Category: News

This month, the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System (IAALS), and the Netherlands-based HiiL (The Hague Institute for Innovation of Law) completed the first nationwide survey of its size to measure how Americans across a broad range of socio-demographic groups experience and resolve their legal problems. The US Justice Needs survey, funded by Bohemian Foundation, reached 10,000 Americans, asking them about the legal problems they experienced in the last four years, what they did to solve those problems, and ultimately whether they felt they managed to reach a fair resolution. The full report with the survey results was just released on September 1st, 2021 with two live webinars presenting the data, reporting on the outcomes, and suggesting solutions.

“The findings of this survey,” says Dr. Martin Gramatikov, Measuring Justice Director at HiiL, “indicate what our research has historically shown—that oftentimes the more developed a nation is, the more justice needs exist in the population, and the greater the challenge of access to justice for all. While it is widely understood that there is an access to justice problem in the United States, the full extent of the justice crisis has been less clear, until now. With the results of this survey, and IAALS’ focus on evidence-based reform, we can begin to truly understand the scope of the problem, and work towards the changes needed to address this justice gap.”

The results of the survey provide a clear picture regarding the landscape of legal problems in the United States. Access to justice is a broad societal problem—66% of the population experienced at least one legal issue in the past four years, with just 49% of those problems having been completely resolved. There is no income group, gender, race or ethnic group, age group, or geographic area that does not face a substantial number of legal problems. On an annual basis, that translates to 55 million Americans who experience 260 million legal problems. A considerable proportion of these problems—120 million—are not resolved or are concluded in a manner which is perceived as unfair. This study shows that access to justice challenges are significant and pervasive.

“This is a crisis that demands increased advocacy and funding for policies and services that increase access to justice across broad segments of society,” says Brittany Kauffman, Senior Director at IAALS. “Previous research has been heavily focused on those with low income, or has been limited in geographical scope. While this study confirms that those with low income are a particularly vulnerable population, it also reflects that the access to justice crisis is not limited to this group. We surveyed people across all regions of the United States, including urban and rural areas. Understanding the breadth and reach of the problem helps us create evidence-based solutions and sound the alarm that we need to take urgent action.”

The data reveals what kinds of justice problems people face in the United States and how—and to what extent—those problems vary across socio-demographic characteristics. It provides insights into the most serious problems, as well as the extent to which those problems are resolved. The report also focuses on two problem types in particular—1) work and unemployment and 2) money-related problems—both of which are particularly serious and impactful for Americans.

“Money-related, work, and unemployment problems disproportionately impact vulnerable groups in society,” says Logan Cornett, Director of Research at IAALS, “and we anticipate these problems will become even more common and impactful as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The data also highlights the critical issues of inequity in the United States justice system. While access to justice is a broad societal problem, the effects of the justice crisis are not equally distributed. Looking at the justice crisis through the lens of different socio-demographic groups reflects different constellations of problems, different experiences, and different outcomes.”

The report examines the rates at which people encounter legal problems, the relative seriousness of those problems, and the rates at which they were able to completely resolve their legal problems. The following groups stand out as most vulnerable: lower income, women, multiracial and Black Americans, younger and middle-aged, and those living in urban and rural environments. To read more, please visit: https://iaals.du.edu/

Part I: Understanding Homelessness and Opioid Use Disorder, Supporting Recovery, and Best Practices in Whole-Person Care

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a complex brain disease that may be present alongside or contribute to additional mental and physical health conditions, as well as social, legal, and other challenges. Impacted individuals may be unable to access or obtain housing, health and/or behavioral health care, and recovery support services. 

This new resource, developed by the Homeless and Housing Resource Center with support from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), outlines a whole-person care approach to supporting and assisting people experiencing homelessness and OUD in their recovery journey. Key topics include: an overview of homelessness and OUD, person-centered and trauma-informed care, reducing stigma, recovery supports, and harm reduction. 

Download the Toolkit

As courts continue to adapt in response to the pandemic, some court leaders are taking the extra step to ask their most impacted users what they think: court staff and court users. Giving voice is an evidence-based component of improving trust and confidence in the courts, not to mention a way to get insights that will improve cooperation and implementation. Unfortunately, most courts have limited mechanisms to get regular input from court users beyond the occasional paper or web-based survey that takes weeks to amass feedback and even longer to analyze the results.

With support from SJI, LaGratta Consulting, partners, and 12 pilot courts nationally have started the Court Voices Project. Pilot courts—rural and urban, limited and general jurisdiction—are collecting real-time, brief feedback from their staff and court users about pandemic responses. What percentage of court users prefer virtual hearings and why? Have court users found new communication channels like phone banks and online chat features to be more convenient and accessible? What ideas do line staff have for improving upon these practices? Pilot courts will collect feedback through November 2021, after which findings and lessons will be captured in a national toolkit and webinar series. In the meantime, court professionals are invited to join the national conversation by answering this live poll question about your court’s recent user feedback efforts, then bookmark the project webpage for ongoing updates. You can also learn more about the project at the Court Technology Conference on September 28-29, 2021; register here to attend in-person or online.

Judges who received opioid use disorder (OUD) training are more likely to view OUD as a chronic disease and a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act, according to a recently released report.

The training also led more judges to conclude that funding should be increased for those who benefit from court-ordered OUD services.

The NCSC-directed Appalachian/Midwest Regional Judicial Opioid Initiative (RJOI) administered the training through a learning model called the Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes, or Project ECHO.

Judge Geno Salomone of the Michigan 23^rd District Court praised the training, the first time ECHO was used by the courts. “I can speak for all of the panel members in Michigan…We loved using the ECHO model. Its brief-time limits are strictly adhered to, but informative. It allows a limited group of attendees access to a number of experts on the topic at hand, and it utilizes real cases. Equally as important, because of the strict scheduling, it avoids Zoom fatigue.”

More than 75 judges in Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee and West Virginia completed a survey before the opioid training, and 54 did so afterward.

The surveys, conducted by Wayne State University’s Center for Behavioral Health and Justice, show:

• Ninety-two percent of the judges strongly agreed, post-training, that recovery is possible after a substance abuse relapse, compared with 75 percent pre-training.
• Eighty-five percent strongly agreed that addressing OUD should be a goal of the justice system, compared with 76 percent before the training.
• Seventy-five percent strongly agreed after training that funding should be increased for OUD services, compared with 67 percent before the training.
• Sixty-six percent strongly agreed post-training that judges should rely on experts to determine how to use medicine to treat those who abuse opioids, compared with 56 percent pre-training.
• Sixty-four percent of judges strongly agreed, post-training, that OUD is a disability under the American with Disabilities Act, compared with 21 percent before training.
• Seventy percent strongly agreed that OUD is a chronic disease after training, compared with 55 percent pre-training.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, state courts accelerated efforts to implement online dispute resolution (ODR) programs that offer litigants a software platform in which to resolve legal problems, including negotiating settlements or exchanging information in preparation for in-court hearings.  ODR programs are intended to increase access to justice, especially for self-represented litigants, through increased convenience, case processing efficiency, and awareness of litigant options, while decreasing costs.  With SJI support, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) has issued a new report describing a framework for program evaluation, as well as ongoing performance measures for ODR programs.  The framework employs a “balanced scorecard” approach to ensure that evaluation and performance measures take into account perspectives of important stakeholders, including courts, litigants, access-to-justice advocates, and funders of ODR programs.  All of the measures address the same underlying primary question: to what extent does the ODR program improve access to justice?  The report is available here.  The NCSC project team is also available to provide technical assistance to courts implementing new ODR programs.

Given the rapid advancement of technology solutions such as ODR, litigant portals, and artificial intelligence, SJI has committed to not only provide seed funding for these efforts, but also play a critical leadership role.  SJI is promoting the development and implementation of these technologies, and working with key stakeholders both nationally and internationally to adapt proven technology platforms in the state courts.  These developments will fundamentally change the way individuals interact with the courts, in addition to further streamlining court operations.

The Robert F. Kennedy National Resource Center for Juvenile Justice, with SJI support, is hosting the Transformation of Youth Justice Symposium (September 8-9, 2021) and supplemental half-day Training Institutes (September 10, 2021). The two-day symposium is designed for multi-disciplinary professionals and youth-serving stakeholders seeking to learn, network, and become part of the nationwide movement to effectively transform youth justice and improve outcomes for children and families.

The Symposium will feature five plenaries and 30 workshops focused on current and significant cross-cutting issues impacting the youth-serving field. Participants seeking to expand their knowledge may also register to attend a supplemental half-day Training Institute session following the Symposium. Focused on six critical topics, these deep-dive sessions will highlight opportunities and methods to significantly enhance current practice to improve system performance and ensure the highest likelihood of achieving positive outcomes for youth and families. The Symposium and Training Institutes will emphasize the importance of peer-to-peer learning and collaboration to identify common challenges and solutions that lead to meaningful, sustainable, and measurable policy and practice change. To learn more, please visit: www.rfknrcjj.org/events.

The National Center for State Courts (NCSC) has released a new resource, the Courts Continuity Assessment Tool (C-CAT), to help courts determine where the gaps may lie in their current continuity programming.

Available as an interactive online self-assessment survey (as of June 2021), or for download as an Excel spreadsheet, the C-CAT builds on prior NCSC work in this area funded by SJI.  This work includes the NCSC Courts Continuity of Operations (COOP) Planning Guide and Template and the NCSC Emergency Management Lessons Learned Focus Group Report. The C-CAT incorporates advice from these new resources, and provides an interactive platform for assessing nine key areas of court continuity of operations:

1. Address Leadership Issues and Dedicate Staff
2. Build and Strengthen Collaborative Relationships
3. Identify Essential Functions
4. Develop Redundant Communications
5. Support the Needs of the Workforce
6. Address Courthouse Infrastructure Needs and Alternate Facilities
7. Address Information Technology (IT) Resilience
8. Identify Reconstitution and Cost Recovery Processes
9. Train and Exercise the Program 

Many of the questions included in the C-CAT are based on those found in the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Continuity Assessment Tool (CAT), and the interactive guidance is consistent with available FEMA Continuity Planning Resources for Non-Federal Entities. Following FEMA recommendations, courts should complete an assessment of their continuity programs on a regular basis (e.g., annually).

The NCSC provides other resources related to continuity of operations and court security, including an Updated Personal Security Tips document – revised since 2009, that covers several areas related to the personal safety of judges and court staff in various settings.

The National Center for State Courts (NCSC) Family-Centered Justice is a court-wide approach committed to focusing on the family unit though meaningful, strength-based and trauma-responsive engagement, intentional case coordination, and multidisciplinary support.  Similar to family-centered practice in child welfare, Family-Centered Justice promotes the value of family voice and family well-being.

The Family-Centered Justice program aims to transform the delivery of justice to children and families in courts throughout the United States by infusing effective family drug court principles into the broader family and dependency court system. The objective is to increase the capacity of state courts to intervene effectively with parents with substance use and/or co-occurring mental health disorders who are involved with the court as a result of child abuse and neglect issues. This program has the potential to impact of the lives of many children and families across the United States by supporting out-of-the-box solutions to address the shortcomings of traditional court processes. Through multi-disciplinary, collaborative work, participating jurisdictions will implement strategies believed to lead to improved outcomes for families impacted by parental substance use and child welfare involvement. The Family-Centered Justice funding opportunity is supported by SJI.

Family-Centered Justice Application Due Date: July 9th, 2021 at 5PM ET

Up to six sites will be selected to receive up to $50,000 in funding for a twelve-month project that includes a planning period. Applicants must demonstrate, at a minimum, buy-in from the courts, child welfare, and treatment. Selected grantees are expected to have a collaborative infrastructure in place that is capable of building the locality’s capacity to meet a broad range of needs for families involved with substance use disorder treatment, child welfare systems, court, and other service organizations. Grantees are expected to implement targeted approaches designed to increase well-being, improve permanency outcomes, and enhance the safety of children and families experiencing substance use disorders.

Access the Family-Centered Application
Access the full Family-Centered Solicitation and Application

Difficult Conversations Webinar Series Recording

The National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ), with support from SJI, hosted a series of five webinars titled Opioids and the Courts- Difficult Conversations. NCJFCJ and expert faculty explored challenges associated with referring children and families to services in dependency and delinquency cases. The faculty and webinar attendees had the opportunity to discuss how courts and services providers can work together to meet the needs of families and improve their lives. Recordings of this webinar series and links to related resources can be found on the NCJFCJ website.

In addition to the webinar series, the NCJFCJ provided training and technical assistance to juvenile and family courts across the country to address the effects of opioid use disorders (OUDs) and other substance use disorders (SUDs) on children and families.  

The project involved recruiting judicially-led court sites to engage in Targeted Resource Mapping to document the continuum of services available for children and families affected by OUDs and other SUDs. The project had two primary, interrelated goals for the sites to 1) gain knowledge of existing services on a local level; and 2) identify and address service gaps in an effort to ensure a healthy and effective continuum of services.

As a result of that work, the NCJFCJ developed the Targeted Resource Mapping Toolkit (Mapping Toolkit). The Mapping Toolkit includes templates to develop a Targeted Resource Map (resource map), Targeted Resource Directory (resource directory), and Targeted Resource Mapping Action Plan (action plan).

The Mapping Toolkit is intended to encourage and provide guidance to courts that are seeking to better understand existing resources, identify and address service gaps, and build relationships with providers in their community. 

Click here to learn more about the Lessons Learned in Targeted Resource Mapping.

Funds Available for Mental Health Courts at the Bureau of Justice Assistance

The Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) is now accepting applications for its Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Program. This year, funding is available through this program to jurisdictions creating or expanding a mental health court.

The grant program seeks to provide support to justice system agencies partnering with mental health agencies to reduce crime and recidivism
associated with people with mental illnesses and co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders. 
Grants are awarded over a period of 36 months beginning October 1, 2021 and are valued at up to $550,000 per award.

Applicants must meet two deadlines as part of a new two-step application process for all Department of Justice grants: 

•    June 22, 2021: The SF-242 and SF-LLL must be submitted to Grants.gov
•    July 6, 2021: The full application must be submitted to JustGrants

New this year, grant applicants must comply with Executive Order 13929 Safe Policing for Safe Communities. See the grant solicitation for details on complying with the order.

Download the Solicitation

Additional Resources for Applicants

Assistance is available on navigating the Department of Justice’s new JustGrants system, including FAQs, an application submission checklist, and recordings of past virtual Q&A sessions. You can access the full library of training resources here.

For technical assistance with submitting the SF-424 and SF- LLL in Grants.gov, contact the Grants.gov Customer Support Hotline at 800-518-4726 or support@grants.gov. 

For technical assistance with submitting the full application in DOJ’s Justice Grants System (JustGrants), contact the JustGrants Service Desk at 833-872-5175 or JustGrants.Support@usdoj.gov.