The Fiscal Year 2015 Annual Statistical Report for the Judiciary has been released detailing the work accomplished by Texas courts. The FY 2015 version provides three formats (print, interactive and flipbook) and gives readers a glimpse of statewide trends, court-level trends and detailed statistical data. Some highlights of the report include: 

After two years of intense effort, the CJI Committee (a diverse group of judges, court administrators, academics, and private-sector lawyers) published its first draft of "Recommendations to Reduce Cost and Delay in the Delivery of Civil Justice" during the CCJ Midyear Meeting in January.  The recommendations are now available for public comment on the NCSC website.

Source:  Washington Update, NCSC 

The American Evaluation Association defines evaluation as "a systematic process to determine merit, worth, value or significance." Program evaluation answers questions like: To what extent does a program or process achieve its goals? How can it be improved? Should it continue? Are the results worth what the costs?

 

The High Performance Court Framework illustrates an integrated approach to performance measurement and management. The court administration quality cycle includes five steps: determining the scope and content of a problem, information gathering, analysis, taking action, and evaluating the results.

 

This report describes general principles that should guide a government-wide effort to strengthen evaluation functions. While it is directed at federal agencies, the roadmap also applies to state and local government.

 

Western Michigan University's Evaluation Center provides checklists to facilitate evaluation. Of particular interest is the Utilization-Focused Evaluation Checklist, which provides useful steps to evaluations.

Source: The Evaluation Center at Western Michigan University

The National Performance Management Advisory Commission developed the performance management framework to help governments move beyond measuring and reporting those measures to managing performance toward improved results. For governments that currently have performance measures, the framework offers information on how they can use them to get better results. For governments that have not yet developed performance measures, the framework provides a starting point for creating a performance management system. The framework is designed to be used by all state, provincial, and local entities - agencies, cities, counties, school districts, the judiciary, and special districts.

Source: National Performance Management Advisory Commission

For additional information on this topic or to discuss how OCA can help you with evaluation in your court, please contact OCA's Scott Griffith, Director of Research and Court Services, or Amanda Stites, Research Specialist at (512) 463-1625.

 

Opinion: (KP-0064) Circumstances under which a truancy court may refer a child to the juvenile probation department, and circumstances under which a child may be prosecuted for delinquent conduct

Request for Opinion: ( RQ-0046-KP)

Summary: A court would likely conclude that under subsection 65.251(b) of the Family Code, a truancy court may refer a child to the juvenile probation department for either failure to obey a truancy order or direct contempt; however, such a referral requires two prior instances of contemptuous conduct regardless of form-either failure to obey a truancy order or direct contempt.

A court would likely conclude that a juvenile prosecutor maintains discretion under subsection 65.252(d) of the Family Code to prosecute a child for delinquent conduct as set forth in subsection 51.03(a)(2)(C) of the Family Code even on a child's initial referral to juvenile court.