Our Impact


  • In 100% of LFCA cases, LFCA Pro Bono Attorneys’ advocacy secured adequate, timely, and consistent mental health services for their child clients (well above the national average of 23%), adequate and timely medical services for their child clients, necessary educational services for their child clients (well above the national average of 55%), and outside resources to address any further trauma and advance their path to recovery.
  • In a large percentage of our cases, LFCA Pro Bono Attorneys facilitated an agreement among the parties, avoiding costly litigation.
  • In a large percentage of cases where LFCA determined the need to spur DCF to additional action and for additional services for the children, LFCA Pro Bono Attorneys’ advocacy resulted in a court order for necessary additional services, demonstrating the effectiveness of LFCA’s program model, partnership with the Yale Child Study Center, and one attorney-one child approach.
  • In 81% of the cases where the LFCA Pro Bono Attorney’s advocacy secured successful closure of their child client’s child protection case through the child being reunified with his or her family, there has been no further family involvement with the child protection system. Our success rate is significantly higher than the national average of 54%.
  • In 94% of LFCA cases, permanency was achieved through the child being placed with a relative, permanent guardian, adoptive parents, or being reunified. These permanent placements were achieved in less than 24 months in 90% of these cases. Both results are well above the national averages of 72% and 68%, respectively.
  • At the conclusion of our cases, 89% of children represented present with a positive assessment for 7 or more of the 10 industry standard future well-being indicators. 84% are found to be performing in school at an age-appropriate level. Both results are significantly higher than the national averages of 68% and 36%, respectively.

We have taken an innovative approach, capitalizing on our pro bono attorneys’ skills with mediation. In this context, we have heightened supportive efforts with parents’ attorneys with a focus on ensuring appropriate and sufficient mental health services for parents (even though our client is the child).

Specifically, while advocating primarily for all necessary services for our child client, LFCA attorneys have also begun to present additional arguments regarding the services they believe will benefit the parents (where reunification is the end objective), by asserting that the implementation of such services will help to heal the entire family, and therefore, are in the best interest of the child.

Continued advocacy in this manner will serve to address the crucial components found within families who are at risk for re-involvement with DCF. In these LFCA cases, the child’s attorney, the parents’ attorneys, and DCF are now jointly focused on obtaining more community and mental health services for parents. The result of this systemic shift has been an increase (by 22%) in successful family reunifications, with no future involvement with DCF.