Accountability and transparency in the adjudication process and justice systems overall are important elements in building public trust and confidence. Defining performance measures, and more importantly, committing to regularly measuring performance not only provide accountability and transparency, but also offer insight for decision makers about what is and is not working so that appropriate adjustments can be made. JMI works collaboratively with decision makers and justice professionals to define what optimum performance means—what the overall goal for the organization or system is—and then what the most appropriate and easy to understand measures are.
JMI experts conduct research to validate performance measures to ensure that they are actually capturing information in an appropriate way and that they are measuring what they are intended to measure
Education and Training
JMI experts offer performance measurement education and training using a number of different approaches, techniques, and technologies, including the following:
Introduction to Performance Measurement. The Introduction to Performance Measurement covers the basics of what performance measures are and how they can and cannot be used. Typically offered as a lecture or a webinar, Introduction to Performance Measurement can be delivered in 60 to 120 minute blocks, tailored to the unique needs and level of understanding of the audience.
Measuring Performance. This 90-minute to 2-hour training module focuses on developing a more in-depth understanding of what performance measurement is, the process for defining and testing appropriate measures, data collection and analysis, and strategies for using performance measures.
JMI provides technical assistance to courts, prosecutors, defense agencies, and criminal justice coordinating councils to help them develop and implement performance measures that are based on their specific goals.
Development of Performance Measures. JMI provides on-site assistance to jurisdictions, courts, and justice agencies to develop their own performance measures. The on-site assistance includes meetings to define goals and objectives, creation of a graphic depiction of how goals and objectives relate to each other (a logic model), meetings to define possible measures, and assessment of available data for the measures.
Validation and Implementation of Performance Measures. JMI provides both on- and off-site technical assistance to validate performance measures to ensure that they are measuring what they are intended to measure and to help jurisdictions, courts, and justice agencies implement the measures. Implementation activities range from developing a plan for data collection, analysis, and reporting to actual collection and analysis of the data.
Courts Martial Performance Measures for the U.S. Department of the Navy, Judge Advocate General Corps
JMI worked with the U.S. Department of the Navy, Judge Advocate General Program to identify performance measures to improve the Navy’s response to and adjudication of sexual assault allegations. Read more . . .
Prosecution in the 21st Century: Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures
JMI’s President, working with the National District Attorneys Association’s American Prosecutors Research Institute, developed a detailed series on performance measurement in prosecution. The three-part effort involved defining goals, objectives, and performance measures for the prosecution profession; an examination of how accurately conviction rates alone measure performance; and an empirical validation of the measures in two prosecutors’ offices. Read more . . .
Baltimore City Circuit Court Caseflow Study
JMI’s Vice President was the project lead and editor for a circuit-wide caseflow audit and study of all court casetypes. Baltimore has experienced intractable challenges in meeting case disposition goals and coping with a very large felony drug docket. In addition, the project helped launch a criminal justice coordinating council and better cooperation between all justice system actors. The report was based on empirical data, interviews, observations and analysis.
Maryland District and Circuit Court Criminal Study, Statewide and Four Counties.
JMI’s Vice President was project lead and editor for a statewide study of local legal culture; a detailed analysis of performance in four key counties; and a follow-up report on the reduction or elimination of jury trial prayers from the District to Circuit Court. A detailed caseflow study was completed for Cecil, Harford, Prince George’s and Wicomico Counties.
Maryland Judiciary Caseflow Assessment Application
JMI’s Vice President was responsible for the design, development, rollout and hosting of browser-based statewide assessment (business intelligence) application for all Maryland trial courts and casetypes. The application extracts data from 17 different case management systems in order to measure performance against Maryland caseflow time standards. Functionality includes quality control forms to match and correct data with hardcopy case files for 11 case types. The application has been in continuous use since 2002. Version 3.0 was turned over to the Maryland Judiciary for hosting in 2005.