On May 24, 2012, the President nominated Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman from New York as new member to the SJI Board of Directors. He currently serves as Chief Judge of the State of New York and Chief Judge of the New York Court of Appeals, a position he has held since 2009. Chief Judge Lippman has spent his entire legal career in the New York State court system, serving for 40 years in a variety of roles. He was Presiding Justice of the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court, First Department from 2007 to 2009; an Associate Justice of the Appellate Term for the Ninth and Tenth Judicial Districts from 2006 to 2007; a Justice of the Supreme Court, Ninth Judicial District from 2006 to 2009; and Chief Administrative Judge of all New York State Courts from 1996 to 2007. Chief Judge Lippman is a member of the Board of Directors of the Conference of Chief Justices, former President of the Conference of State Court Administrators, and former Vice Chair of the Board of the National Center for State Courts. He is the recipient of numerous awards and honors, including the William H. Rehnquist Award for Judicial Excellence, which was awarded to him in 2008. He holds a B.A. from New York University in Government and International Relations, and a J.D. from the New York University School of Law.

SJI received 15 grant applications requesting a total of $756,684 for the 3rd quarter of FY 2012. The Board will meet on June 18, 2012 to award new grants for the 3rd quarter. The results of this Board meeting will be available the following week. The final grant deadline for FY 2012 (4th quarter) is: August, 1, 2012. SJI staff are available to help interpret the Grant Guideline, and offer assistance on other matters related to grant applications. All future applicants are reminded that they are required to describe how their proposed project addresses one or more of SJI’s new Priority Investment Areas. In addition, applicants must delineate specific performance outcomes and define how success will be measured. Several applications submitted this quarter were developed from SJI’s previous Strategic Initiatives Grants (SIG) program solicitation on Self-Represented Litigation and the state courts. Increases in self-represented litigants continue to challenge state courts, as they seek innovative methods to address the issue despite limited resources. In addition to the other Priority Investment Areas, SJI remains committed to assisting the state courts in assuring access to justice for these litigants.

SJI awarded the New Mexico Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) a grant (SJI-11-E-153) in June 2011 after the AOC experienced inconsistencies with state and county probation compliance programs. In New Mexico, probation duties are the constitutional responsibility of the executive branch, housed within the New Mexico Corrections Department (NMCD). Because of limited resources, the probation department observes a policy that prioritizes surveillance efforts on felony offenders. Per the State’s statute, county officers and the programs they administer must follow the misdemeanor guidelines of the AOC.

The New Mexico Judiciary did not have an internal training program for officers, and instead had often depended on applicants’ prior training in law enforcement or as NMCD probation officers as qualifying background for their positions. The AOC and county affiliates did team up to host two training sessions. However, the State’s budget reductions resulted in a 13 percent cut to the Judiciary. Courts no longer had funding available for training and travel, since that funding was reallocated to cover basic operational costs. The New Mexico Judiciary recognized the need to establish a training regimen for its own court probation/surveillance officers. Given the Judiciary’s funding and staff issues, the AOC determined the most efficient method to train officers was to provide the classroom portion of the training via web-enabled online modules. Some components of the training, such as CPR/First Aid and self-defense are still required to be in a classroom setting; however, most of this type of training is available through various agencies throughout the state. The Judiciary did not want to delay cursory training for the officers because they would be performing their duties without statutory knowledge or awareness of best practices. This could lead to significant safety issues for the officers.

The Judiciary worked with a contractor to turn the existing training footage into web-based learning modules through the use of a multimedia software program called QuidPro®. QuidPro® e-Learning Software is a revolutionary product that allows organizations to develop innovative, interactive, educational programs. The completed programs are considered cross platforms and can either be burned to CD or DVD, posted on the internet, or used with a local network. The court officer basic training includes the following modules: 1) Ethics; 2) Report Writing Basics and Documentation; 3) Office Safety; 4) Introduction to Controlled Substances and Drug Testing; 5) Field Safety; 6) Law Block; and 7) Stress Management.

The New Mexico Judiciary reports there will be approximately $943 in cost savings per officer trained using the online training. The savings is realized not only in staff time, but in other expenses associated with costly travel.

The module is available to the public and can be viewed at http://www.nmcobt.com.

The Mahoning County Bar Association (MCBA), on behalf of its four local courts, received a grant in FY 2010 (SJI-10-T-090) from SJI to contract with the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) on a study of potential court consolidation for all courts in the county. This included a municipal (limited jurisdiction) court system based in Youngstown, Ohio. Prior to the project, the Ohio Supreme Court and State Court Administrator’s Office had been encouraging courts and counties to move towards greater efficiencies, and identified court consolidation as one of the methods of achieving those goals. With the support of the Judiciary and AOC, as well as the Mahoning County Board of Commissioners, the MCBA began coordinating with the NCSC to submit an application to SJI for further support and funding of the analysis.

With one of the more robust municipal courts systems in the country, Ohio’s courts of limited jurisdiction have responsibilities that go beyond standard municipal court case proceedings. Mahoning County has a strong bar association who, along with other stakeholders, observed the difficulties of the current court system. Of particular interest to the MCBA, County Commissioners, and courts, were the following considerations: 1) constitutional and statutory framework for limited jurisdiction courts in Ohio; 2) statutes explicitly dealing with limited jurisdiction courts in Mahoning County; 3) potential governance and management structure required to consolidate and operate the courts post-consolidation; and 4) consolidated court system facilities.

The project recently concluded, and a final report was released detailing the advantages and disadvantages of consolidating the limited jurisdiction courts in Mahoning County below the Court of Common Pleas, including four County-area courts, the Youngstown Municipal Court, two additional municipal courts, and three mayor courts. Ultimately, the report concludes that there are a number of benefits to court consolidation in Mahoning County and provides a 3-phase plan to complete the process.

SJI received 20 grant applications requesting a total of $1,147,684 for the 2nd quarter of FY 2012. The Board met on April 23, 2012, at the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) in Williamsburg, Virginia, to make decisions on those applications. In addition, NCSC provided overview briefings about their operations. The Board also had the opportunity to visit the Courtroom 21 Project, a part of the Center for Legal and Court Technology at the College of William & Mary School of Law. The Courtroom 21 Project is the world’s most technologically advanced trial and appellate courtroom, and is used for testing new court technologies, in addition to providing ongoing education.

During its meeting, the Board awarded 13 grants totaling $612,090. One (1) Project Grant was awarded to the Missouri Office of the State Court Administrator (OSCA) for an Access to Justice Project designed to increase their capacity to meet federal and state-mandated access to justice requirements through an electronic forms hosting and delivery system. Eight (8) Technical Assistance (TA) Grants were approved, including: Phase III support to develop judicial branch educator competencies for the National Association of State Judicial Educators (NASJE); implementation of a high performance court framework in the Scottsdale City Court, Arizona; a supreme and superior court unification project in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; and grants to the Kansas Supreme Court, New Mexico AOC, Washington AOC, San Mateo Superior Court in California, and Dane County Clerk of Courts in Wisconsin for court improvement, analysis, and reengineering projects. Four (4) Curriculum Adaptation & Training (CAT) Grants were approved, including: a grant to the Washington AOC for an intensive court interpreter training initiative; statewide delivery of case management training for Colorado juvenile probation officers on a new risk assessment tool, which builds on a previous grant (SJI-11-T-011) to develop the new assessment tool; development and the online delivery of judicial webcasts for judges (including new judges) for the National Judicial College (NJC); and support for the in-house certification of a 12-person team from the Missouri OSCA to deliver the NCSC’s Institute for Court Management (ICM) Certified Court Manager (CCM) credential.

During the 2nd quarter Board meeting, 6 SIG grants were awarded totaling $275,158. These projects address one of SJI’s new Priority Investment Areas: Self-Represented Litigation and the State Courts. SIG grants were made to the: 1) Judicial Council of California to train bilingual JusticeCorps volunteers to provide enhanced services for self-represented litigants (SRLs); 2)Indiana Administrative Office of the Courts to train volunteer college and law students to serve statewide pro se clinic clients; 3) National Center for State Courts (NCSC) to develop a standard set of definitions and counting rules for cases involving one or more SRLs; 4) Self-Represented Litigation Network (SRLN) and NCSC to develop formal case triage protocols for assistance to SRLs; 5) SRLN to facilitate state court reimbursement under Title IV-D, and promote awareness of this resource; and 6) South Carolina Access to Justice Commission for delivery of legal information to SRLs in underserved areas of South Carolina.

On April 17, 2012, the Senate Commerce, Justice, Science (CJS) Subcommittee on Appropriations marked up the FY 2013 CJS bill, which included $5,121,000 for SJI—the same level provided in FY 2012 and requested in the FY 2013 President’s Budget. The Senate Appropriations Committee approved the CJS bill on April 19, 2012. Also on April 19th, the House CJS Subcommittee marked up the bill, which included $5,121,000 for SJI. The House Appropriations Committee approved the bill on April 26, 2012. SJI greatly appreciates the continued support of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees. SJI will provide updates as the appropriations process continues to move forward.

The National Center for State Courts (NCSC) recently announced that the final products from the SJI-funded Phase II: A National Campaign to Ensure the Racial and Ethnic Fairness of America’s State Courts (SJI-08-I-084) are now available on the NCSC website. The project is the final phase of the National Campaign to Ensure Racial and Ethnic Fairness in the Courts—a project initiated in collaboration with the Conference of Chief Justices (CCJ) and Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA) Access and Public Trust Committees in 2006.

The resources include a report on three pilot educational programs on implicit bias and shorter excerpts that can be used as stand-alone pieces for presentations and judicial education programs. A summary and accessible links to the resources developed under this grant include:

• Helping Courts Address Implicit Bias: Resources for Education: describes and evaluates the three pilot judicial education programs on implicit bias and offers lessons learned. It also includes appendices with resource materials for programs on implicit bias.
• Addressing Implicit Bias in the Courts: briefly describes the implicit bias phenomenon and outlines potential strategies that court professionals can use to combat implicit bias.
• Implicit Bias: Frequently Asked Questions: addresses some common questions about implicit bias and what contemporary science tells us about this cognitive phenomenon.
• Strategies to Reduce the Influence of Implicit Bias: identifies conditions that may give rise to implicitly biased judgment or behavior and details seven general approaches to address implicit bias in the courts based on current scientific research.

A manuscript submitted to the Justice System Journal, and a forthcoming article in the UCLA Law Review is also available.

SJI’s solicitation for concept papers dealing with self-represented litigation and the state courts resulted in 47 papers; totaling $4,770,208. Self-represented litigation in the state courts was designated an SJI Priority Investment Area for FY 2012. Once the Board has awarded grants for selected projects, more details will be provided.

SJI continues to receive over $1 million in grant applications per quarter., and encourages potential applicants to consider submitting their application as early in the fiscal year as possible. In addition, SJI staff can assist potential applicants in determining whether their proposed projects are eligible within the parameters of SJI’s Grant Guideline. It is important for potential applicants to consider the timing of applications. While SJI has not previously allocated all grant funding before the 4th quarter of a given fiscal year, increases in quarterly applications, designation of Priority Investment Areas, and potential partner grants at the national level have an impact on available grant funding. In addition to the requirements contained in the Grant Guideline, applicants are also being asked if their proposed projects advance one or more Priority Investment Areas, and if not, why.

Potential applicants are encouraged to contact SJI with any questions. The deadline for 3rd quarter grant applications is May 1, 2012. The deadline for 4th quarter grant applications is August 1, 2012.

With the support of the SJI, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) and William   Mary Law School’s Institute for Bill of Rights Law launched the State Supreme Court Initiative (SSCI) in FY 2010 (SJI-10-N-147). The project began with three initial goals: 1) to study and report on the work and decisions of state supreme courts; 2) to encourage journalists and academics to engage in similar study; and, 3) to provide a new vehicle for public education about the important work of state supreme courts

The primary vehicle through which SSCI is working towards these objectives is a website featuring: 1) a database of detailed information and statistics about state supreme courts and their opinions; and 2) a blog for the state supreme court decisions modeled off the highly successful SCOTUSblog for U.S. Supreme Court decisions. In the fall of 2010, SSCI convened a task force made up of prominent legal journalists, state supreme court scholars, transparency advocates, clerks, and judges. The task force discussed the shape of the project and plotted strategies to move ahead. At the suggestion of the task force, SSCI undertook a two-month trial last spring during which two William   Mary Law students explored state supreme court information networks and approaches to covering state supreme courts. The students analyzed various aspects of state supreme courts (opinion release schedules, volume, opinion release format, etc.). They also tested how to blog about state supreme court outcomes, getting a sense of how much time it takes and what resources are needed.

The trial proved to be a great learning experience. Building on this work, a state supreme court “bloginar” course began with a series of lectures on state supreme courts as institutions. Law students have been assigned five state supreme courts to cover. Students are currently blogging weekly about state supreme court outcomes, upcoming cases, and court composition matters, generating approximately 30 posts per week. In addition, the students are creating profiles with information about the unique history and make up of each state supreme court.

The SSCI will rollout the blog/website and products by the summer of 2012.