Author: Lauren Curtis

New Publication: A National Compendium of Court Navigation Programs

Policy Research Associates, in partnership with the State Justice Institute, is pleased to announce the release of a new publication, A National Compendium of Court Navigation Programs. This Compendium provides an overview of 18 court navigation programs operating in 22 states across the United States. A court navigation program provides guidance and information about court processes and procedures to people in contact with the court system. In addition, the programs can link people to resources related to their behavioral health, economic, and social service-related needs.

The Compendium provides an overview of each program’s funding source, its core components, and its implementation. Each program overview is accompanied by a checklist showing where the program’s navigators provide support across the legal system. Program overviews also have checklists outlining specific services each program offers related to a person’s behavioral health, economic, social, and legal needs.

The Compendium can serve as a tool for courts to develop their own court navigation program or to expand an existing program’s services. It can also assist court administrators, treatment and service providers, families, and community members with foundational knowledge to ensure that people in contact with the court system can have their needs met and navigate the court system successfully.

This Compendium is available for free download. 

Download the Compendium here: https://www.prainc.com/resources/compendium-court-navigation-programs/.

Rural Justice Collaborative Seeking Innovation Site Nominations

Applications Due: July 31st, 2023

RURAL JUSTICE COLLABORATIVE (RJC)
Rural communities face unique challenges that impact their ability to deliver fair and equitable justice. Despite these challenges, rural communities rely on their many strengths to address the needs of their residents. The RJC is designed to highlight the success found in rural justice systems. More information about the RJC can be found at www.ruraljusticecollaborative.org.  
 
RJC SEEKING INNOVATION SITE NOMINATIONS (APPLICATION)
The RJC is soliciting nominations for rural justice programs or initiatives that were developed in rural communities or adapted for rural communities that fall into the RJC’s seven areas of focus. To be considered, a program or initiative must:

  • Primarily serve justice-involved individuals or families engaged in the court system or be designed to increase access to legal representation.
  • Reflect innovation that is specific to a rural community.
  • Have been operational for a least one year.
  • Have a written description of the initiative, practice, or program.
  • Have an interest in serving as a mentor for other rural communities.

Priority consideration will be given to initiatives that are multi-disciplinary in nature (at least two agencies representing two different disciplines must be involved). Past Innovation Sites can be found here.

Innovation-Sites-Flyer

New IAALS Report on State Court Civil Filings: The Trends, Drivers of Change, and Importance of Data

IAALS, the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System at the University of Denver, announced today that it released its new The Past and Future of State Court Civil Filings report. This report provides important new insights into long-term filing trends and areas where courts may need resource shifts, like declining tort and small claims cases and increasing debt-collection cases. Building off a review of historical events, IAALS also developed a framework around the numerous factors that may influence filings, which can further guide analysis.

In 2022, the World Justice Index ranked the United States 115 out of 140 countries as to whether people can access and afford civil justice. With 66 percent of the population experiencing at least one legal issue over a four-year period, according to IAALS’ US Justice Needs study, there is significant work to do to improve access to justice. Court systems are among those sources of help that improve the chances of resolution. By focusing on state court filings over time, The Past and Future of State Court Civil Filings aims to provide additional insights into the specific role that courts have played in resolving cases, how that role might be changing, and the factors that are expected to continue to influence the filing of cases in our courts going forward.

“Historically, it’s been accepted that state court case filings climb over time in step with population growth, which has informed court planning for buildings, staff, judges, and other resources. More recently, however, courts saw a decline in filings, now followed by fluctuation stemming from the pandemic,” says IAALS CEO Brittany Kauffman. “Courts need a better understanding of what types of cases are being brought before them—and in what numbers—so that planning and policymaking can respond accordingly.”

To bring more clarity and guidance, this report presents a multifaceted study that explores civil case filings over a long timeframe—16 to 41 years—in four states: California, Minnesota, Ohio, and Texas. While it is critical to look at filings in the short term given the current recent challenges of the pandemic, this longer view of filings challenges us to think more deeply about changes over time, influencing factors, and takeaways for planning, policymaking, and reform efforts.

Read the full article here: New IAALS Report on State Court Civil Filings: The Trends, Drivers of Change, and Importance of Data | IAALS (du.edu)


New Webinar! Active Judging in Eviction Court

Eviction dockets are often fast-paced and high-volume, which can create challenges for the overwhelming numbers of litigants appearing without counsel and struggling to understand the legal process and their options. Judges from three different jurisdictions will describe how they have adopted principles of active judging to increase understanding, ensure due process, and expand access to resources for litigants in eviction court.

NCSC will be hosting this webinar on Wednesday, May 17th, 2023, at 3:00PM EST.

Register here: Webinar Registration – Zoom

JMI and NIC Announce Release of National Standards for Criminal Justice Coordinating Councils and Essential Elements Document

The Justice Management Institute (JMI), in collaboration with the National Institute of Corrections (NIC), is proud to introduce two groundbreaking publications designed to support jurisdictions with criminal justice coordinating councils (CJCCs). The first publication, entitled National Standards for Criminal Justice Coordinating Councils, offers a comprehensive framework for jurisdictions to create or improve a coordinating council. Its companion publication, CJCC Essential Elements, delineates the core characteristics that define high-performing CJCCs.

These publications aim to help jurisdictions optimally structure and operate their coordinating councils, positioning their local CJCCs to effectively address challenges within the criminal justice system and facilitate meaningful change. The CJCC Essential Elements includes two practical tools: the CJCC Elements Checklist and the CJCC Elements Assessment Tool. The checklist highlights crucial components for jurisdictions to consider when forming a CJCC, while the assessment tool enables them to evaluate the extent to which their councils align with national standards.  Complementing these new resources, JMI and NIC recently published the National Survey of Criminal Justice Coordinating Councils. Serving as the foundation for the national standards and essential elements, this publication offers additional information on coordinating councils that jurisdictions may find valuable.

Request for Applications: Enhancing State and Local Court Efforts to Further Address Fines, Fees, and Bail Practices

Application Deadline: June 30th, 2023

Background:

In 2016, the Conference of Chief Justices/Conference of State Court Administrators (CCJ/COSCA) established the National Task Force on Fines, Fees, and Bail Practices to:-develop recommendations and tools to promote the fair and efficient enforcement of the law;-ensure no person is denied access to the justice system based on race, culture, or lack of economic resources; and,-develop policies relating to Legal Financial Obligations that promote access, fairness, and transparency.

State Justice Institute, along with the U. S. Department of Justice/Bureau of Justice Assistance, provided grant funding to support the work of the Task Force. The Task Force produced the Principles on Fines, Fees, and Bail Practices, in addition to numerous additional resources in the Resource Center. Though system improvements have been made in some jurisdictions, the equitable enforcement of fines and fees, along with issues related to bail practices, remains. Through a special Request for Applications (RFA) process, SJI will award grants to further improve state court efforts to address fines, fees, and bail practices. SJI intends to award grants that will enhance state and local courts’ ability to:

-Review these practices to ensure processes are fair and access to justice is assured.

-Develop processes and procedures for indigency review.-Implement alternative forms of sanctions.

-Implement processes that replace money-based pretrial practices with those based on a presumption of pretrial release by the least restrictive means reasonable to assure appearance in court and promote public safety.

-Ensure pretrial release practices include connections to wrap-around services, such as legal and non-legal navigators, behavioral health, housing, and public health services.

-Promote transparency, governance, and structural reforms for better court oversight of legal financial obligations.

In addition to meeting all other application requirements, SJI will give priority consideration for funding to projects that focus on institutionalizing and/or replicating the Principles on Fines, Fees, and Bail Practices of the CCJ/COSCA National Task Force on Fines, Fees, and Bail Practices.

ELIGIBILITY

SJI is authorized by Congress to award grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts. For the purposes of this RFA, eligibility is limited to the following entities:

• State and local courts and their agencies (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(1)(A)).

• Other eligible grant recipients (42 U.S.C. 10705 (b)(2)(A)–(D)).SJI may also make awards to state or local agencies and institutions other than courts for services that cannot be adequately provided through nongovernmental arrangements (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(3)).

SJI is prohibited from awarding grants to federal, tribal, and international courts.

Funding Categories

Eligible applicants may apply for funding based on the categories below.

Category 1-Local Court: Eligible local court applicants may apply for up to $50,000 for a period of up to 12 months.

Category 2-State or Territory Supreme Court and/or the Administrative Office of the Courts: Eligible state (or territory) supreme courts and/or administrative court office applicants may apply for up to $100,000 for a period of up to 12 months. They may also submit applications on behalf of one or more local courts for up to $50,000 per locality for up to 12 months and must agree that all funds will go directly to the local court(s).Note: No grant funds or cash match may be used to pay the salary and related costs for a current or new employee of a court or other unit of government. Cash match for these grants will be waived; however, applicants are encouraged to include as much cash and in-kind match as possible towards their proposed project.

Full instructions are available here: Request-for-Applications-Fines-Fees-Bail_5.1.2023.pdf (sji.gov)

Sustainable Case Management and Evidence Adjudication Support Tools for Cases Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic and Future Government-declared Emergencies

With the certification of 64 resource judges and four court resource attorneys’ mid-summer 2022, the National Courts and Sciences Institute (NCSI) completed Phase 1 of a SJI-supported strategic initiative to discover ways to train judges and court personnel to cope with novel, changing, Covid Science in the Courtroom. Judges from 12 jurisdictions in coordinator-facilitated teams participated in 21 science seminars and numerous jurisdiction efforts to translate the evolving science into case management and evidence adjudication bench books.

Phase 2 began immediately following certification — with the objective to disseminate to State Courts across the country insights from the participating jurisdictions’ experiences. Ten jurisdictions created products that may assist courts with Covid’s continuing challenges and with preparation for the next public health emergency that predictably could disrupt criminal justice, civil litigation and adjudication of extraordinary remedies, such as the Pandemic generated in a wide variety of public and private institutions, health care, and work settings. Following a Dissemination Workshop review comprised of 42 judges and scientists in March 2023, the following products have been scheduled for delivery to State courts, and possibly to other dissemination destinations contemplated by SJI policies:

⚪ June 2023: A complete video archive of 21 online science seminars recorded from January 2021 through November 2022, each the result of a courts and science collaboration between NCSI and the Medical University of South Carolina, and 2 additional science centers. The seminar series emphasizes causation-in-fact and methods for judging the strength of evidence emanating from overlapping waves of applicable, contentious research. Expert witness qualification is considered throughout.

⚪ July 2023: Bench books and related adjudication assisting products created by this strategic initiative’s jurisdiction teams, including discussion of challenges jurisdictions confronted as their work proceeded.

⚪ August 2023: A report on Covid-related case filings found during this project, with suggestions for statistical features / assistance to promote justice access and fairness in the wake of pandemic created constitutional challenges, criminal case management controversies, civil litigation demands for compensation and equitable relief for irreparable harms arguably following from the imposition and retraction of governmental emergency orders.

⚪ October 2023: A handbook-styled report on the project’s evaluated strengths, weaknesses and recommended improvements, with take-aways for jurisdictions that may wish to consider replication of the procedures utilized in this SJI Strategic Initiative. The report will include a list of resource judges and attorneys available to explain this project and able to recommend general strategies to assist courts adjudicate cases featuring novel, rapidly-changing scientific evidence.

Pictured here are 42 judges and scientists in attendance March 2023 at the UNC Friday Conference Center for Continuing Education.

New Guidance on Privacy Protection for Domestic Violence Survivors Now Available Online

The National Center for State Courts (NCSC)’s new Protecting the Privacy of Domestic Violence Survivors course provides best practices to guide courts and providers on improving policies and procedures designed to protect survivors’ privacy and inform survivors of their rights. Available in English and Spanish, the online, self-paced course provides an overview of information that needs to be protected, discussion of a survivor-centered approach to service delivery, ways to safely communicate with survivors and institutions and defining roles and responsibilities for promoting confidentiality.

“Courts and service providers must carefully protect any information potentially useful for identifying or locating survivors,” said Felix Bajandas, an NCSC principal court management consultant and project director. “This includes, but is not limited to, a combination of characteristics such as zip code, gender and date of birth.”

Available in English and Spanish, the online, self-paced course provides an overview of information that needs to be protected, discussion of a survivor-centered approach to service delivery, ways to safely communicate with survivors and institutions and defining roles and responsibilities for promoting confidentiality. The estimated completion time is 10 minutes.

In addition to the course, the Violence Against Women (VAWA) and the Courts partnership has developed tools and resources to support survivors, including:

For more information, visit VAWA and the Courts.

National Study Finds Expedited Action Rules Can Ease Civil Case Backlogs

Enforcing court rules that require expedited actions can improve fairness, cost, and efficiency in the civil justice system while also relieving case backlogs exacerbated by the pandemic, according to new findings released by national experts today. In its report, “A Renewed Analysis of the Expedited Actions Rules in Texas Courts,” the Texas Office of Court Administration (OCA), National Center for State Courts and IAALS, the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System, found that rules adopted by the Supreme Court of Texas in 2012 have expedited the resolution of cases—both before and after the pandemic.

“The rules have had a positive impact, particularly in the area of discovery, but the full benefit of the rules has not been realized,” according to the Texas study. “While it has been over a decade since the rules were first implemented, there remains great opportunity for more consistent case management.”

Recommendations for maximizing those opportunities include training for judges and staff, increased use of technology to assist in civil case management and stronger enforcement of the rules.

In 2019, the Texas rules required:

  • Application to all civil cases where the amount in controversy is $100,000 or less;
  • Discovery to begin within 180 days of case filing;
  • Limits to discovery of no more than 6 hours of depositions, 15 written interrogatories, 15 requests for production and 15 requests for admission;
  • Mandatory trial dates within 90 days of completion of discovery; and
  • Restrictions on time, fees and deadlines for court-ordered alternative dispute resolution.

The study—which was conducted at the request of the Texas Office of Court Administration—notes that the expedited actions rules work particularly well with certain case types, especially contract cases, debt collection, and personal injury cases where only limited discovery is needed. In January 2021, the rules were amended and increased the amount-in-controversy from $100,000 to $250,000, which expanded the number of cases eligible for civil case processing under the rules.

“The rules provide predictability in these cases, which contributes to efficiency and decreased costs,” according to the report. “Judges and attorneys agreed that the rules are less effective for more complex cases, such as cases that require more experts or additional discovery beyond the limits in the rules.”

OCA Research Director Jeffrey Tsunekawa explained that “the Supreme Court of Texas implemented the expedited actions rules to address some of the many complications in resolving civil cases in Texas. As judges, court staff and attorneys continue to familiarize themselves with the rules, efficient use of the courts’ time will be realized as cases as finalized. These efficiencies are not only benefit courts and the attorneys who practice in these courtrooms, but also the litigants involved in the legal disputes.”

Read the full report online to learn more about the research, findings and recommendations.

This project is funded by the State Justice Institute.