Enhancing Information Sharing in Family Drug Courts: A Lean Six Sigma Case Study

Given the variety of stakeholders involved in cases within family drug courts, efficient communication and information sharing, which are needed to support decision‐making, can be quite challenging. Through a case study in one family drug court system, this research employed an action research approach to improve the information sharing process following the Lean Six Sigma methodology. The solutions implemented through this study contributed to improving the quality of the services provided by this court system and its overall productivity. In addition, this research extends our knowledge about methods for improving court systems from which others can learn to guide future improvement efforts.     

Roles and Power within Federal Problem Solving Courtroom Workgroups

Problem solving (PS) courts (e.g., drug, family, gang, prostitution, reentry) are becoming more commonplace. Today, PS courts exist or are planned in nearly all of the ninety‐four U.S. federal districts. These courts focus on integrating therapeutic jurisprudence into the courtroom environment while emphasizing group decision‐making processes among courtroom workgroup members. In this legal setting, courtroom workgroup teams, regularly consisting of judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, probation officers (POs), and treatment providers engage a collective, case management approach to decision making with shared power among team members. However, despite the court's therapeutic and collaborative design, we find that POs wield powerful influence in decision making. Informed by sixteen months of qualitative fieldwork, including semistructured interviews, observation of courtroom workgroup meetings, and court observations in five federal PS courts in three federal districts, we find that POs exert undetected informational, technical, and relational power within the PS courtroom workgroup. This role and its accompanying power transforms POs into key decision makers, regardless of PS court type, workgroup dynamics, and decision‐making style. The POs' role makes them critical contributors to the outcomes in federal PS courts with important implications for punishment decisions in the federal justice system. With an increasing number of PS courts currently in the planning stages at the federal level, our study has implications for the structure and decision outcomes in these growing courtroom workgroups.     

The Influence of Administrative Law Judge and Political Appointee Decisions on Appellate Courts in National Labor Relations Board Cases

Scholars have long been simultaneously concerned with the factors that influence appellate court decision making and the level of deference that the courts allow for agencies. However, scholars have treated administrative agencies as unitary actors with a single level of decision making, but in reality agency decisions involve input from multiple actors within the agency. I argue that appellate courts rely more heavily on decisions made by actors in the bureaucracy with greater levels of expertise and who are less politically motivated as cues in their decision making. This theory is bolstered by legal precedent in the area of administrative law that suggests courts should more heavily rely on the expert judgment of administrative judges. Thus, as a result of their increased expertise, appearance of political neutrality, and institutional support, courts will be more reliant on decisions issued by administrative law judges (ALJs) than those issued by the political appointees as cues in their decision making. Using over 300 unfair labor practice decisions issued by the federal appeals courts on review of cases from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board), I develop a model of appeals court decision making in unfair labor practice cases as a function of the initial decision of the ALJ, the final order of the political appointees of the NLRB, case characteristics, the ideology of the deciding appeals court panel, Supreme Court influence, and economic factors. Though the ideology of the court plays a role in its decision making, cues from ALJ decision making and that of the Board weigh more heavily in appellate court outcomes. However, cues from ALJ decisions play the most consistent role in appellate court decision making, even in more difficult cases. This has important implications for agency strategy in courts and suggests that future research should consider the influence of lower‐level decision making over appellate court decision making in the area of administrative law.     

Out on a Limb: Appointing a Parenting Coordinator with Decision‐Making Authority in the Absence of a Statute or Rule

This Article addresses the issue of whether a court may appoint a Parenting Coordinator (PC) with decision‐making authority in the absence of a statute or court rule. The Article identifies possible sources of authority for the appointment of a PC with decision‐making authority in a state with no authorizing statute or court rule. It also provides a paradigm for constructing an appointment that allows for the benefits of Parenting Coordination but does not delegate decision‐making authority to an extent that it would constitute an impermissible delegation of judicial authority.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Where a court seeks to appoint a PC with decision‐making authority in the absence of an authorizing statute or court rule, the court may find some authority allowing the appointment in (1) its equitable authority over child custody and visitation, (2) its authority to enforce its own orders, or (3) its authority to appoint other extrajudicial assistants such as a special master or mediator.
• Where a court seeks to appoint a PC with decision‐making authority in the absence of an authorizing statute or court rule, the court must craft an appointment that delegates enough decision‐making authority to the PC for parenting coordination to be effective yet, at the same time, not so much decision‐making authority as to render the appointment an impermissible delegation of a judicial function, specifically:
  • The PC's role should be limited to assisting the parties in implementing custody and visitation terms already decreed by the trial court.
  • A PC should be appointed only if the parties to the divorce consent to the appointment or if the trial court makes a finding that the case is a high‐conflict case.
  • The parties must have the opportunity for the trial court to meaningfully review any decision of the PC so that the trial court retains ultimate decision‐making authority.

     

Race and Juvenile Incarceration: A Propensity Score Matching Examination

Disproportionate minority contact is an important issue in contemporary juvenile justice. Few studies have directly examined the link between race and judicial decision to incarceration. Using official data from Pennsylvania (n?=?41,561), this study added to this literature in two ways. This study used propensity score matching to obtain a purer estimate of the influence race has on the decision to petition a case to juvenile court. The results indicated that prosecutors use perceptual shorthand in making this decision that hinges on race. Specifically, blacks were more 1.28 times more likely than whites to have their case petitioned to juvenile court.     

Factors of Success: Drug Court Graduate Exit Interviews

Drug court judges enforce mandated treatment through a series of rewards and graduated sanctions as compliance with mandated treatment and retention are crucial to successful graduation for participants. A study of 600 graduates from drug court details self-report data of motivations and perceptions offenders shared about their experience in drug court. Clients rated different factors related to their entry into, retention in, and graduation from drug court. Upon graduation, clients rated the opportunity to avoid jail as a key factor in their decision to enter drug court and positive improvements in their life as significant in their decision to remain. This research provides important information on the drug court experience from those clients who successfully graduated.     

Business as Usual? Bail Decision Making and “Micro Politics” in an Australian Magistrates Court

Between the 1970s and 1990s, political scientists in the United States pursued a distinctive research program that employed ethnographic methods to study micro politics in criminal courts. This article considers the relevance of this concept for court researchers today through a case study about bail decision making in a lower criminal court in Australia. It describes business as usual in how decisions are made and the provision of pretrial services. It also looks at how traditionalists and reformers understood business as usual, and uses this as a critical concept to make visible micro politics in this court. The case study raises issues about organizational change in criminal courts since the 1990s, since there are fewer studies about plea bargaining and more about specialist or problem‐solving courts. It is suggested that we need a new international agenda that can address change and continuity in criminal courts.     

Collaborations between drug courts and service providers: Characteristics and challenges

Addressing the multiple treatment needs of drug-involved offenders can enhance outcomes including sobriety and recidivism. Meeting drug court offenders' needs requires collaborative linkages between courts and providers of treatment and other services; however, there has been limited research on linkages. Using semi-structured interview data collected from administrators of fourteen drug courts and providers of services to offenders in those drug courts, this study described collaborative linkages and the challenges involved in fostering them. Although results suggest a moderate to strong level of linkage as perceived by both drug court administrators and service providers, services other than substance abuse treatment were sparsely provided through the drug courts. Limitations in funding, management information systems, and staffing were perceived as barriers to linkage. Results offer directions for enhancing linkages between drug courts and service providers and should be of value in improving quality of drug court treatment and offender outcomes.     

“YOUTH IS ENMESHED IN A HIGHLY DYSFUNCTIONAL FAMILY SYSTEM”: EXPLORING THE RELATIONSHIP AMONG DYSFUNCTIONAL FAMILIES,PARENTAL INCARCERATION,AND JUVENILE COURT DECISION MAKING*

Although prior work has substantiated the role of external attributes in juvenile court decision making, no study to date has examined how family situational factors as well as maternal and paternal incarceration affect juvenile court officials' responses to troubled youth. Using quantitative and qualitative juvenile court data from a large urban county in the southwest, this study draws on attribution theory to examine how family structure, perceptions of family dysfunction, and parental incarceration influence out‐of‐home placement decisions. Findings reveal that juvenile court officials' perceptions of good and bad families inform their decision making. This study emphasizes the need to unravel the intricate effects of maternal and paternal incarceration and officials' attributions about families and family structure on juvenile court decision making.     

Analytic methods for examining race and ethnic disparity in the juvenile courts

Prior studies of juvenile court decision making and racial disparity are often criticized for their lack of methodological rigor. These studies are criticized for focusing their analyses on separate decision-making stages and not taking into account issues that are related to sample selection. This research attempted to address these issues through an analysis of juvenile court case records from the state of Hawaii. Different limited dependent variable models were used to estimate ethnic disparity in juvenile court outcomes. Comparisons of models according to the Bayesian Information Criteria (BICs) are used to assess the overall fit of these models. The findings indicate few substantive differences across models and a general leniency of the court in favor of White youth. The findings do reveal that there are differences in the accuracy with which these models predicted juvenile court outcomes. The usefulness of this method of model comparison for disparity research is discussed.     

Domestic violence and dependency courts: the Greenbook demonstration experience

This field study reports on a cross-site evaluation of dependency courts in communities receiving federal funding to implement the Greenbook initiative, a multisite demonstration for community improvement of coordinated responses to families victimized by domestic violence and child maltreatment. This article focuses on the dependency court, where child maltreatment cases are heard, specifically court participation in collaborative activities and court practice improvements. Findings indicate that perceptions of judicial leadership varied considerably by site. Cross-training appeared to increase over time, particularly with court staff. Collaborative efforts emerged across the Greenbook initiative with regard to the courts, and some innovative practices appeared within Greenbook sites, such as separate case plans for perpetrators and victims of violence in families, reducing the likelihood of controversial failure to protect charges. Results also highlight challenges inherent in changing court practices. Research and practice implications are discussed, focusing on relevance to other communities attempting to work collaboratively with the court system.     

The Drug Court as Postmodern Justice

The drug court is far more than a new version of the old drug-diversion idea. It is a fundamental embodiment of postmodern justice and represents a paradigm shift from criminal court practices. This article compares the drug court to the criminal court in terms of the dimensions of the modernism-postmodernism debate as specified in legal research and public policy scholarship. First, the courts are differentiated in terms of their worldviews, ideas on the nature of society, definitions of truth, and conceptions of the foundation of law. Next, the drug court and criminal court jurisprudence are juxtaposed. Specific dimensions include their collaborative versus adversarial systems and the individualized versus the due process framework. Finally, the two courts are considered in terms of their divergent visions of the drug user. Upon analysis, it appears that the two courts are in an intractable ideological disagreement framed by competing modern versus postmodern intellectual dispositions.     

Modeling the politics of punishment: A conceptual and empirical analysis of ‘law in action’ in criminal sentencing

The empirical sentencing literature has focused intensively on racial equity concerns, but this research added to the literature by analyzing political-contextual sources of punishment. This study developed a functional model of court decision making and used ordinal logit to assess court punishment decisions in 387 counties across seven states. The findings supported established assumptions about individual level punishment determinants, but showed that political environment indicators also predicted sentence severity. Interactions were present as well. In law and order environments Black defendants received enhanced sentences, but in jurisdictions with the largest Black populations, Black defendants faced reduced punishments. With individual and state level effects held constant, the findings from this research reinforced claims that punishment is intensely political.     

CONTEXTUAL DISPARITIES IN GUIDELINES DEPARTURES: COURTROOM SOCIAL CONTEXTS,GUIDELINES COMPLIANCE,AND EXTRALEGAL DISPARITIES IN CRIMINAL SENTENCING1

This study examines the theoretical and empirical linkages between criminal court social contexts and the judicial use of sentences that deviate from the recommendations of sentencing guidelines. Individual sentencing data from the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing (PCS) are combined with county‐level measures of social context to examine predictions about the role courtroom characteristics play in judicial departures. Results from hierarchical analyses suggest that the likelihood of departure varies significantly across courts, even after accounting for variations in individual case characteristics. Several measures of courtroom social context—including the size of the court, its caseload pressure and the overall guidelines compliance rate—are significantly related to the individual likelihood of receiving a departure sentence. Moreover, the social context of the court also conditions the influence of various individual‐level sentencing considerations. Findings are discussed in relation to contemporary theoretical perspectives on courtroom decision making and future directions for research on contextual disparities in criminal sentencing are suggested.     

An Examination of the Denver Drug Court: The Impact of a Treatment‐Oriented Drug‐Offender System

This paper reports on a retrospective study of the Denver Drug Court that was conducted to assess the court's impact on court processing, treatment matching, and offender recidivism. A sample of 300 offenders from the Denver Drug Court and drug offenders from two previous years prior to the drug court was obtained. Quasi‐experimental procedures were used to examine differences in measured variables across each offender cohort. Data for this study were collected from court records as well as through on‐line arrest records. This paper begins with an exploration of the organizational framework of the Denver Drug Court and the court's related treatment options. It also examines the extant literature on the effectiveness of drug courts. Analysis of the data indicates that the Denver Drug Court has reduced case processing time and it has slightly reduced the amount of time offenders spend in presentence confinement. Unlike previous studies of drug courts, this study attempted to examine the court's ability to match offenders to treatment needs. Analysis of the available data, although limited, suggests that offenders are being matched to appropriate levels of treatment. Finally, data analysis indicates no significant differences in revocation or rearrest rates. This article concludes with a discussion of the controversial nature of drug courts. Directions for future research are offered.     

Psychosocial concepts in juvenile law

This study was designed to clarify the types of information about juveniles and their families that are relevant for three types of juvenile court decisions: (a) the pretrial detention of juveniles; (b) their transfer for trial in criminal courts: and (c) disposition decisions after delinquency adjudication. Predominant legal standards for these decisions are described, information relevance for the decisions is defined, and why past studies have failed to clarify the information needs of juvenile court decision makers is explained. Results of a study involving a national sample of juvenile court personnel include an empirically derived domain of psychosocial and behavioral characteristics of juveniles and their families relevant for courts' interpretations of controlling legal standards; factor analysis of the domain, describing dimensions of the domain of information about juveniles and families; and an examination of the relation of these information categories to each legal standard controlling the decision areas in question. The interpretation of results may facilitate decision making by juvenile courts, evaluations by mental health professionals who assist juvenile courts, and further research by social scientists who study discretionary juvenile court decisions.This research was supported by grant No. MH-35090 from the Center for Studies of Antisocial and Violent Behavior, National Institute of Mental Health, DHHS. Portions of the study were conducted in collaboration with the National Juvenile Law Center, Inc. of St. Louis. The authors wish to acknowledge Martha Bellew-Smith, Marcia Conlin, and Robert Rust, who contributed substantially to the conduct of the study. Others who participated at various stages are Steve Bellus and Sandra Seigel     

Enhancing the Foster Care Review Process: The Case of Kentucky's Interested Party Review Program

In order to promote timely permanency for children in out‐of‐home care, citizen foster care review programs employ volunteers to monitor progress for children in the child welfare system. In addition to case file reviews, Kentucky implemented an Interested Party Review system in which foster care review board members meet with family members and child welfare staff in order to glean more detailed and multi‐faceted information to submit to the court. This article describes a mixed‐methods program evaluation demonstrating the contribution of such a review process to judicial decision making and child outcome, as well as recommendations for program improvement.     

Working from Inside and Outside Institutions: How Safety Audits Can Help Courts' Decision Making Around Domestic Violence and Child Maltreatment

As systems begin to work collaboratively to address the overlap of domestic violence and child maltreatment, systems‐analysis approaches are also being explored to test the effectiveness of collaborative interventions in meeting the needs of victims and their families. The institutional safety audit model is one such approach currently being explored in sites across the country. Under this model, case files of families receiving services are submitted to an analysis that compares the interventions received with the needs that were demonstrated. Though still in a formative stage, the institutional safety audit has the potential to be used by the courts as an innovative information‐gathering tool on the effectiveness of court‐ordered interventions. This article will provide a detailed overview of the safety audit model, describe how safety audits are currently being used in the field, and discuss how the courts can incorporate safety audit findings into decision‐making around domestic violence and child maltreatment.     

Administration of Justice and Multimodality in Media: Semiotic Translation,Conflict and Compatibility

Law as one sign system can be recorded and interpreted by another sign system—media. If each transaction in court is taken as a sign, it can be interpreted or transferred by different signs of media for the same purpose, though with different effects. This study focuses on the transformative effects of the semiotic revolution in media on law. The present research revealed that the evolution of media has driven the administration of justice to pay more attention to the process of court proceedings. This research also discusses the semiotic conflict and compatibility between the sign subsystems within media upon interpreting the administration of justice. In addition, disequilibrium between different sign systems highlights the consequent need for intersemiotic translation, consciousness and evaluation as part of decision making on court domains.     

FRAGMENTED COURTS AND CHILD PROTECTION CASES

This article discusses the proposed implementation of a model court project that can serve as an alternative approach to adjudicating child abuse and neglect cases. The model project allows criminal child abuse cases to be processed with related civil proceeding in one court before one judge. This integrated approach can ensure more efficient case processing, more informed judicial decision making, and more effective delivery of services to children and families.