Category: News

New Resource! The Robert F. Kennedy National Resource Center for Juvenile Justice (RFKNRCJJ)’s Probation and Youth Justice System Review Guidebook. We are pleased to announce the release of the new Probation and Youth Justice System Review (System Review) Guidebook, developed for probation departments, courts, and youth justice systems seeking to improve outcomes for the young people they serve, thereby achieving shared goals for reducing risk for future delinquent behavior, holding youth accountable, supporting sustainable positive behavior change, and improving community safety.

This new resource builds upon the RFK National Resource Center’s seminal System Review framework used in partnership with 32 state and local jurisdictions throughout the country to achieve substantial improvements in youth outcomes and system performance. The System Review Guidebook aligns with the most up-to-date and relevant research on adolescent development, risk-needs-responsivity approaches, comprehensive behavioral health screening and assessment (including trauma), graduated responses, family engagement, implementation and change management science, and data-driven management and reporting. It also features current jurisdictional examples to illustrate different aspects of the System Review process, as well as on-the-ground perspectives from jurisdictional leaders who can provide firsthand insight on the challenges and successes experienced within their respective communities.

Access here: Probation and Youth Justice System Reform | Robert F. Kennedy National Resource Center for Juvenile Justice (rfknrcjj.org)

More than two-dozen state court leaders and academics met Tuesday in Arlington, Virginia, to celebrate—and put the final exclamation point on—the work of the Community Engagement in the State Courts Initiative.

First launched as a response to the U.S. Department of Justice investigation of Ferguson, Missouri, the goal of the project has been to get “proximate” to socioeconomically disadvantaged, underserved communities, in order to help advance understanding of how courts can best engage these communities to address structural, institutional, and other problems which undermine trust and confidence in the courts.

“The twin pandemics of COVID-19 and renewed racial unrest around the world made these community engagement projects all the more important,” said Chief Judge Anna Blackburne-Rigsby of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, who served as one of the chairs of the effort, and who currently serves as co-chair of CCJ-COSCA’s Public Engagement, Trust and Confidence committee.

Participants reflected on the long arc of the project, which included a multi-city, PBS-broadcast “Listening Tour” in 2017, but more recently, pilot projects across six jurisdictions, each of which tried a slightly different approach to engaging with their communities. Reports from the six pilot jurisdictions, as well as an online “how to” community engagement toolkit, are available on the NCSC website.

Funding for the multi-year effort came from NCSC, the State Justice Institute, the California Endowment, and the Public Welfare Foundation.

Policy Research Associates, in partnership with the State Justice Institute, is pleased to announce the release of a new publication, A National Compendium of Court Navigation Programs. This Compendium provides an overview of 18 court navigation programs operating in 22 states across the United States. A court navigation program provides guidance and information about court processes and procedures to people in contact with the court system. In addition, the programs can link people to resources related to their behavioral health, economic, and social service-related needs.

The Compendium provides an overview of each program’s funding source, its core components, and its implementation. Each program overview is accompanied by a checklist showing where the program’s navigators provide support across the legal system. Program overviews also have checklists outlining specific services each program offers related to a person’s behavioral health, economic, social, and legal needs.

The Compendium can serve as a tool for courts to develop their own court navigation program or to expand an existing program’s services. It can also assist court administrators, treatment and service providers, families, and community members with foundational knowledge to ensure that people in contact with the court system can have their needs met and navigate the court system successfully.

This Compendium is available for free download. 

Download the Compendium here: https://www.prainc.com/resources/compendium-court-navigation-programs/.

IAALS, the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System at the University of Denver, announced today that it released its new The Past and Future of State Court Civil Filings report. This report provides important new insights into long-term filing trends and areas where courts may need resource shifts, like declining tort and small claims cases and increasing debt-collection cases. Building off a review of historical events, IAALS also developed a framework around the numerous factors that may influence filings, which can further guide analysis.

In 2022, the World Justice Index ranked the United States 115 out of 140 countries as to whether people can access and afford civil justice. With 66 percent of the population experiencing at least one legal issue over a four-year period, according to IAALS’ US Justice Needs study, there is significant work to do to improve access to justice. Court systems are among those sources of help that improve the chances of resolution. By focusing on state court filings over time, The Past and Future of State Court Civil Filings aims to provide additional insights into the specific role that courts have played in resolving cases, how that role might be changing, and the factors that are expected to continue to influence the filing of cases in our courts going forward.

“Historically, it’s been accepted that state court case filings climb over time in step with population growth, which has informed court planning for buildings, staff, judges, and other resources. More recently, however, courts saw a decline in filings, now followed by fluctuation stemming from the pandemic,” says IAALS CEO Brittany Kauffman. “Courts need a better understanding of what types of cases are being brought before them—and in what numbers—so that planning and policymaking can respond accordingly.”

To bring more clarity and guidance, this report presents a multifaceted study that explores civil case filings over a long timeframe—16 to 41 years—in four states: California, Minnesota, Ohio, and Texas. While it is critical to look at filings in the short term given the current recent challenges of the pandemic, this longer view of filings challenges us to think more deeply about changes over time, influencing factors, and takeaways for planning, policymaking, and reform efforts.

Read the full article here: New IAALS Report on State Court Civil Filings: The Trends, Drivers of Change, and Importance of Data | IAALS (du.edu)

The Justice Management Institute (JMI), in collaboration with the National Institute of Corrections (NIC), is proud to introduce two groundbreaking publications designed to support jurisdictions with criminal justice coordinating councils (CJCCs). The first publication, entitled National Standards for Criminal Justice Coordinating Councils, offers a comprehensive framework for jurisdictions to create or improve a coordinating council. Its companion publication, CJCC Essential Elements, delineates the core characteristics that define high-performing CJCCs.

These publications aim to help jurisdictions optimally structure and operate their coordinating councils, positioning their local CJCCs to effectively address challenges within the criminal justice system and facilitate meaningful change. The CJCC Essential Elements includes two practical tools: the CJCC Elements Checklist and the CJCC Elements Assessment Tool. The checklist highlights crucial components for jurisdictions to consider when forming a CJCC, while the assessment tool enables them to evaluate the extent to which their councils align with national standards.  Complementing these new resources, JMI and NIC recently published the National Survey of Criminal Justice Coordinating Councils. Serving as the foundation for the national standards and essential elements, this publication offers additional information on coordinating councils that jurisdictions may find valuable.

The SJI Board of Directors will be meeting on Monday, June 5, 2023, at 1:00 PM MT. The purpose of this meeting is to consider grant applications for the 3rd quarter of FY 2023, and other business.

ADDRESS: The Supreme Court of Wyoming, 2301 Capitol Avenue Room 237, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

The National Center for State Courts (NCSC)’s new Protecting the Privacy of Domestic Violence Survivors course provides best practices to guide courts and providers on improving policies and procedures designed to protect survivors’ privacy and inform survivors of their rights. Available in English and Spanish, the online, self-paced course provides an overview of information that needs to be protected, discussion of a survivor-centered approach to service delivery, ways to safely communicate with survivors and institutions and defining roles and responsibilities for promoting confidentiality.

“Courts and service providers must carefully protect any information potentially useful for identifying or locating survivors,” said Felix Bajandas, an NCSC principal court management consultant and project director. “This includes, but is not limited to, a combination of characteristics such as zip code, gender and date of birth.”

Available in English and Spanish, the online, self-paced course provides an overview of information that needs to be protected, discussion of a survivor-centered approach to service delivery, ways to safely communicate with survivors and institutions and defining roles and responsibilities for promoting confidentiality. The estimated completion time is 10 minutes.

In addition to the course, the Violence Against Women (VAWA) and the Courts partnership has developed tools and resources to support survivors, including:

• Critical Conversations series
  • E-filing Domestic Violence Protection Orders – Safety, Accessibility, and Effectiveness webinar
  • Lessons Learned from the Pandemic:  Understanding and Enhancing Litigants’ Experiences in Domestic Violence Cases report
• Protection Order Repositories, Web Portals, and Beyond: Technology Solutions to Increase Access and Enforcement report

For more information, visit VAWA and the Courts.

Enforcing court rules that require expedited actions can improve fairness, cost, and efficiency in the civil justice system while also relieving case backlogs exacerbated by the pandemic, according to new findings released by national experts today. In its report, “A Renewed Analysis of the Expedited Actions Rules in Texas Courts,” the Texas Office of Court Administration (OCA), National Center for State Courts and IAALS, the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System, found that rules adopted by the Supreme Court of Texas in 2012 have expedited the resolution of cases—both before and after the pandemic.

“The rules have had a positive impact, particularly in the area of discovery, but the full benefit of the rules has not been realized,” according to the Texas study. “While it has been over a decade since the rules were first implemented, there remains great opportunity for more consistent case management.”

Recommendations for maximizing those opportunities include training for judges and staff, increased use of technology to assist in civil case management and stronger enforcement of the rules.

In 2019, the Texas rules required:

• Application to all civil cases where the amount in controversy is $100,000 or less;
• Discovery to begin within 180 days of case filing;
• Limits to discovery of no more than 6 hours of depositions, 15 written interrogatories, 15 requests for production and 15 requests for admission;
• Mandatory trial dates within 90 days of completion of discovery; and
• Restrictions on time, fees and deadlines for court-ordered alternative dispute resolution.

The study—which was conducted at the request of the Texas Office of Court Administration—notes that the expedited actions rules work particularly well with certain case types, especially contract cases, debt collection, and personal injury cases where only limited discovery is needed. In January 2021, the rules were amended and increased the amount-in-controversy from $100,000 to $250,000, which expanded the number of cases eligible for civil case processing under the rules.

“The rules provide predictability in these cases, which contributes to efficiency and decreased costs,” according to the report. “Judges and attorneys agreed that the rules are less effective for more complex cases, such as cases that require more experts or additional discovery beyond the limits in the rules.”

OCA Research Director Jeffrey Tsunekawa explained that “the Supreme Court of Texas implemented the expedited actions rules to address some of the many complications in resolving civil cases in Texas. As judges, court staff and attorneys continue to familiarize themselves with the rules, efficient use of the courts’ time will be realized as cases as finalized. These efficiencies are not only benefit courts and the attorneys who practice in these courtrooms, but also the litigants involved in the legal disputes.”

Read the full report online to learn more about the research, findings and recommendations.

This project is funded by the State Justice Institute.

Research shows rural Americans are more likely than urban residents to be jailed, to overdose, and lack access to substance use treatment, mental health care, and public health services. That’s why it’s so important to identify innovative solutions to address justice inequality in rural communities. The Deason Criminal Justice Reform Center, in partnership with the National Center for State Courts, and Rulo Strategies, LLC,  authored the Rural Justice Innovations publication to highlight the inaugural group of nineteen Rural Justice Innovation sites selected by the Rural Justice Collaborative (RJC). The innovation sites profiled in this report represent the best of the best. These locations have proven rural justice programs that increase access to justice, improve family outcomes, and reduce reoffending rates. Most importantly, these programs are replicable in other rural communities that face similar challenges in ensuring equitable justice.

The RJC, a group of the country’s most innovative rural justice system leaders, is working to identify best practices that rural communities can replicate. By forming a group of judges, prosecutors, public defenders, treatment providers, and more, the RJC pioneers a new model centered on rural leaders developing solutions to rural problems not by focusing on what a barrier in their communities, but on what is working. The RJC is supported with funding from the State Justice Institute.

Access the publication here: https://www.sji.gov/wp-content/uploads/Rural-Justice-Innovations.pdf