Given the challenges posed to the U.S. courts sector, such as high caseloads and resource constraints, it is valuable to identify opportunities where changes in technology, policy, or practice could improve performance. In this report, RAND researchers, with the help of a practitioner Courts Advisory Panel, seek to map out an innovation agenda for the sector.

Cover: Fostering Innovation in the U.S. Court System

Fostering Innovation in the U.S. Court System

Identifying High-Priority Technology and Other Needs for Improving Court Operations and Outcomes

Published May 10, 2016

by Brian A. Jackson, Duren Banks, John S. Hollywood, Dulani Woods, Amanda Royal, Patrick W. Woodson, Nicole J. Johnson

Download

Download eBook for Free

Full Document

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 1.5 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Appendix: Technology and Practice Taxonomy

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.6 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Purchase

Purchase Print Copy

 Format Price
Add to Cart Paperback164 pages $42.50

Research Questions

  1. What is the current state of the art for court technology and practice?
  2. What are the opportunities where changes in technology, policy, or practice could improve performance in the court system?
  3. Based on the objectives of the court system, what are the highest-priority needs for courts in the United States?

Society relies on the judicial system to play numerous roles. It is the link between law enforcement and the corrections system and serves as a check on their power over citizens. It also adjudicates civil disputes, serving as a venue for negotiation and resolution of various problems. In playing these roles, courts today are challenged by a wide range of issues, such as high caseloads, resource constraints, disparities in justice outcomes, and increasing needs to share information. For the courts to adapt to these challenges and take advantage of new opportunities to improve their ability to play their critical roles, the court system needs innovation. This report draws on published literature and new structured deliberations of a practitioner Courts Advisory Panel to frame an innovation agenda. It identifies and prioritizes potential improvements in technology, policy, and practice for the court system. Some of the top-tier needs identified by the panel and researchers include developing better tools to sort cases and match them with the process most likely to get them to an outcome efficiently and effectively, defining strategies and minimum standards for protecting the "virtual filing cabinets" that hold the court's formal records, and expanding the court-related transactions and interactions that could be done from a distance over the Internet. Such high-priority needs provide a menu of innovation options for addressing key problems or capitalizing on emerging opportunities for the court system. This report is part of a larger effort to assess and prioritize technology and related needs across the criminal justice community for the National Institute of Justice's National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center system.

Key Findings

Courts Today Face a Wide Range of Challenges

  • Members of the Courts Advisory Panel identified the major issues or problems in courts today in five key areas: case preparation, court information management, support for court hearings, facilities management, and people management.
  • Among issues raised by the panel, issues of caseloads and the required amount of staff to handle them were prominent. So were concerns related to court security and emergency preparedness.
  • Much of the panel cited issues with sharing information across jurisdiction boundaries and across criminal justice agencies, particularly problems with system compatibility. Data protection and the quality of the data entered in court information systems were also common concerns.
  • The panel also voiced concerns about balance and fairness in the justice system — because the resources available to the state have the potential to overmatch the resources that all but the wealthiest individuals could use in their own defenses. Issues of how to support pro se litigants also were raised.

Innovation Needs for the Court System Fall into Eight Broad Categories

  • Leverage opportunities for greater court efficiency while ensuring that technology serves justice goals.
  • Improve security and emergency preparedness.
  • Improve quality and utilization of shared data in the justice system.
  • Strengthen analysis and use of data.
  • Address concerns in maintaining and protecting the court record.
  • Address basic technology shortfalls in today's courts.
  • Improve court technology acquisition processes.
  • Use technology for notification and public communication.

Recommendations

  • This effort, aimed at the national level, sought to frame an innovation agenda for the court system writ large. The value of the result will be driven by application and by how individual agencies or organizations use the identified needs to inform their choices about the future.
  • The innovation agenda presented here represents a starting point for developing new technology, policy, and practice to improve court performance. Rooted in present problems and current technology opportunities, the agenda represents a snapshot in time, one that should be revisited both as technology and society change and as it becomes possible to elaborate on and expand the agenda.
  • Reflecting the courts as both an actor and a venue that brings together entities across government, the private sector, and the general public, many of these needs reach outside the walls of the courthouse, creating potential benefits and requirements for many organizations and for society more generally. Pursuing these innovations is part of a broader program of improving national justice system performance through better coordination, information-sharing, and assessment to achieve the goals of appropriate, equitable, efficient, and effective administration of justice for the nation.

The research reported here was Sponsored by the National Institute of Justice and conducted within the Justice Policy Program, a part RAND Justice, Infrastructure, and Environment.

This report is part of the RAND research report series. RAND reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.