Category: News

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)

The National Center on Substance Abuse and Child Welfare (NCSACW), the Children’s Bureau (CB) and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) have collaborated to create: Engaging Parents and Youth with Lived Experience: Strengthening Collaborative Policy and Practice Initiatives for Families with Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders. This resource provides key considerations for recruiting and engaging those with lived experience who were involved with child welfare associated with a substance use disorder or other mental health challenge. It also highlights considerations for engaging youth who have spent time in the foster care system.

Parents and youth can offer valuable insight, based on first-hand experience, that helps agencies implement strategies to improve outcomes for those served.

To access this new resource: Final_LiveExperience (hhs.gov)

The Oregon Supreme Court approved the Licensed Paralegal (LP) Program, a program that will license individuals who aren’t lawyers to provide limited legal services in family law and landlord/tenant issues, two areas with the greatest unmet need for legal assistance in the state. This makes Oregon the fifth state in the country to enlist a new tier of legal professionals in the effort to provide more access to legal help. The LP program will train paralegals to assist with a variety of legal issues, including divorce and separation, custody and parenting time, child and spousal support, and forced entry and wrongful detainer.

Some of their duties include:

• Meeting with potential clients to evaluate and determine needs and goals, as well as provide advice
• Filing documents and pleadings with the court 
• Preparing for, participating in, and representing a party in settlement discussions, including mediation 
• Attending court appearances and depositions with clients to provide support and assistance in procedural matters

Fortunately, states like Utah, Arizona, and Minnesota have also embraced new tiers of legal professionals. As IAALS Manager Michael Houlberg, “There’s a big push. Since 2020, there have been more than 10 states that have developed proposals.” Building on this momentum, IAALS’ newly launched Allied Legal Professionals project aims to help standardize these legal professional programs nationally, in order to expand the options for accessible and affordable legal help for the public. Programs like Oregon’s are exemplary of what we hope to eventually see spread even further across the country.

To read the full article, please visit: Oregon Joins Growing List of States Empowering Legal Professionals to Help More People | IAALS (du.edu)

In 2021, with support from State Justice Institute, the National Center for State Courts, in partnership with Rulo Strategies LLC, launched the Rural Justice Collaborative (RJC) to showcase the strengths of rural communities and highlight the cross-sector collaboration that is a hallmark of rural justice systems. These strengths include strong professional networks, deep ties to the communities they serve, resiliency, and ingenuity. The video below highlights the mission of the RJC: https://vimeo.com/735789228

Now in its fourth edition, Steps to Best Practices for Court Building Security delivers updated guidance on a diverse array of court security topics. Examples include recommendations for implementing remote hearings for in-custody defendants and recommendations for security technology. The new release highlights how courts can integrate technology into building infrastructure—including security control centers, alarms, access control technology, and cameras. The updated guidance also incorporates greater attention to how architectural design can create safe separation and circulation for all court participants. The 2022 update also reinforces fundamental security concepts for courts of all shapes and sizes.

To help courts achieve these fundamental practices, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) evaluates the effectiveness of court building security programs through responses to questions, such as:

• Is there a Court Security Committee in place? How does it function?
• Who is “in charge” of security in the courthouse? How do you know who’s in charge?
• What policies and procedures are in place? How are they developed?
• What training and exercise programs are in place? Who participates and how often are they conducted?
• Who gets screened for weapons?
• Who has access after hours?
• What is your role and responsibilities with respect to security?

To learn more about NCSC’s court security services, please visit the Court Security and Emergency Preparedness web page. 

Over the past decade, the Kansas Judicial Branch has used SJI grants to accomplish many of its objectives, including improving its workforce and commencing access to justice initiatives. In FY 2016, an SJI grant (SJI-16-T-149) enabled the Judicial Branch to contract with the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) for an independent assessment of job classifications and rates of compensation for employees and district magistrate judges. The results were astonishing:

• Every employee job classification was 4.6 percent to 22.2 percent below market;
• Nine job classes, covering more than one-quarter of all employees, had a starting salary below the Federal Poverty Guideline for a family of four;
• Two classifications, (Trial Court Clerk II and Court Services Officer I), comprising approximately half of the Judicial Branch’s positions, were 17.8 percent below market.
• Nearly one-third of employees were working more than one job to make ends meet, and many more were looking for additional work outside the Judicial Branch for the same reason.

The NCSC updated the study in 2018, and calculations were revised the following years using the Consumer Price Index to account for market adjustments.

The salary issues were due to chronic underfunding of the Kansas court system. During one stretch, Kansas judges did not receive a pay increase for nine years, and employee position pay was not increased for eight years, except for a one-time 2 percent cost of living increase which was offset by increased employee benefit contributions. The SJI-funded classification and compensation study illustrated how significantly below market employee positions were, and provided a solid, independent basis for the Judicial Branch’s efforts in working with the Legislature to provide adequate funding for salaries. The Legislature recognized the situation and began annually increasing employee salaries to bring them to market rate.

In 2019, the Legislature appropriated a 5 percent increase to the Judicial Branch’s employee pay pool, which enabled the Supreme Court to allocate raises in proportion to the compensation study.  The Legislature also appropriated 2.5 percent increases in 2018 and 2020.  During the 2021 legislative session, the Legislature appropriated funding over two years to raise Judicial Branch employees to market rate, in accordance with the compensation study. That same year, the Legislature provided judges with 5 percent salary increases for fiscal years 2022 and 2023. During the 2022 session, the Legislature appropriated a 5 percent across-the-board increase for employees and judges for a cost-of-living adjustment. The impact of these increases is staggering. For the first time in decades, employee positions are at or near market pay and judges salaries are moving toward competitiveness.

A weighted caseload study for judges and clerks was initially performed by the NCSC in 2011.  Because this caseload study provided valuable data, the Judicial Branch continued working with the NCSC on updates for judges, clerks, and administrative assistants. While this project was not supported with SJI funding, the Judiciary used the results as a basis for requesting and receiving additional positions in FY 2022.  This project, in addition to the compensation study, provided adequate compensation figures for the positions contained in the weighted caseload studies.

The Kansas Judicial Branch has relied on SJI grant-funded projects for more than its salary efforts. Other successful projects supported by SJI over the years include:

• A 2019 NCSC performance audit of services to self-represented litigant needs and services (SJI-19-T-031).  The audit included several site visits around the state, and detailed surveys of system stakeholders.  The results of the audit include a report providing a roadmap for expanding the reach and impact of self-help services in Kansas. The Kansas Office of Judicial Administration, in conjunction with the Kansas Supreme Court’s Access to Justice Committee, has already made considerable strides toward implementing many of the report’s recommendations.

• A 2012 review of court collections processes, which resulted in legislative changes including the transfer of court collections contracts oversight from the Kansas Attorney General’s Office to the Judicial Branch.