Advancing Justice - 2012 IICM

8/13/2019 Advancing Justice - 2012 IICM

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/advancing-justice-2012-iicm 1/26





STRATEGIC GOALS AND MAJOR OBJECTIVES

OF THE IDAHO COURTS

I. PROVIDE TIMELY , FAIR , AND IMPARTIAL CASE RESOLUTION

II. ENSURE ACCESS TO JUSTICE

III. PROMOTE EFFECTIVE , INNOVATIVE SERVICES

IV. INCREASE PUBLIC TRUST AND CONFIDENCE IN IDAHO

COURTS

3



• Advancing Justice Mission Statement:

Provide timely, fair, and impartial case resolution, as

mandated in Article 1, Section 18 of the Idaho Constitution

and as reflected in the Mission Statement of the Idaho Courts.

1. Every case receives individual attention.

2. Individual attention is proportional to need.

3. Decisions demonstrate procedural justice.

4. Case progress is monitored through early andcontinuous judicial supervision.

Guiding Principles:

Guiding Principles 1, 2, and 3 from Ostrom, Brian, and Roger Hanson. 2010. Achieving High Performance: A

Framework for Courts. Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts. Guiding Principle 4 from Solomon,Maureen. 2010. Conducting a Felony Caseflow Management Review: A Practical Guide. Washington D.C.:Bureau of Justice Assistance.

4







REVIEW OF IDAHO’S TIME

STANDARDS FOR CASE PROCESSING

7



CRITICAL REVIEW OF IDAHO’S

TIME STANDARDS

A major objective of Advancing Justice:

“evaluate the adequacy of Idaho’s time standards for the purposes of meeting theexpectations of the public, assisting trial

judges with calendar management, and

assessing the need for judicial resources…”



ICAR 57 - TIME STANDARDS FORCASE PROCESSING TIMES

(a) The following time standards are adopted as guidelines for judges, trial court

administrators, lawyers, and litigants to assist them in determining the length of

time it should take to conclude a case in the trial courts:

CIVIL District Court 540 days from complaint

Magistrate Court 180 days from complaint

FELONIES Magistrate Court30 days from first appearance to order holding thedefendant to answer in the district court or

discharging the defendant

District Court 150 days from first appearance in district court

MISDEMEANORS 90 days from first appearance

INFRACTIONS 60 days from first appearance

DOMESTIC RELATIONS

& CHILD SUPPORT 180 days from complaint

ENFORCEMENT Juvenile 90 days from admit/deny hearing Act cases

Child ProtectionAs provided in the time frames Act cases established

in the Idaho Juvenile Rules

SMALL CLAIMS 90 days from complaint



10

Time Standards currently reported in theActive Pending Cases by Judge and Type



BENEFITS OF TIME STANDARDS:

• Case management tool

• Allow us to work towards case processing goals

• Inform decisions about judicial resourceallocation

• Allow us to identify need for additional judicialresources

• Allow us to assess whether we are meeting theexpectations of the public and our funders

11



TIME STANDARDS:RECOMMENDED CHANGES

• Use time to disposition rather than age of pendingcaseload as a means of assessing performance

•

Adopt tripartite model for measuring and reporting(multiple benchmarks)

• Improve case mgmt information

(interim case events)

• Assume a comprehensive “systems approach” to

change practice.

12



TimeStandards

Interim CaseEvents

Pertinent courtrules/procedures

Differential CaseMgmt (DCM)

Criteria

Systemicconditions and

challenges

A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO TIME STANDARDS

13





PROPOSED TIME STANDARDS FORDISTRICT CIVIL CASES

Model Time

Standard

Current Idaho Time

Standard

Proposed Time

Standard

Interim Case Events

75% within 180 days

90% within 365 days

98% within 540 days

90% within 540 days

Measured from

filing of complaintto disposition.

75% within 180 days

90% within 365 days

98% within 540 days

Measured fromfiling of complaint

to disposition

Service of Summons

Filing of responsive pleading

Dispositive Motions

Pre-trial Conference

Start of trial

Entry of judgment

or dismissal 15



ENHANCING PERFORMANCEMEASUREMENT AND MANGEMENT

IN THE IDAHO COURTS

16





HIGH PERFORMANCE COURT MEASUREMENT:A BALANCED SCORECARD (NCSC)

Effectiveness:

Gauges the matchbetween stated goals

and their achievement.

Procedural Satisfaction:Gauges if customersperceive the court isproviding fair andaccessible service.

Efficiency:

Gauges the variabilityand stability in keyprocesses.

Productivity:

Gauges whether processesmake the best use of judges and staff time.

Balance

18



• Litigant Fairness SurveyProcedural SatisfactionPerformance Measures

• Time to DispositionEfficiency Performance

Measures

• Age of Pending Caseload

• List of active pending cases (inventory)Operational Mgmt

Tools

“Research Measures”(additional analysis

needed)

• Months of work on hand

• Average continuances per case

• Average number of hearings per case

Our Current Proposal:

*To be determined: Measures of Effectiveness and Productivity 19



20

Detailed Caseload by Judge



21

Active Pending Cases by Judge and Type



22

Active Pending Cases by Judge



Age of PendingCaseload

Time to Disposition

Operational Management Tool Performance Measure(Efficiency)

A “snapshot in time” measure of

the average age of pendingcases awaiting disposition

A measure of the average timetaken to dispose of all cases overa specified period of time.

Provides judges and

administrators a tool foridentifying the number (orpercentage) of casesapproaching benchmarks.

An indicator of court efficiency;

used to assess timeliness of caseprocessing.

23



Case Type

Felony

90-149 days old 150-319 days old 320+ days old

This

week

Last

week

Last

month

Last

year

This

week

Last

week

Last

month

Last

year

This

week

Last

week

Last

month

Last

year

# of cases 28 26 22 21 10 7 7 15 3 3 4 5

% of caseload 62% 60% 54% 54% 22% 22% 23% 24% 7% 7% 10% 10%

Misdemeanor

90-119 days old 120-149 days old 150+ days old

This

week

Last

week

Last

month

Last

year

This

week

Last

week

Last

month

Last

year

This

week

Last

week

Last

month

Last

year

# of cases

% of caseload

Infraction

60-179 days old 180+ days old

This

week

Last

week

Last

month

Last

year

This

week

Last

week

Last

month

Last

year

# of cases

% of caseload

Proposed reporting format for Age of Pending Caseload

24



Proposed reporting format for Time to Disposition

Case Type

Idaho time

standard for

disposing of

75% of cases

Cases disposed

within the 75%

standard

Idaho time

standard for

disposing of

90% of cases

Cases disposed

within the 90%

standard

Idaho time

standard for

disposing of

98% of cases

Cases disposed

within the 98%

standard

# of

cases

% of

caseload

# of

cases

% of

caseload

# of

cases

% of

caseload

Felony 21 days 85 71% 35 days 114 95% 45 days 119 99%

Misdemeanor

Infraction

25



Questions or Comments

26

Contact Information:

Judge Barry Wood [email protected]

Taunya Jones [email protected] 947-7438

mailto:[email protected]




Documents

Advancing Justice - 2012 IICM