterprise employment and annual payroll are summed from the associated establishments.

Firm - A firm is a business organization consisting of one or more domestic establishments in the same state and industry that were specified under common ownership or control. The firm and the establishment are the same for single-establishment firms. For each multi-establishment firm, establishments in the same industry within a state will be counted as one firm- the firm employment and annual payroll are summed from the associated establishments.

Establishment - A single physical location where business is conducted or where services or industrial operations are performed.

Employment - Paid employment consists of full and part-time employees, including salaried officers and executives of corporations, who were on the payroll in the pay period including March 12. Included are employees on sick leave, holidays, and vacations; not included are proprietors and partners of unincorporated businesses.

Annual Payroll - Total annual payroll includes all forms of compensation, such as salaries, wages, commissions, bonuses, vacation allowances, sick-leave pay, and the value of payments in-kind (e.g., free meals and lodgings) paid during the year to all employees.

Exhibit 3 Excerpts from IRS Guide: “Employees vs. Independent Contractors”

Found via:

Employees vs. Independent Contractors

The tax law covering independent contractors is very complicated. Before you can determine how to treat payments you make for services, you must first know the business relationship that exists between you and the person performing the services. The person performing the services may be -

• An independent contractor

• A common-law employee (Employee)

• A statutory employee

• A statutory nonemployee

In determining whether the person providing service is an employee or an independent contractor, all information that provides evidence of the degree of control and independence must be considered.

It is critical that you, the employer, correctly determine whether the individuals providing services are employees or independent contractors. Generally, you must withhold income taxes, withhold and pay Social Security and Medicare taxes, and pay unemployment tax on wages paid to an employee. You do not generally have to withhold or pay any taxes on payments to independent contractors.

Caution: If you incorrectly classify an employee as an independent contractor, you can be held liable for employment taxes for that worker, plus a penalty.

Who is an Independent Contractor?

A general rule is that you, the payer, have the right to control or direct only the result of the work done by an independent contractor, and not the means and methods of accomplishing the result.

Example: Steve Smith, a computer programmer, is laid off when Megabyte Inc. downsizes. Megabyte agrees to pay Steve a flat amount to complete a one-time project to create a certain product. It is not clear how long it will take to complete the project, and Steve is not guaranteed any minimum payment for the hours spent on the program. Megabyte provides Steve with no instructions beyond the specification for the product itself. Steve and Megabyte have a written contract, which provides that Steve is considered to be an independent contractor, is required to pay Federal and state taxes, and receives no benefits from Megabyte. Megabyte will file a Form 1099-MISC (PDF). Steve does the work on a new high-end computer which cost him $7000. Steve works at home and is not expected or allowed to attend meetings of the software development group. Steve is an independent contractor.

Refer to the page on Paying Independent Contractor if you need information on what your responsibilities are when paying contractors.

Who is an Employee?

A general rule is that anyone who performs services for you is your employee if you can control what will be done and how it will be done.

Example: Donna Lee is a salesperson employed on a full-time basis by Bob Blue, an auto dealer. She works 6 days a week, and is on duty in Bob's showroom on certain assigned days and times. She appraises trade-ins, but her appraisals are subject to the sales manager's approval. Lists of prospective customers belong to the dealer. She has to develop leads and report results to the sales manager. Because of her experience, she requires only minimal assistance in closing and financing sales and in other phases of her work. She is paid a commission and is eligible for prizes and bonuses offered by Bob. Bob also pays the cost of health insurance and group-term life insurance for Donna. Donna is an employee of Bob Blue.

Exhibit 4 Excerpt of from IVAA Member Directory

Found via:

|[pic] |[pic] |

|  |

|IVAA Alphabetical Member Directory |

|A - B - C - D - E - F - G - H - I - J - K - L - M - N - O - P - Q - R - S - T - U - V - W - X - Y - Z |

|  |

| |

| |

| |

|A |

| |

|NAME |

|COMPANY |

|STATE |

|COUNTRY |

|DESIGNATIONS |

| |

|Abbey,LaJuan Ford |

|AMS Consulting, Ltd. |

|Maryland |

|United States |

| |

| |

|[pic] |

| |

|Abreght,Jean |

|Dove Enterprises |

|Pennsylvania |

|United States |

| |

| |

|[pic] |

| |

|Adams,Nicole M |

|Nicoles Virtual Services |

|Oregon |

|United States |

| |

| |

|Real Estate Support |

| |

|[pic] |

| |

|Alexander,Marleen |

|M. Alexander & Associates, Inc. |

|Maryland |

|United States |

| |

| |

|[pic] |

| |

|Allen,Nikita J. |

|Simply Virtual |

|Michigan |

|United States |

| |

| |

|[pic] |

| |

|Allin,Cheryl |

|VirtuAllin Administrative Services |

|Washington |

|United States |

| |

| |

|Real Estate Support |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

-----------------------

[1] Hertz, Michael. Pro Bono Net News: Large Law Firms: A Larger Role to Play. Oct. 2003. . Apr. 2004

[2] The true number is actually somewhat higher than 504,370, because this number does not account for the self-employed.

[3] “Awards and Accolades,” Jet Blue Airways, 2004. 19 April 2004 .

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download