Network Groups:
UCMN RCIN TCRIC
Rural Courts Improvement Network
OverviewKey Issues Facing Rural Courts
Network Seminars
Seminar Format
Significant Innovations and Promising Practices
Overview
The Rural Courts Improvement Network is an initiative of The Justice Management Institute (JMI) and the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), U.S. Department of Justice. The initiative got underway early in 2008, with the goal of strengthening the ability of state court systems and rural court leaders to improve court operations in rural areas. The basic approach to developing the network is to conduct a series of seminars for teams from states in a geographic region of country. The teams consist of a mix of state-level court leaders and trial court judges and administrators in each of the participating states. The seminars are structured to enable participants to learn from each other and to use the seminar experience to shape improvements in operations in their own jurisdictions. Innovative practices and promising approaches to addressing problems faced by rural courts will be discussed at the seminars and summaries will be posted on this web page. The web page will also have resource materials relevant to rural courts.Key Issues Facing Rural Courts
The critical contextual factors unique to rural courts include geographic distance, sparse populations in or near local communities, small numbers of attorneys, small populations from which to select jurors for trials, professional isolation of judges and staff, lack of accessible programs and services, outmoded court facilities that were often constructed in a much earlier era, and on-going interpersonal relationships in local communities that can pose ethical problems. The types of services that courts in populous areas have frequently come to depend upon for certain types of cases—e.g., substance abuse and mental health treatment services; domestic violence prevention programs—are often non-existent or extremely difficult to access in rural counties. In some rural areas there are significant immigrant populations, and language barriers often create a need for qualified interpreters that can not easily be met. It is common for rural counties to have part-time judges and (in limited jurisdiction courts) to have non-attorney judges, part-time prosecutors, and very limited law enforcement presence. The unique needs of rural courts—and the potential solutions to their common problems—need to be examined, and new approaches need to be developed. JMI’s experience in conducting a prototype seminar for rural court practitioners in 2004, reinforced by discussions at the first RCIN seminar in June 2008, indicates that there are seven key areas of rural court organization and operation that warrant particular attention as development of the Network begins:- Technology — including hardware, software, and information and communications infrastructure and technical support to permit rural courts to realize the benefits of computer technology.
- Improved procedures and practices for cases involving self-represented litigants, including effective use of technology, easily understandable forms and instructions, and training for court staff on providing information and appropriate assistance.
- Upgrading of indigent defense services, including development of performance standards, mechanisms for supervision of appointed attorneys, and adequate levels of compensation and support for public defenders and assigned counsel.
- Language barriers: a need for improved court interpreter services, with qualified and accessible interpreters.
- Greater accessibility of substance abuse and mental health treatment services.
- Modernization of antiquated court facilities, including upgrades to enable adequate security and utilization of modern information technology.
- Better collaboration with the other branches of government, while strengthening the independence of the judiciary in case decision-making and internal court management.
Network Seminars
Because the universe of rural courts is large, it makes sense to develop a network of rural court leaders drawn from a broad range of courts. Additionally, in seeking to catalyze constructive change in rural courts, it seems desirable to have a broad mix of participants that includes trial court administrators and clerks, trial court judges (especially chief judges, who often have responsibility for multi-county districts with multiple courts), state court administrators, and state judicial educators. Participants at RCIN meetings are organized on a state team basis, with teams drawn from a total of six to eight states in a geographic region of the country. The exact composition of participants at the seminars will vary from team to team and from one seminar to another. However, the objective for each seminar is to have a mix of trial court judges (especially chief judges), trial court administrators/court clerks, and state court administrators or their principal deputies as participants. Where possible, the host site for a Network seminar will be a location where there is a rural court that has developed especially promising practices or programs that can be adapted by other jurisdictions. For example, the first Network seminar was held in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, the seat of a five-county judicial district. Idaho is a state that has paid particular attention to development of programs that address the needs of rural courts and the residents of rural communities, and the June 2008 seminar in Coeur d’Alene provided an opportunity to showcase an array of promising programs that address key issues identified by rural court practitioners across the country. (See summaries below under Significant Innovations and Promising Practices.)Seminar Format
RCIN seminars are planned and conducted collaboratively. JMI staff works with host site representatives and members of an RCIN steering committee to identify key topics to be addressed and materials to be used. The seminars are conducted over a period of approximately three days, using a combination of plenary sessions, small group breakouts with structured problem-solving exercises, and a team action planning session. Where possible, as at the seminar in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, the seminar will also include a visit to a nearby rural court, with opportunity for interaction with local practitioners. The plenary sessions and breakout groups are facilitated by JMI staff and consultants. Other faculty are drawn from among the rural court leaders who have participated in previous seminars and from seminar participants who have relevant subject matter expertise. Seminar sessions are highly interactive, designed to facilitate the interchange of ideas and information about practices followed in different jurisdictions to address common problems. By calling on practitioner faculty who have been involved in previous seminars, the network of rural court leaders interested in fostering constructive change can be enlarged and strengthened.Significant Innovations and Promising Practices
At the June 1-4 RCIN seminar in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, a number of leading edge programs designed to expand access to the courts and to needed court-related services were discussed. Examples include the following:- Idaho Court Assistance Services. In 1998, the Idaho Supreme Court initiated a pilot project designed to facilitate meaningful to the courts on the part of self-represented litigants. A JMI evaluation of the pilot program found it to be very promising, and it has now been expanded to every county in the state. Court Assistance Officers—functioning under guidelines established by the Supreme Court—are in now all seven Idaho judicial districts. They provide self-represented litigants with educational materials, court-approved forms, limited assistance in completing the forms, and information about court procedures so that they can better understand the legal requirements of the court system, and providing referrals to legal, community and social services organizations that provide similar assistance. In sparsely populated counties, where it is not feasible to have a Court Assistance Officer, a Deputy Clerk appointed by the District Court Clerk provides a more limited range of services, with the Court Assistance Officer for the District available to consult by telephone if necessary.
- Idaho Supreme Court Self-Help Center. This is an internet-based center that contains an array of information sheets, forms, and instructions that can be used by a self-represented litigant to prepare and file papers needed for court proceedings. Types of cases for which there materials are available on-line include Divorce, Child Custody, Landlord-Tenant, Small Claims, and Domestic Violence (Petition for temporary Protective Order). The site is accessible at http://www.courtselfhelp.idaho.gov. As a practical matter, the Self-Help Center functions as a complement to the Court Assistance Officer Program. The result of the availability of forms, instructions, and direct assistance from Court Assistance Officers is that judges and magistrates who are hearing cases involving self-represented litigants have far better information on which to make decisions. The process of developing the Self-Help Center has been a collaborative one, involving judges, court administrators, clerks, Court assistance Officers, bar leaders, and advocacy groups. An additional benefit has been the development of forms (and related instructions) used in many types of cases are now uniform across the state.
- Idaho Problem-Solving Court Initiative. As in other areas where innovations have been tried, Idaho began working with problem solving courts using a pilot project approach. In 1998, there were only two felony drug courts in Idaho, but—through the vision and commitment of the drug court team members, and their willingness to open the embryonic drug courts to a thorough evaluation—they established a solid foundation of operational success and public support. Today, following the Idaho judiciary’s concerted effort in 2000 to expand drug courts throughout the state and the Idaho Legislature’s action in establishing a statutory framework for expansion of drug courts, there are 52 drug courts or mental health courts in Idaho, including some in relatively sparsely counties. Providing transportation for program participants and accessing assessment and treatment services remain problems, but progress is clearly being made in serving drug abusing and mentally ill persons who get caught up in the justice system.
- Idaho Court Interpreter Program. U.S. Census Bureau data indicates that approximately 9.3 percent of Idaho’s population over 4 years old speaks a language at home other than English. If 9.3 percent of the cases in Idaho’s courts might require an interpreter, that would mean a total of about 23,000 cases in which an interpreter might be needed for hearings and trials. The Idaho Administrative Office of the Courts has addressed this problem by (a) becoming a member of the Consortium of State Court Interpreter Certification, coordinated by the National Center for State Courts; (b) conducting orientation and training programs each year for persons interested in becoming interpreters; (c) administering certification exams in a number of different languages (including Arabic, Korean, Cantonese, Mandarin, Laotian, Somaii, Haitian-Creole, Spanish, Hmong, Portuguese, and Vietnamese; and (d) adopting Idaho Court Administrative Rule 52—a statement of policy regarding the utilization of “certified interpreters”, “conditionally approved interpreters” and “qualified interpreters” in court proceedings. The different categories covered by Administrative Rule 52 reflect the extent to which the prospective interpreter has passed exams and participated in the orientation and training programs conducted by the Idaho Administrative Office of Courts. Qualified interpreters are persons who, even though they may not be certified or conditionally approved as court interpreters, are (1) readily able to interpret or sign translate from English to the language of a non-English-speaking person (or from that person into English); and (2) agree to follow Idaho standards for court interpreting and the Idaho Code of Professional Responsibility for Interpreters in the Judiciary. Rule 52 sets forth a priority order for utilization of interpreters, with top priority given to use of certified interpreters. The approach is an evolving one, minimum standards prescribed and with the Idaho courts continually seeking to expand and upgrade the available interpreter services. The orientation program for new judges includes a module on court interpreting, and the Administrative Office of Court has a senior staff member responsible for coordinating the court interpreter program and providing assistance to local courts.
- Nebraska ePayment System for Traffic Tickets. The Nebraska Administrative Office of Courts has been implementing an internet-based system that enables motorists charged with a traffic offense to pay the fine electronically. Typical traffic citations that can be paid on-line include speeding tickets, seat belt violations, driving without current tags, failure to stop at stop sign, and similar offenses. Users of ePayment log onto the Nebraska Judicial Branch web site, www.supremecourt.ne.gov, and click on the “ePayments” button. They can pay their citations using a credit card or debit card, and will be charged a small administrative fee in addition to the fine amount. More serious violations—including driving while license suspended, driving under the influence of alcohol, driving an uninsured vehicle—will still require a court appearance. It is anticipated, however, that the ePayment system will substantially reduce court appearance as well as provide a valuable convenience for persons charged with most traffic offenses.
- Alaska Family Law Self-Help Center and “800 Number” Telephone Assistance for Self-Represented Litigants. The Alaska Administrative Office of Courts has an internet-based Family Law Self-Help Center with forms and instructions for some types of proceedings, as well as sections with “Frequently Asked Questions” and answers to the questions. It also offers a “Helpline” service through a toll-free telephone number that used by litigants who have questions about court procedures and the filing of court papers.