The National Center for State Court’s (NCSC)/Center for Elders and the Courts (CEC), in partnership with the University of California at Irvine School of Medicine’s Center of Excellence on Elder Abuse and Neglect, has developed two training resources for judges and court personnel:

• The Elder Abuse Curriculum for Judicial Officers is available for download. The curriculum is comprised of three modules that provide an overview on the physiology of aging, identifying elder abuse and neglect, and crafting more effective court responses. The curriculum includes all course materials, an instruction manual, and supplemental videos. The curriculum is also adaptable for in-person and educational sessions of varying length.

• The new online course, Justice Responses to Elder Abuse, will soon be available, free of charge, through the CEC website. The course is expected to be released in April 2014. This comprehensive resource expands on the curriculum and features expert medical, judicial, and prosecution faculty through the course’s four key parts: 1) Aging in America; 2) Enhancing Elder Abuse Awareness; 3) Special Issues and Tools for Courts; and, 4) Practical Application via Case Scenarios.

In FY 2011, SJI began a multi-year grant initiative to assist the NCSC with the needed upgrades to the CEC website, so that hosting of complex integrated materials and deployment of web-based training would be possible. For more information on these CEC products, please contact Brenda Uekert (buekert@ncsc.org) or Denise Dancy (ddancy@ncsc.org) at the NCSC.

On January 14, 2014, the first-ever Federal Strategic Action Plan on Services for Victims of Human Trafficking in the United States was released. After several months of coordination with the White House, Executive Branch agencies, and other entities, the SJI-sponsored Human Trafficking and the State Courts Collaborative was included as a part of this national effort (see pages 33-34, and 60). While SJI’s contribution to the plan appears small, it is in fact one of the only components of the plan that includes the state courts as a justice system stakeholder in addressing human trafficking.

The plan lays out a five-year path for increased coordination, collaboration, and capacity across the federal government and in partnership with other governmental and nongovernmental entities at all levels. It describes the steps that federal agencies will take to ensure that all victims of human trafficking in the United States are identified, and have access to the services they need to recover and to rebuild their lives. This includes a victim services network that is comprehensive, trauma-informed, and responsive to the needs of all victims, regardless of the type of trafficking they endured. More than 15 federal agencies (led by the Departments of Justice, Health and Human Services, and Homeland Security) worked with stakeholders and participated in listening sessions across the country to develop this plan, as well as solicited feedback through a 45-day public comment period.

In FY 2013, SJI awarded a Strategic Initiatives Grant (SIG) to the Center for Public Policy Studies/The National Judicial College/Center for Court Innovation (CPPS/NJC/CCI) to form a Human Trafficking and the State Courts Collaborative focused on 4 strategic priorities: 1) increasing understanding and awareness about the challenges faced by state courts in dealing with cases involving trafficking victims and their families, and traffickers; 2) developing and testing state and local approaches for assessing and addressing the impact of human trafficking victims and defendants in the state courts; 3) enhancing state and local court capacity to improve court services affected by human trafficking-related case processing demands; and 4) building effective national, state, and local partnerships for addressing the impacts of human trafficking case processing in the state courts.

Courts across the country have experienced a significant increase in the number of cases involving self-represented litigants. To assist in meeting the demand for additional resources, the Court Statistics Project (CSP), with support from SJI, recently released a report titled, Developing Standardized Definitions and Counting Rules for Cases with Self-Represented Litigants, (SJI-12-P-084).

CSP, a joint project of the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) and the Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA), has developed a number of products through extensive research and collection of case data that advance the courts’ ability to address self-represented litigant demands with efficiency, and in the fairest manner possible. The project to standardize self-represented litigant definitions and counting rules was initiated with the goal of establishing a consistent approach to reporting cases with self-represented litigants, and fostering a means by which comparative data could be produced within and among jurisdictions.

CSP intends to use this data to facilitate greater understanding of the nature and extent of self-representation in the state courts. Recommendations are provided in three key areas necessary to case processing: 1) definitions; 2) counting rules; and, 3) reporting guidelines. Each area is well-defined with the intent of avoiding ambiguity when it comes to collecting, interpreting , and reporting caseload data. The final report also addresses court technology standards that reflect the level of capabilities required to manage data-driven operational changes.

The Board met on December 9, 2013, to make decisions on quarterly grant applications and awarded a total of 14 grants. Four (4) Project Grants were approved, including: educational programming for the National Association for Court Management (NACM); a court clerk workload assessment for the King County, Washington, District Court; a pretrial and probation services assessment for the Missouri courts; and an adult guardianship special assistant project for the Maryland Judiciary. Seven (7) Technical Assistance (TA) Grants were approved, including: user-friendly electronic guardianship forms, manuals, and guidance for the Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, Orphans’ Court; judicial operations restructure project for the Douglas County, Nevada, courts; a calendaring and docket management assessment for the Washington County, Oregon, Circuit Court; judicial workload study update for the Montana Supreme Court; New Jersey Judiciary build-a-brief application for self-represented litigants and attorneys; jury instructional online videos for the Connecticut Judiciary; and an assessment of the impact of Hurricane Sandy by the National Center for State Courts (NCSC). Three (3) Curriculum Adaptation & Training (CAT) Grants were approved, including: human trafficking training by the National Association of Women Judges (NAWJ); Arkansas AOC online training programs for court security officers; and leadership education and training for the Virginia courts.

On December 5, 2013, the Conference of Chief Justices/National Association for Court Management (COSCA/NACM) Joint Technology Committee (JTC) received the first report of a Working Group appointed to develop national technology standards for jury automation. The JTC Jury Standards Working Group is comprised of representatives from JTC, the Court Information Technology Officers Consortium (CITOC), the Forum on the Advancement of Court Technology (FACT), and national experts on jury system technology. By beginning with a set of jury automation technology requirements that were developed earlier this year for the Fourth Judicial District Court in Minnesota, the Working Group had a considerable head start on this project The Minnesota standards were developed by the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) with a grant from the State Justice Institute. Minnesota intends to use the technology standards to develop an RFP to procure a statewide jury automation system.

For the Minnesota project, the NCSC assembled an advisory committee composed of Minnesota stakeholders and national experts on jury system technology. The project was one of the first opportunities that NCSC technology experts had to employ the Court Technology Framework (CTF). The CTF is a tool developed by the JTC and designed to provide context for existing, and identification of possible new, technology standards initiatives for the court community. The goals and objectives of the CTF include: 1) providing an organized view of the increasingly complex landscape of court technology solutions; 2) promoting alignment of IT initiatives with business goals; 3) defining a standard set of components and interfaces that make up a comprehensive court IT environment; and 4) helping courts more readily identify opportunities for improved efficiency and/or cost savings through the use of technologies. For the Minnesota jury technology standards, project staff and Advisory Committee members first identified the business capabilities necessary to operate a jury system effectively, then specified the technology applications, data management, and technology infrastructure required to support those capabilities.

Both the Minnesota technology standards and the JTC Working Group standards emphasize the need for improved technology solutions to incorporate effective practices in jury operations; to exchange information more effectively with executive agencies, court case management systems, courtrooms, and court finance divisions; and to generate management reports that conform to standard jury performance measures such as jury yield and juror utilization. The Working Group expects to submit its recommendations for national jury automation standards to the JTC in Spring, 2014.

For more information on the resources mentioned in this article, including a cadre of publications, memorandums, and working documents, please visit the Joint Technology Committee website (http://www.ncsc.org/About-us/Committees/Joint-Technology-Committee.aspx) and the Court Technology Framework website (http://www.ncsc.org/ctfwiki).

Developed with support from SJI, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) recently released a report titled, Courthouse Violence in 2010-2012, Lessons Learned (SJI-13-T-089). Through review of six tragic incidents of violence in court facilities or on premises occurring between December 2011 and February 2013, the report provides judges, court administrators, and security officers with a tool that catalyzes preparedness and planning.

The report was written with the assistance of several state court judges and administrators who shared their experiences and voiced lessons they had learned first-hand from recent security incidents. These jurisdictions were represented by rural, urban, and most frequently, suburban communities located in South Carolina, Minnesota, Washington, Oklahoma, Delaware, and Arkansas.

The report reveals four key lessons learned, they include:

• Everything during a violent courthouse incident happens unbelievably fast.
• It may not be possible to prevent a violent incident, but there may be “indicators” to look for in advance of the incident.
• There are obvious needs for certain security measures, and courts need to be proactive in making sure those measures are in place.
• There must be a focus on the impact of these incidents on court staff and their families.

Recommendations addressing each of these lessons learned, with input from NCSC Court security experts are included in the report. They provide valuable considerations for state courts to consider as they evaluate their emergency plans.

The report is available through the NCSC Library eCollection.

Through an SJI Strategic Initiatives Grant, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) and Self-Represented Litigation Network (SRLN) have developed case triage protocols for cases involving self-represented litigants, and developed a report offering best practices for the collection of litigant information. This innovative project will provide a basis for system redesign towards quickly and effectively serving litigants as they access the state courts (SJI-12-P-085).

The project team included representatives from the state courts, the civil legal aid community, and the private bar. These partnerships are critical, since successful triage requires coordination between the courts, litigants, and service providers. The project team met its goal of developing triaging processes to better serve litigants.

While the report begins with a brief historical framework for understanding triage in the legal context, particularly as it applies to the self-represented litigant, most of the focus in each legal issue section is on the application of stakeholder protocols, inclusive of: a) litigant choice protocol; b) court protocol; and, c) provider’s protocol. The following legal issue sections (pp. 6 – 20) are included:

• Eviction Protocols;
• Family Law Protocols;
• Foreclosure Cases; and,
• Credit Card Cases

Each section addresses common issues and barriers to triage, as well as the most frequently applied policies and available resources. Specific information tailored to each section addresses the perspective of the individual stakeholder and seeks to identify elements of the triage critical to all parties.

Applicable to multiple SJI Priority Investment Areas, this report offers stakeholders more detailed information and recommendations in the areas of self-represented litigation, state court reengineering, and the application of the protocols to improve access to limited English proficient (LEP) populations. While many jurisdictions already engage in some form of triage, the focus of this report is to:

• Provide guidance on full integration of the court, litigant, and service providers as stakeholders;
• Advance mechanisms for standardization of triage protocols; and,
• Promote access to justice through the litigant portal, inclusive of self-help centers and websites

The project team is currently exploring the development of an implementation guide that will enable key stakeholders to implement these protocols through online portals. Topics for the planned implementation guide may include: resources required, sequential implementation tasks, governance, integration and information requirements, and how to best make litigants aware of the portal so they may access services.

The report, titled, Triage Protocols for Litigant Portals: A Coordinated Strategy Between Courts and Service Providers is available through the NCSC Library’s eCollection and via their online Self-Representation Resource Guide.

The Board met on September 9, 2013, to make decisions on quarterly grant applications and awarded a total of 12 grants. Eight (8) Technical Assistance (TA) Grants were approved, including: an operational improvement initiative for the 3rd Judicial District Court of Kansas; a review of probate and guardianship procedures for the 2nd Judicial District Court of Nevada; a criminal caseflow assessment for the Alameda County Superior Court in California; development of a court facility plan for the Mohave County Superior Court in Arizona; an organizational assessment for the District of Columbia Court of Appeals; a communications reengineering and probation service integration project for the Pierce County District Court in Washington; and, update of the Virginia Court facility guidelines for the Virginia Supreme Court.

Four (4) Curriculum Adaptation & Training (CAT) Grants were approved, including: delivery of the curriculum, Improving Access to Justice for Immigrant Crime Victims: The Important Role of Legally Correct Information, to four additional jurisdictions and via webinar by American University; cultural diversity training in the 15th Judicial Circuit of Florida; development and pilot testing of the nationally-recognized curriculum, Preventing and Addressing Internet-Related Juror Misconduct, by the National Center for State Courts; and, court facilities training for the Idaho Supreme Court.

During the September 9, 2013 meeting, the Board awarded a Strategic Initiatives Grant (SIG) to the National Center for State Courts (NCSC), in partnership with the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System (IAALS) to support the Civil Justice Initiative. At its 2013 Midyear Meeting, the Conference of Chief Justices (CCJ) passed a resolution calling for the creation of a Civil Justice Initiative to address the impact of excessive costs and delays in civil litigation on access to justice, public trust and confidence in the courts, and the constitutional role of the courts. The project will develop guidelines and best practices for civil litigation based on best practices in various states, and other applicable information. The project will focus on a wide variety of issues such as civil case processing including variations for pleading standards, discovery procedures, summary judgment and other dispositive motions, business court programs, and managing mass tort litigation. The project will result in: 1) a written report presented to CCJ summarizing the project’s findings and recommendations including evidence-based practices, best practices, and templates for civil rules and operational practices for CCJ members to consider adopting in their respective states; and 2) a series of briefing papers on the current landscape of civil litigation in state courts and other issues addressed by the project.

Each fiscal year, SJI allocates significant financial resources to support its Priority Investment Areas. In FY 2014, the Priority Investment Areas will be (in no ranking order): 1) Language Access and the State Courts; 2) Self-Represented Litigation; 3) Reengineering in Response to Budget Reductions; 4) Human Trafficking and the State Courts; 5) Immigration Issues in the State Courts; 6) Guardianship, Conservatorship, and Elder Issues; and 7) a new Priority Investment Area on Remote Technology – e.g., innovative use of technology to improve the business operations of courts and provide enhanced services outside the courtroom (videoconferencing, online access, educational services, remote court proceedings, the electronic record, centralization/regionalization of court services, etc.).

The state courts have been increasing their use of technology to enhance services, become more efficient, and reduce costs. However, much of this work has been fragmented across and within states, and often depends on various factors such as awareness of how remote technology can be harnessed to improve the delivery of court services and/or willingness to embrace new technologies. Technological advancements such as the electronic record, digital recording, and videoconferencing require courts to not only reassess current business processes, but also create new rules and procedures that support access outside the traditional courthouse/courtroom context.

SJI is interested in innovative approaches to promoting awareness of the ease and benefits of embracing remote technology to improve access to justice, enhance court operations, and reduce costs. Please note that SJI will not support the operational costs associated with the development or enhancement of case management and electronic record systems, in addition to any other equipment costs that support these systems.