Performance Measurement of Drug Courts: The State of the Art
ICM course provides steps to improve performance.
The High Performance Court Framework informs court leaders of actions they can take to integrate performance improvement into ongoing operations. Participants in this ICM course, which will take place on December 6-8, 2016, at NCSC headquarters in Williamsburg, Va., will learn to build on those principles and solve business problems.
ICM course covers education training & development.
Participants for ICM’s course, Education Training and Development, will learn the fundamentals of adult education and instructional design as well as different approaches to developing employees. The course will take place November 1-3, 2016, at NCSC headquarters in Williamsburg, Va.
Court systems require effective leadership and management practices to respond to important issues, such as public trust and confidence, court and community collaboration, and timeliness and consistency. The demand for increased services from courts, along with proper strategic planning and team building, can be more easily forecasted and implemented when sound leadership, planning, and organizational change management are in place.
Links to related online resources are listed below. Non-digitized publications may
be borrowed from the NCSC Library; call numbers are provided.
Through its six meetings over three years, the Executive Session set out to both develop and answer questions that U.S. state courts will face in the foreseeable future, attempting to clarify what leaders of state courts can and should do to distinguish their role in our system of democratic governance.
An NCSC Area of Expertise. Grants from SJI and BJA have enabled NCSC to identify and develop the steps and processes that courts should take in order to succeed in their reengineering efforts.
A two and one-half day seminar is taught by chief judges and court executives led by Gordon Griller, Director of Trial Court Leadership Programs at the Institute for Court Management.
This paper explores some of the underlying points of tension between state supreme courts and local trial courts, ultimately positing a "shared leadership" model to leverage local court innovation in states where the judicial function is highly dispersed. Central to this discussion is the overarching need to maintain prompt and affordable court services amidst economic uncertainty and reduced resources.
This paper proposes a set of principles for governing state court systems that is intended to begin a dialogue about how court governance can best be enhanced to meet current and future challenges. The principles outlined in this paper were developed by re-examining what courts, as institutions, need to do internally to meet their responsibilities.
This article addresses the Conference of Chief Justice and the Conference of State Court Administrators challenging them to take up the task of improving the justice system by being committed to making changes to fix it.
What must the courts do to adjust to the changing realities of an increasingly complex world? The answer requires establishing a well-defined governance structure; providing a uniform message not only to the other branches of government, but also to the public; and forging positive relationships both inside and outside of courts.
This article discusses how difficult financial times are giving rise to changes to trial court governance, forcing a new blend of centralized and decentralized decision making not widely experienced in the past. For some, recognizing and skillfully using these new approaches in leading trial courts might mean the difference between adapting well to these tough times or not.
For nearly decades, the national community of courts has struggled to develop curricula to train an ever-changing cadre of court leaders. Today, budding programs on the national and local scene hold great promise to teach new knowledge about leadership and help people grow in the ability to exercise judgment and skill in applying that knowledge.
" The purpose of this document is to provide a basis from which judicial councils, presiding judges, and court administrators could work to strengthen the effectiveness of the executive team in court management. These Key Elements primarily contain the prospective elements of a state-level rule of court."
The practice of statewide collaboration is evolving; thus this Leadership Guide reflects a varied and evolving field of opinion and practice.
National Association for Court Management.
Outlines 5 guidelines for effective leadership and management of court systems.
Court managers will need a broader array of serivce-delivery strategies as courts face increasing demands and fewer resources. The standard solution, ot hire more staff as intermediaries, is becoming increasingly infeasible, and the user-friendly court, relying more on court users to participate in service delivery, will become a more important strategy.
This article examines multiple converging factors that contributed to abolition, including the New Jersey Supreme Court’s decision making in capital cases, public-opinion data, political conditions, and the New Jersey Death Penalty Study Commission hearings and report.
This interview with three court administration leaders, Alexander B. Aikman, Geoff Gallas, and Russell Wheeler, reviews the accomplishments of court reform since Roscoe Pound's speech launched the court reform movement.
This report focuses on how the theory and measurement of court culture provides a framework for conducting business.
Article reviews successful efforts in the countries of Latin America in establishing independent judiciaries.
Issues in trial court administration arising from an amendment to the Arkansas constitution that merged multiple trial courts into a two-tier system with one general-jurisdiction circuit court and one limited-jurisdiction district court.
This document describes how Total Quality Management (TQM) is being implemented in both the public and private sectors. The document also outlines both the benefits and challenges of implementing TQM in the courts.
This publication discusses inefficiencies within the Lancaster County court system and steps that can be taken to correct them.
This article discusses some possible implications and suggest ways in which courts might be reorganized to concentrate dwindling court resources on those functions constituting the core and constitutional mission of the state and local courts.
This article discusses how the staff of Oregon's state courts strives and have succeeded to fulfill their mission to provide fair and accessible justice services that protect the rights of individuals, preserve community welfare, and maintain the public's confidence in their justice system. how courts have been outsourcing for years and will likely do more of it in the future to hold costs down and improve service.
This article discusses how states, local governments, and trial courts around the nation are using strategic planning as a tool to identify and better manage their core missions during these difficult fiscal times.
This NCSC glossary provides definitions and links in related articles/works regarding strategic planning in the courts.
This report presents information intended to help state courts improve their capacities for conducting visioning and strategic planning activities and attempts to relates its review of the concepts to actual court futures efforts, the intent being to discern some lessons from their experiences.
An analysis of how Orleans Parish must reform its overcrowded juvenile courts. This report includes articles on fairness and racial bias, problems which these courts constantly face. Charts and articles are provided towards the end which discuss possible solutions to the multitude of problems faced by Orleans Parish.
The social, economic, technological, and policy trends shaping the courts since the 1990s, coupled with emerging trends, will require courts to alter their roles more profoundly by 2020 than ever before. Courts must revolutionize how they provide justice services, rethink how they do business, and assertively shape a better future.
This article presents Utah's experience with reengineering, describing both the benefits and the political costs associated with reengineering court processes.
This article discusses lessons learned from courts engaged in reengineering projects, including insights with regard to successful project design.
This article discusses the importance of establishing principles to guide reengineering processes and to work with justice partners to establish stable and adequate funding for the courts.
This article introduces a series of five (5) articles that shares experiences of courts engaged in the reengineering process to confront the quality of services challenges during a time of diminishing resources.
This article discusses an essential functions approach to reengineeering in which courts the financial crisis that has caused state and local courts to examine court services, define those that are most essential, streamline or even eliminate services that are not highest priority, and reengineer those that remain.
This article discusses how courts have used technology for decades to improve their services and now the time has come for them to use technology to help rethink and reengineer their operations.
This article discusses strategies of state courts to reengineer their state court systems in response to the current deep economic recession and its attendant impacts on state and local revenue and budgets.
This article discusses the necessity of reengineering state court processes.
A guide for court managers on the application of business processes and review techniques, and a tool for employing technology in court systems.
This manual provides help for judge leaders, court administrators, clerks of court, court IT directors, and other court managers who deal with information technology prepare for technology change, and adjust to the changes that technology brings to the courts.
This glossary of terms aids in the development of a preliminary understanding of the meaning of many of the common terms encountered by those who want to learn more about how to change day-to-day work processes in the courts.
Judge Ahalt suggests that courts, lawyers, and judges must embrace modern technology to create a successful future. He lists positive changes that would occur if modern technology was applied to dispute resolution systems, such as reduced time delays, reduced costs, and increased profits. Judge Ahalt bases his analysis upon Michael Hammer's and Dean Pound's works regarding court technology and reengineering.