Challenging Times: Court Stewardship and Business Process Re-engineering

Transcription

1 Challenging Times: Court Stewardship and Business Process Re-engineering Baltimore, Maryland February 7, 2011 Overview: Re-Engineering from a Court Leadership Perspective Stewardship and convener role of judicial leadership and court managers in re-engineering First Principles: court mission and core functions Business process re-engineering vs. cutback management strategies Agile courts and quality cycle: High Performance Courts Framework (NCSC) National Association for Court Managers Core Competencies Information Technology Management Caseflow Managment Leadership Education, Training, and Development Purposes And Responsibilities Of Courts Visioning and Strategic Planning Human Resources Management Essential Components Resources, Budget, and Finance Court Community Communication Baltimore, MD 1

2 The Leadership Challenge Information Technology Management Caseflow Managment Leadership Education, Training, and Development Purposes And Responsibilities Of Courts Visioning and Strategic Planning Human Resources Management Essential Components Resources, Budget, and Finance Court Community Communication Leadership is the Energy that moves us toward our purpose What constitutes leadership and how does it differ from court management? Managers coordinate operations, employ control mechanisms, establish accountability measures Leaders vision, create, think strategically, and inspire others to act Managers are people who do things right and leaders are people who do the right thing. Bennis, W. G., & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders: The strategies for taking charge. New York: Hare & Row. Baltimore, MD 2

3 Leading to fulfill the Court s Purposes Courts need leaders who take risks, inspire innovation, challenge the status quo, and stimulate growth and change Leaders must: Be credible in action Create focus through vision and purpose Manage interdependence: work beyond the boundaries Produce a high performance work environment Do skillful and continual diagnosis Leading to fulfill the Court s Purposes Courts need leaders who take risks, inspire innovation, challenge the status quo, and stimulate growth and change Leaders must: Be credible in action Create focus through vision and purpose Manage interdependence: work beyond the boundaries Produce a high performance work environment Do skillful and continual diagnosis Business Process Re-Engineering: Project Scope Internal: Court Baltimore, MD 3

4 Business Process Re-Engineering: Project Scope Internal: Court Justice Agencies Business Process Re-Engineering: Project Scope Justice Agencies Internal: Court External: Community Services & Stakeholders Business Process Re-Engineering: Project Scope Justice Agencies Internal: Court External: Community Services & Stakeholders Mutual Investment: Pooled Resources and Cumulative Benefits Baltimore, MD 4

5 Process Re-engineering: Potential Cumulative Benefits High Potential Cost Savings Low Court Court and Court, Justice Agencies Justice Agencies and Stakeholders Participants Context: Culture of Continuous Growth and Rapid Change Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County Old Court House- built ,970 Population (1930 census) 3,268 Case Filings 3 Superior Court Judges Context: Culture of Continuous Growth and Rapid Change Downtown Court Complex million Population 192,303 Superior Court Cases 394,771 Justice Court Cases 95 Superior Court Judges 23 Justices of the Peace 60 Court Commissioners 3,480 Staff Baltimore, MD 5

6 Court Mandates Study Purpose: Ensure that budget reduction plans preserve resources for mandated court functions Scope: Citation of all applicable authorities: State constitution State statutes Court rules Administrative orders Other sources, e.g. ABA and COSCA Standards Resources: Full-time equivalent staff (FTE s) & salaries Statement of consequences of unfulfilled mandates Mandates Juvenile Court Administration Arizona Constitution, Art. 6, 15 The jurisdiction and authority of the courts of this state in all proceedings and matters affecting juveniles shall be as provided by the legislature or the people by initiative or referendum. A.R.S A. The juvenile court has original jurisdiction over all delinquency proceedings brought under the authority of this title. B. The juvenile court has exclusive original jurisdiction over all proceedings brought under the authority of this title except for delinquency proceedings. D. The juvenile court has jurisdiction of proceedings to obtain judicial consent to the marriage, employment or enlistment in the armed services of a child, if consent is required by law. F. The orders of the juvenile court under the authority of this chapter or chapter 3, 5 or 10 of this title take precedence over any order of any other court of this state except the court of appeals and the supreme court to the extent that they are inconsistent with orders of other courts A.R.S A. The presiding judge of the juvenile court shall appoint a director of juvenile court services who shall serve at the pleasure of the presiding juvenile judge. B. The director of juvenile court services shall recommend the appointment of deputy probation officers, detention personnel, other personnel and office assistants as the director deems necessary. Such deputy probation officers, detention personnel, other personnel and office assistants shall not have authority to act or draw a salary for their services until their appointments have been approved and ordered by the presiding judge of the juvenile court. A.R.S Dependency petitions Preliminary Protective Conference and hearing shall be held within 5-7 days of removal from home. A.R.S Abortion Consent Petitions hearing and decision shall be held within 48 hours of petition filing A.R.S Adoption/Temporary Custody Petition petition shall filed within 5 days of custody and a hearing shall be held within 10 days of filing petition. A.R.S (C) Mental health evaluations requires assessment within 72 hours of admission to inpatient assessment facility Rule 32, Rules of Proc. for Juv. Ct Advisory hearing for detained juveniles shall be held within 24 hours if filing of petition. Local Rule 1.2(d) The court shall include the following departments and offices: (6) Juvenile Court Center. Administrative Order Presiding judges shall obtain compliance with statistical reporting requirements from superior [Administrative Rule V-A(III)(J)] court, adult probation, juvenile court, justice courts and magistrate courts. Mandates [1] Staff [2] FTE Annualized Salary Costs 67 $2,382,199 Case flow management and assurance of statistical reporting Administrative support for all Juvenile Court case processing Juvenile Court Administrator 1 Administrative Assistant 1 Case flow management and assurance of statistical reporting Deputy Juvenile Court Administrator 2 Preliminary Protective Conference and hearing shall be held within 5-7 days of removal from home; update record for AOC compliance Dependency Staff 11.5 Advisory hearing for detained juveniles shall be held within 24 hours if filing of petition; update record for AOC compliance Delinquency Staff 32.5 Adoption/Temporary Custody Petition petition shall filed within 5 days of custody and a hearing shall be held within 10 days of filing petition; update record for AOC compliance Extended Hours Court Staff including Commissioner Assistantclassified 4 Administrative and courtroom support; update record for AOC compliance Commissioner Assistant-classified 4 Establish local CASA programs CASA Program Staff 11 Baltimore, MD 6

7 Internal Court Process Re-engineering and Restructuring Economies of scale: consolidation of technology, human resources, budget, procurement, telecommunications, security and facilities management functions Outsourcing: Forensics, Family Court Reports, Probate Investigations, Citations Processing and Collections Streamlining: Probation (EBP), ADR, Self Service Centers, Libraries Internal Court Process Re-engineering and Restructuring Technology: Centralized Electronic Recording, Remote Video Court Interpretation, Domestic Violence (OOP s), Juror Payment Kiosks Enhanced Revenues (FY 09): New and Increased User Fees = $8 million Bond Forfeitures, $2.5 million Regional Jury Summonsing Internal Court Savings: FY 10 Budget 12.5% Budget Reduction = $22 mil Elimination of 435 positions Baltimore, MD 7

8 Results of Court and Justice Agency Re- Engineering Efforts Integrated Criminal Justice Information System: 400 million annual transactions City Police Probation Criminals Indigent Representation Other States Criminal Justice IS County Jails FBI Border Patrol County Attorney Attorney General Superior Court Justice Court Juvenile Court Parole NLETS State Mental Hospital Initial Appearance Court AFIS Victims State Supreme Court MVD DHS Visitors Clerk of the Courts Private Counsel Department of Public Safety Corrections Court and Justice Agencies: Process Re-engineering for New Criminal Tower AS IS Value Added & Non-value Added Activities Creation of Backlog & Reduced Customer Service Resources Available Resources Needed Innovation / Improvement Activities By Process Experts TO BE Value Added Activities ONLY Improved Service Reduced Backlog Increased Job Satisfaction Together, we will create a new organization that is focused only on activities that Add Value. Resources Available Resources Needed Slide provided by Dr. Dan Straub Results of Process Re-Engineering for New Criminal Court Tower Process Identified Total Processes Improved Processes Time Saved (Min.) Case Filing Pre-Judgment Calendaring , Court Operations ,238(Est.) Judgment Post-Judgment ,536 Totals ,033 The Good News: 68% of criminal case management process can be improved, many before moving into the new courthouse! Baltimore, MD 8

9 Results of Court and Justice Agency Re- Engineering Efforts & Almost 2 million minutes saved annually! Around $1,000,000 in staff costs saved annually! Equivalent to 16 staff! External Re-Engineering: Courts, Justice Agencies and Stakeholders Restorative Justice Model Collaborative Re-engineering: An Example - RCC & EDC Regional Court Centers (RCC) established in Early Disposition Court (EDC) established in Consolidates multiple settings in Superior Court through Direct Complaint process. Co-locates judicial officers, court staff, prosecutors, defense lawyers, interpreters, probation officers and treatment services with courtrooms and jail detention facilities. On-site communications result in synergies and economies of scale. Baltimore, MD 9

10 Collaborative Re-engineering: Tangible Caseflow Results 90% of new felonies are now filed in either RCC or EDC 60% of the cases in RCC and EDC are resolved there (54% of total filings) Half of all cases are terminated within 28 days in FY10 compared to 100 days in FY01. Collaborative Re-engineering: Tangible Financial Results $46,000,000 Cumulative Savings Since 2001 $5,500,000 FY2010 Actual Savings $1,500, Estimated Savings Collaborative Re-Engineering: New Criminal Court Tower Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County Project Completion: Feb Baltimore, MD 10

11 Challenging Times: Court Stewardship and Business Process Re-engineering Criminal Court Tower Construction RCC / EDC Court Room Glassed off inmate docking area High volume, high security courtroom with full technology support Criminal Court Tower Baltimore, MD 11

12 Co-Location of Courts, Justice Agencies and Stakeholders Victim Rooms Secure Custody Victim Rooms Community Programs Room TASC Negotiation Room Lessons Learned Convener role of court leadership in systems approach Identification of re-engineering opportunities Establishment of consortium model Governance Stakeholder intensive areas; family, mental health, probate, juvenile justice, criminal and civil courts Potential Benefits of Broad-Scoped Re-Engineering Mutual Investment: Pooled resources Enhanced community/stakeholder support System-wide savings for multiple organizations Shift from competition to collaboration for system funding and new resource acquisition Plan for scalability and sustainability: proof of concept Comprehensive Performance Measurement to Assess Efficacy of System Changes Integrating Court Tools measures with the funding body s performance based budget system, e.g., Managing for Results Intergovernmental relations focus, including workgroup participation by budget staff Program site visits, tours and reports for funding bodies Evidence Based Practices Approach High Performance Court Framework (NCSC): Balanced Scorecard Approach: effectiveness, efficiency, procedural fairness and productivity Administrative Principles: individual case attention, treating cases proportionately, procedural fairness and judicial control of legal process Quality cycle: an iterative systemic process Organizational culture Baltimore, MD 12