Category: News

To help courts plan for future space requirements, NCSC has launched a Modern Courthouse Self-Assessment Tool that examines existing building space and provides guidance on new courthouse space planning and design trends. Responses collected in the interactive questionnaire offer insights for potential remodels and new construction by assessing current courthouse design and current and future service requirements. At the end of the assessment, courts receive a summary report that can assist with defining, planning and reforming space needs to support and enhance updated court operations.

“Future court facilities should continue to be planned with robust integrated technologies without losing sight of the needs of self-represented litigants or those with limited access to technology,” said David Sayles, an NCSC senior court management consultant. “The tool provides some insights into planning considerations for these spaces and connects the survey to other resources within the national center on various topics.”

The self-assessment tool also offers a courtroom construction cost calculator. According to Sayles, the calculator offers a high-level, “rough, order of magnitude” estimate that compares construction costs of hybrid courtrooms and traditional, fully in-person courtrooms. 

For courts already exploring future space needs and design, NCSC has extended the deadline to enter the Court Space reDesign Challenge. Selected projects will be showcased nationally or have the opportunity to receive no-cost technical assistance, with a representative eligible to participate in the National Judicial Court Space Innovation Workshop in late Spring/early Summer 2023. The deadline to submit entries is Friday, February 17th, 2023.

Application Deadline: March 15th, 2023

According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Administration on Children, Youth and Families, Children’s Bureau, on average over 400,000 abused and neglected children live in foster care in the U.S. and foster care systems serve over 600,000 children and youth every year.[1]  According to the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, in 2020, 34% of child maltreatment victims were under age 3, more than half were female (51%), 44% were white, and the majority (61%) experienced neglect, and American Indian/Alaskan Natives, Black, multiple race, Pacific Islander, and Hispanic youth were more likely to be victimized than white youth.[2]  State courts play a pivotal role in the lives of these children and families.  Every day judges are faced with difficult decisions affecting children and youth with foster care system involvement, continually challenged to find the right solutions in each of their cases. 

Through a special Request for Applications (RFA) process, SJI will award grants to further improve state court efforts in addressing child abuse and neglect. SJI intends to award grants that will enhance state and local court ability to handle these challenging cases, and better serve youth and their families. In addition to meeting all other application requirements, SJI will give priority consideration for funding to projects that focus on institutionalizing, replicating, and/or building on national best practices and procedures in child abuse and neglect cases. Applications should address one or more of the key principles detailed below: 

• Keeping families together
• Ensuring access to justice
• Cultivating cultural responsiveness
• Engaging families through alternative dispute resolution techniques
• Ensuring child safety, permanency, and well-being
• Ensuring adequate and appropriate family time
• Providing judicial oversight
• Ensuring competent and adequately compensated representation
• Advancing the development of adequate resources

Project proposals must not duplicate existing activities supported by other sources, such as the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Children’s Bureau’s Court Improvement Program.

---

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).

Category 3-Non-profit, For-profit Organizations and Institutions of Higher Education: Eligible non-profit, for-profit organizations, or institutions of higher education applicants may apply for up to $150,000 for a period of up to 18 months.  

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.

Applications, along with all required forms and attachments, are due to SJI the SJI Grant Management System (GMS) by March 15, 2023, to be eligible for consideration for the first round of review. Applications received after March 15, 2023, will be reviewed, and if approved, awarded on a rolling basis in FY2023.  It is anticipated that awards will be made beginning May 1, 2023.

Full instructions are available here.

---

[1] Children’s Bureau Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) Report #9.Online. Available:  https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/cb/afcarsreport28.pdf.  Released on November 1, 2022.

[2] OJJDP Statistical Briefing Book. Online. Available: https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/victims/qa02107.asp?qaDate=2020. Released on April 18, 2022

To help courts establish themselves as a trusted source for information, the Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA) has published new guidance for developing timely, accurate and understandable communication. In “Courting Public Trust and Confidence: Effective Communication in the Digital Age,” COSCA examines three types of “bad information”—disinformation, malinformation, and misinformation—and provides guidance on how to respond without compromising the integrity of the court.

“Now, more than ever, it is critical for courts to take a proactive approach to communication,” said Karl R. Hade, COSCA president and Executive Secretary of the Supreme Court of Virginia. “It is up to us as judicial leaders to position the court as the trusted source of information.”

Instead, COSCA says, courts should look to these guidelines for effective communication with today’s audiences:

• Use summaries directed to a general audience.
• Provide transparency in more cases but particularly in high-profile or high-stakes cases.
• Respond promptly to bad information.
• Use a restrained response to undue criticism of the court system or of a specific judicial officer.
• Increase social media presence.
• Continue to expand civics education activities.

Additionally, COSCA provides several recommendations for combating bad information:  

• Consider judicial code of conduct amendments that would allow judicial officers to directly respond to bad information and targeted campaigns based on bad information.
• Provide best practices training for court staff and judges on how to respond to bad information and defuse heated media coverage.
• Develop a communications plan and trained team to help courts monitor and respond to bad information and publicize positive information in a variety of formats.
• Consider establishing a media committee with media organizations, journalists, attorneys, and representatives of the court.
• Offer plain language summaries of appellate opinions and high-interest trial court cases.
• Provide greater transparency in all cases, but particularly for high-profile cases.

For more information on this paper and others, visit the COSCA website.

The Office of Justice Programs’ Bureau of Justice Assistance announced the 67 fellows selected to participate in the inaugural class of the Reaching Rural: Advancing Collaborative Solutions initiative. Co-sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the State Justice Institute, the initiative will support the fellows’ work to address the overdose crisis that has disproportionately affected rural communities across America.

The United States is experiencing an overdose epidemic. More than 107,000 Americans died from an overdose in 2021, an increase of almost 15% from 2020. While no corner of the country has gone untouched, the crisis has hit rural America particularly hard.

“Illicit substances—particularly powerful synthetic opioids like fentanyl—continue to claim lives at alarming rates. The impact of the opioid crisis has been particularly intense in smaller, more isolated communities where treatment options tend to be scarce,” said BJA Director Karhlton F. Moore. “Through the Reaching Rural Initiative, we are working to support rural public safety and public health practitioners to build deeper partnerships and develop collaborative, innovative solutions to address the needs and challenges in their communities.”

Throughout the year-long initiative, the fellows will meet monthly, virtually and in-person, to examine their local and regional challenges and identify opportunities to serve justice-involved individuals with substance use or co-occurring disorders more effectively. The fellows were selected through a competitive application process and will participate in the Reaching Rural Initiative through one of two tracks, either as part of a cross-sector team from their community or as individuals. The Initiative is part of an ongoing interagency partnership to strengthen public safety and public health collaboration under BJA’s Comprehensive Opioid, Stimulant, and Substance Abuse Program.

The selected fellows reflect a diverse network of professionals representing 80 rural communities in 14 states. The fellows include elected county leaders, county and tribal judges, law enforcement officers, prosecutors, public defenders, public health and behavioral health practitioners, emergency management professionals, reentry coordinators and individuals working in community nonprofits in the following counties:

• Navajo County, Ariz.
• Antelope Valley, Calif.
• County of Del Norte, Calif.
• Solano County, Calif.
• White County, Ind.
• Vigo County, Ind.
• Hopkins County, Ky.
• Marshall County, Ky.
• Chippewa County, plus portions of three bordering counties: Lac qui Parle, Swift and Yellow Medicine, Minn.
• Polk County, Minn.
• Roseau County, Minn.
• Louis County, Minn.
• Todd County, Minn.
• Wright County, Minn.
• Rankin County, Miss.
• Jefferson County, Neb.
• Oneida County, N.Y.
• Harnett County, N.C.
• Cambria County, Pa.
• Cocke County, Tenn.
• 41 counties in the Panhandle and South Plains of West Texas, Texas.
• Prince George and Surry Counties, Va.
• Stevens County, Wash.
• Okanogan County, Wash.
• Fayette and Mason County, W.Va.
• Mercer, McDowell, Wyoming, Summers, Monroe, Raleigh, Fayette, Nicholas, Webster, Pocahontas and Greenbrier Counties, W.Va.

For more information on the Reaching Rural Initiative, please visit: https://rural.cossapresources.org/reachingrural.

The FY 2023 1st Quarter SJI Board meeting was held on December 5, 2022, at the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico. The Board was joined by Maite Oronoz Rodríguez, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico.

The SJI Board of Directors met on December 5, 2022 to make decisions on quarterly grant applications, and approved a total of 12 new grants.

Three (3) Strategic Initiatives Grants were awarded: 1) the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges to support court self-assessment tools, demonstration sites, and broad dissemination for the Enhanced Juvenile Justice Guidelines; 2) Rulo Strategies, National Association of Counties (NACo), and Praxis Consulting for the Courts and County Collaboration: Phase II; and 3) the National Courts and Sciences Institute to prepare and certify state court judges as resources on criminal, civil, and equitable cases involving data science and artificial intelligence.

Two (2) Project Grants were awarded: 1) The National Association for Court Management (NACM) to: develop and deliver nationally significant educational programs, related material, and curriculum with continued focus on SJI Priority Investment Areas and the NACM Core®; and continue distant learning opportunities to broaden the scope and delivery of educational opportunities available in a convenient and flexible method accessed by judges, court managers, administrators, and other judicial branch employees to include many of NACM’s justice partners; and 2) the Kentucky Administrative Office of the Courts to host a mental health summit that will provide an opportunity to discuss, develop, and implement behavioral health interventions for courts and communities.

Six (6) Technical Assistance Grants were awarded: 1) the Supreme Court of Illinois to develop court-driven solutions to improve competency to stand trial practices; 2) the 21^st Judicial Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Missouri to create a strategic plan that will incorporate reforms made during the COVID-19 pandemic; 3) the Supreme Court of Wyoming to implement the Judicial Council’s strategic/operational plan; 4) the 19^th Judicial District of Louisiana to improve caseflow management practices for criminal and civil cases; 5) the Delaware Administrative Office of the Courts to develop a strategic campaign for the judicial branch; and 6) Cowlitz County, Washington, Superior Court for a caseflow and COVID backlog project.

One (1) Curriculum Adaptation and Training Grant was awarded to the District of Columbia courts.

IAALS, the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System at the University of Denver, just announced that it released its new Allied Legal Professionals landscape report, along with an accompanying online Knowledge Center. With generous support from the Sturm Family Foundation, this project seeks to help standardize a new tier of legal professionals nationally, with the goal of increasing the options for accessible and affordable legal help for the public.  

“Today, the majority of Americans are faced with a very serious access to justice problem—not only low-income populations, as many people believe. And the pandemic has only made matters worse in recent years,” says Jim Sandman, chair of IAALS’ board of advisors and President Emeritus of the Legal Services Corporation. “For example, studies show that around 40–60% of the middle class have legal needs that remain unmet. Simply put: people want legal help, and they are not getting the help they need.” 

The access to justice problem reflects the way in which current regulations constrict new pathways to accessible legal services and leave consumers with few alternatives. However, one solution that has been spreading quickly across the country is in the form of allied legal professionals—licensed and regulated professionals who are not lawyers, but have been authorized to represent clients in limited matters.

“IAALS has been closely watching those states who have altered their unauthorized practice of law rules to allow this new tier of legal services providers, creating avenues to legal help for many who cannot afford an attorney,” says IAALS Manager Michael Houlberg. “The few programs that have been created—and those still in the planning stage—have all been set up with a slightly different framework to fit their jurisdictions’ needs. We created the Allied Legal Professionals project specifically with the goal to map out what these different programs look like, understand the benefits and challenges that exist within each one, and then create recommendations for a national approach with the assistance of subject-matter experts based on data and best practices.”

The Allied Legal Professionals landscape report offers a preliminary compilation of existing programs, presented across a framework that allows for comparison between and among the various state and international efforts. The accompanying online Knowledge Center is designed to be an up-to-date resource with current state information for those considering how these programs can be achieved and improved upon.

Additionally, IAALS recently hosted a convening where experts and national partners came together to develop recommendations and best practices for states developing allied legal professional programs. 

For more information, please visit: Homepage | IAALS (du.edu)

Funded by State Justice Insititute, the Judicial Task Force releases the final report from the National Judicial Task Force to Examine State Courts’ Response to Mental Illness. Continued collaboration between the courts, government agencies, mental health providers and others is critical to affect the systemic change needed to improve how courts respond to individuals with serious mental illness. That was the message echoed during Tuesday’s release of the final report from the National Judicial Task Force to Examine State Courts’ Response to Mental Illness. The virtual event drew about 900 participants, including court officials, behavioral health professionals, and members of the news media.

“We see how the justice system can become a never-ending highway of pain as it maneuvers people on a needless journey, with no off ramp, often to ineffective support and treatment,” said task force member Circuit Judge Nan Waller of Multnomah County, Oregon. “However, having had the privilege to serve on the task force has given me great optimism. The task force operated in a manner consistent with its recommendations, bringing together stakeholders from the behavioral health and justice systems, along with the important voices of those with lived experience, and then providing expert staff to help turn our thoughts and ideas into tools, bench cards, policy briefs, and research.”

Judge Waller joined task force co-chairs Chief Justice Paul L. Reiber of Vermont and New York Chief Administrative Judge Lawrence K. Marks to offer insights on ways the task force recommendations can positively impact individuals with severe mental illness during Tuesday’s virtual launch and policy discussion.

Two national mental health experts – Miriam E. Delphin-Rittmon, Ph.D., the U.S. Health and Human Services Assistant Secretary for Mental Health and Substance Use and leader of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) and Dr. Sarah Y. Vinson, Interim Chair of the Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences at Morehouse School of Medicine – elaborated on ways the behavioral health community can partner with the courts to improve outcomes for individuals with serious mental illness.

“We know that our country is facing a mental health crisis,” Dr. Delphin-Rittmon said. “… I am confident that these recommendations and examples of successful programs have the potential to make really meaningful impacts in communities across the country.”

Among the task force recommendations, state courts should:

• Convene justice and behavioral health system partners to identify opportunities to collaboratively improve responses to individuals with behavioral health disorders.
• Promote processes to identify and divert individuals with behavioral health disorders at every stage of system involvement towards treatment and away from further penetration into the criminal justice system.
• Examine current case management and calendaring practices and implement strategies to more quickly and effectively address issues presented in cases involving individuals with behavioral health needs.

Watch the recording of the webinar and download a copy of the final report and recommendations.

During the pandemic, courts stepped out of their normal routine and comfort zones to find new ways of doing business. These new procedures benefitted both courts and court customers. The National Center for State Courts (NCSC)’s new Pandemic Era Procedural Improvements toolkit outlines tips and examples that your court can adopt to enhance operations in the post-pandemic era.

“The pandemic was a major disruptor. I think about other major disruptors that changed society—cars, TV, mobile phones. We didn’t stop at the Benz Patent Motor Car, black and white television, or car phones,” said Lonni Summers, an NCSC senior court management consultant. “We continued to innovate and evolve to make things better. Courts should do the same with pandemic-era procedural improvements.”

This toolkit contains a high-level summary of procedural improvements that courts implemented between 2020 and 2022 that courts should adopt permanently. Resources include examples, best practice recommendations, and references to publications and materials that provide information, models, and guidance for jurisdictions that want to adopt these improvements.

For more information, please read Pandemic-Improvements-10.31.2022.pdf (ncsc.org)

IAALS, the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System at the University of Denver, released Unbundled Legal Services in the New Normal—a new report highlighting key takeaways from the national 2021 conference—in partnership with The Chicago Bar Foundation, the ABA Standing Committee on the Delivery of Legal Services, and the Self-Represented Litigation Network. Accompanying the release is the launch of an unbundling resource center on IAALS’ website, which will help various stakeholders like consumers, lawyers, and courts get how-to information on promoting and utilizing unbundled legal services. 

Unbundled legal services, or limited-scope representation, is one way that people who are unable to afford a lawyer—and would end up representing themselves in court—can still receive legal assistance in their case. While typically lawyers handle all aspects of a case from beginning to end, a lawyer providing unbundled legal services works on and charges for only certain legal tasks within the broader case, often based on what their clients can afford and need help with most. Unbundled legal services are becoming a more popular and less expensive way to help people get legal assistance, which usually leads to better legal outcomes than forgoing legal assistance altogether.

The three-day event highlighted that while there is increased use of technology and scalable unbundled services in this “new normal”—which makes starting an unbundled practice easier—important startup and ethical considerations remain for practitioners in this space, in addition to needed increased support by courts. The conference created a forum where an array of stakeholders shared their perspectives, gained better insights into collaborative roles, and learned about best practices to advocate for this service delivery model.

To read the full report, visit: IAALS Launches New Report and Online Resource Center for Unbundled Legal Services, Offering New Tools that Lead to Access to Justice | IAALS (du.edu)