COURTS OF APPEALS, DISTRICT COURTS, AND OTHER JUDICIAL SERVICES

Salaries and Expenses

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT REQUIREMENTS Mandatory Discretionary Total

Fiscal Year 2020 Salaries and Expenses Enacted Appropriation $457,484,000 $5,250,234,000 $5,707,718,000

Fiscal Year 2020 Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund Enacted Appropriation $0 $9,070,000 $9,070,000

Total, Fiscal Year 2020 Enacted Appropriation $457,484,000 $5,259,304,000 $5,716,788,000

Fiscal Year 2021 Salaries and Expenses Appropriation Request $469,369,000 $5,459,475,000 $5,928,844,000

Fiscal Year 2021 Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund Appropriation Request $0 $9,700,000 $9,700,000

Total, Fiscal Year 2021 Appropriation Request $469,369,000 $5,469,175,000 $5,938,544,000

Requested Increase from Fiscal Year 2020 Enacted Appropriation $11,885,000 $209,871,000 $221,756,000

APPROPRIATION LANGUAGE

COURTS OF APPEALS, DISTRICT COURTS, AND OTHER JUDICIAL SERVICES

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

 For the salaries of judges of the United States Court of Federal Claims, magistrate judges, and all other officers and employees of the Federal Judiciary not otherwise specifically provided for, necessary expenses 

of the courts, and the purchase, rental, repair, and cleaning of uniforms for Probation and Pretrial Services Office staff, as authorized by law, [$5,250,234,000]$5,459,475,000 (including the purchase of firearms 

and ammunition); of which not to exceed $27,817,000 shall remain available until expended for space alteration projects and for furniture and furnishings related to new space alteration and construction projects.

 In addition, there are appropriated such sums as may be necessary under current law for the salaries of circuit and district judges (including judges of the territorial courts of the United States), bankruptcy judges, 

and justices and judges retired from office or from regular active service.

 In addition, for expenses of the United States Court of Federal Claims associated with processing cases under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-660), not to exceed 

[$9,070,000]$9,700,000 to be appropriated from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund.

(P.L. 116-93 - Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, 2020)

 4.1
Fiscal Year 2021 Resource Requirements:

FTEs Amount FTEs Amount FTEs Amount

 1,870 457,484 26,377 5,880,948 28,247 6,338,432

 - - - (170,015) - (170,015)

 1,870 457,484 26,377 5,710,933 28,247 6,168,417

 Estimated FY 2020 fee collections.............................................................................. - - - (203,489) - (203,489)

 Carryforward balances from FY 2019 and prior years into FY 2020....................................... - - - (248,140) - (248,140)

Fiscal Year 2020 Enacted Appropriation (includes Vaccine Injury Fund).............................. 1,870 457,484 26,377 5,259,304 28,247 5,716,788

Mandatory Discretionary

Fiscal Year 2020 Obligations (includes Vaccine Injury Fund).............................................

 Non-appropriated sources of funding...................................................................... 

FY 2019 Encumbered Carryforward ..............................................................................

SUMMARY OF REQUEST 

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

FISCAL YEAR 2021

Total 

Fiscal Year 2020 Available Resources (includes Vaccine Injury Fund)..................................

(Dollar amounts in thousands)

 4.2
Page

FTEs Amount FTEs Amount FTEs Amount

Fiscal Year 2020 Base Enacted Appropriation (including Vaccine Injury Fund)..................... 1,870 457,484 26,377 5,259,304 28,247 5,716,788

Adjustments to Base to Maintain Current Services:

A. Judges and Associated Staff

4.32 1. Pay and benefit cost adjustments

4.32 - 4,178 - 1,521 - 5,699

4.32 - 2,974 - 965 - 3,939

4.32

4.32 i. Health benefits............................................................................................ - 167 - 82 - 249

4.33 ii. FICA adjustment...................................................................................... - 231 - 75 - 306

4.33 iii. FERS adjustment................................................................................... - 717 - 1,258 - 1,975

4.33 8 1,816 43 4,824 51 6,640

4.34 7 1,556 30 3,142 37 4,698

4.35 1 246 3 366 4 612

B. Court Personnel and Programs

4.37 5. Pay and benefit cost adjustments

4.37 - - - 25,639 - 25,639

4.37 - - - 25,810 - 25,810

4.37 - - - 25,639 - 25,639

4.37

4.37 i. Health benefits............................................................................................ - - - 5,451 - 5,451

4.37 ii. FICA adjustment.................................................................................... - - - 2,814 - 2,814

4.38 iii. FERS adjustment................................................................................... - - - 31,648 - 31,648

4.38 - - - (13,679) - (13,679)

4.38

 - - - 62,924 - 62,924

4.39 - - - (33,000) - (33,000)

Mandatory Discretionary Total 

 e. One less compensable day......................................................................................

 decline in non-appropriated funds ..............................................................................

6. Funding necessary to maintain FY 2020 service levels due to anticipated 

3. Increase in average number of senior judges (7 judge FTE/30 staff FTE)...................................

 c. Benefits increases.............................................................................................

2. Increase in average number of filled Article III judgeships (8 judge FTE/43 staff FTE).................

 c. Promotions and within-grade increases.....................................................................

 d. Benefits increases...............................................................................................

 a. Proposed January 2021 pay adjustment (1.0% for nine months).......................................

 a. Proposed January 2021 pay adjustment (1.0% for nine months).......................................

 b. Annualization of 2020 pay adjustment (2.6% for three months).......................................

4. Increase in average number of filled bankruptcy judgeships (1 judge FTE/3 staff FTE) ...............

 b. Annualization of 2020 pay adjustment (3.1% for three months).......................................

7. Reduction to FY 2021 base due to decrease in court salary and non-salary requirements ...............

 4.3
Page C. Other Adjustments

FTEs Amount FTEs Amount FTEs Amount

4.39 - - - 13,566 - 13,566

4.39 - - - 630 - 630

4.40

4.40 - - - 5,231 - 5,231

4.40 - - - 20,981 - 20,981

4.40 - - - (2,000) - (2,000)

4.40 - - - (5,955) - (5,955)

4.43

4.43 - - - 15,456 - 15,456

4.43 - - - (900) - (900)

 16 11,885 76 192,488 92 204,373

 1,886 469,369 26,453 5,451,792 28,339 5,921,161

Program Increases:

4.44 12. New FY 2021 full-time magistrate judges and staff (2 new judgeships/

 2 FTE and 7 staff FTE).......................................................................................... - - 9 1,302 9 1,302

4.45 - - 139 13,599 139 13,599

4.45 - - - 2,482 - 2,482

 - - 148 17,383 148 17,383

 1,886 469,369 26,601 5,469,175 28,487 5,938,544

 16 11,885 224 209,871 240 221,756

Financing the Fiscal Year 2021 Request:

 1,886 469,369 26,601 5,469,175 28,487 5,938,544

4.46 - - - 213,705 - 213,705

4.47 - - - 175,000 - 175,000

Total Estimated Obligations, Fiscal Year 2021............................................................... 1,886 469,369 26,601 5,857,880 28,487 6,327,249

15. Estimated FY 2021 fee collections..............................................................................

16. Anticipated unencumbered carryforward from FY 2020...................................................

 Total Current Services Appropriation Required......................................................

Total Appropriation Request, Fiscal Year 2021...............................................................

Total Fiscal Year 2021 Appropriation Request...............................................................

Total Appropriation Increase, Fiscal Year 2020 to Fiscal Year 2021....................................

14. Infrastructure costs for new courthouse construction projects .............................................

13. FY 2021 court support staffing due to workload changes...................................................

Mandatory Discretionary

 b. GSA rent inflation.............................................................................................

 b. Contractor conversion savings..............................................................................

 Subtotal, Program Increases..............................................................................

 Subtotal, Adjustments to Base to Maintain Current Services.......................................

 d. Other space-related adjustments..............................................................................

11. Information technology requirements ........................................................................

 a. Continued implementation of ongoing information technology projects...............................

Total 

8. Inflationary and miscellaneous adjustments.....................................................................

 c. Space reduction...............................................................................................................

10. GSA space rental and related services

9. Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund adjustment.........................................................

 a. New space to be delivered in FY 2021.....................................................................

 4.4
COURTS OF APPEALS, DISTRICT COURTS AND OTHER JUDICIAL SERVICES

Salaries and Expenses ($000)

FY 2019 Actuals FY 2020 Estimated Obligations 

Activity ($000) Direct Offsetting Coll. Total Oblig. Direct Offsetting Coll. Total Oblig. Direct 

Appeals 716,741 35,919 752,660 672,779 74,343 747,123 698,844 

District 2,550,514 127,819 2,678,333 2,734,559 302,174 3,036,734 2,840,501 

Bankruptcy 835,253 41,859 877,112 780,861 86,287 867,148 811,113 

Probation/Pretrial 1,460,100 73,173 1,533,273 1,519,518 167,910 1,687,428 1,578,387 

Total Obligations 5,562,608 278,770 5,841,378 5,707,718 630,714 6,338,432 5,928,844 

 Encumbered Carryforward - - - - (170,015) (170,015) - 

Revised Obligations 5,562,608 278,770 5,841,378 5,707,718 460,699 6,168,417 5,928,844 

Fee Availability (210,301) (210,301) (203,489) (203,489) 

Vaccine Injury Trust Fund (8,475) (8,475) (9,070) (9,070) 

Prior Year Recoveries & Other Adjustments (37,489) (37,489)Unobligated Balance, Start of Year: Encumbered Carryforward (184,650) (184,650)

 Unencumbered Carryforward (256,010) (256,010) (248,140) (248,140) Unobligated Balance, End of Year: Encumbered Carryforward 170,015 170,015

 Unencumbered Carryforward 248,140 248,140 175,000 175,000

Anticipated Financial Plan Savings (175,000) (175,000)

Appropriation (Direct) 5,562,608 - 5,562,608 5,707,718 - 5,707,718 5,928,844 

Mandatory 418,225 457,484 Discretionary 5,144,383 5,250,234 

FY 2019 Actuals FY 2020 Estimated Obligations 

Encumbered Unencumbered Total Encumbered Unencumbered Total Encumbered 

Start of Year: Fee Account (210,995) (92,194) (303,189) (97,192) (213,268) (310,460) - 

 Judiciary Information Technology Fund (44,961) (80,898) (125,859) (62,937) (34,872) (97,809) - 

 S&E No-Year Funds (54) (11,558) (11,612) (9,886) - (9,886) -

 Subtotal (Unobligated Balance) (256,010) (184,650) (440,660) (170,015) (248,140) (418,155) - 

End of Year: - - - - -  Fee Account 213,268 97,192 310,460 - - - - 

 Judiciary Information Technology Fund 34,872 62,937 97,809 - - - - 

 S&E No-Year Funds - 9,886 9,886 - - - - 

Anticipated Financial Plan Savings1 - - - - 175,000 175,000 

- 

 Subtotal (Unobligated Balance) 170,015 248,140 418,155 - 175,000 175,000 - 

Carryforward (Unobligated Balance) Analysis ($000)

1/Anticipated Financial Plan Savings for FY 2020 into FY 2021 ($175 million) would include unobligated balances from the Fee Account, the Judiciary Information Technology 
COURTS OF APPEALS, DISTRICT COURTS AND OTHER JUDICIAL SERVICES

Salaries and Expenses

Obligations by Budget Object Class ($000)

FY 2019 Actuals FY 2020 Estimated Obligations 

Description ($000) Direct Offsetting Coll. Total Oblig. Direct Offsetting Coll. Total Oblig. Dir

1100 Personnel compensation 2, 131,033 614,639 2,745,671 2,651,588 293,006 2,944,593 2

 

1200 Personnel benefits 44,320 884,374 928,694 923,731 102,074 1,025,806 

 

1300 Benefits for former personnel 7,035 353 7,387 8,605 951 9,556 

 

2100 Travel 61,191 3,067 64,257 61,910 6,841 68,751 

 

2200 Transportation of Things 4,304 216 4,519 4,747 525 5,272 

 

2310 Rental payments to GSA 980,935 49,160 1,030,094 951,062 105,094 1,056,156 

 

2320 Rental payments to others 4,173 209 4,382 47,504 5,249 52,753 

 

2330 Communications, utilities & misc 35,926 1,800 37,727 70,560 7,797 78,357 

 

2400 Printing and reproduction 7,933 398 8,331 6,855 758 7,613 

 

2500 Other services 412,384 20,667 433,050 450,931 49,829 500,760 

 

2600 Supplies and materials 9,417 472 9,889 11,990 1,325 13,315 

 

3100 Equipment 41,770 2,093 43,863 66,768 7,378 74,146 

 

9100 Financial transfers 498,529 24,984 523,513 451,466 49,888 501,354 

 

 278,770 5,562,608 5,841,378 5,707,718 630,714 6,338,432 5

 

 - - - - (170,015) (170,015) 

 

 278,770 5,562,608 5,841,378 5,707,718 460,699 6,168,417 5

 

Total Obligations Encumbered CarryforwardRevised Obligations
FY 2020 Enacted FY 2021

No. of 

Authorized 

Judgeships

Compensation 

($000)

No. of 

Authorized 

Judgeships

Compensation 

($000)

Circuit Judgeships 167 42,414 167 44,023

District Judgeships 677 150,850 677 155,210

Senior/Retired Judgeships 183,259 179,716

Bankruptcy Judgeships 347 84,504 347 86,877

 Total 1,191 457,484 1,191 469,369

COURTS OF APPEALS, DISTRICT COURTS AND OTHER JUDICIAL SERVICES

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Summary of Mandatory Obligations
COURTS OF APPEALS, DISTRICT COURTS AND OTHER JUDICIAL SERVICES

Summary of Personnel Compensation and Benefits by Activity

FY 2021

Actual Adj. to Base Total Re

FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE 

Program ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) AppealsJudges -

Article III Judges

Active 160 39,341 165 42,414 - 1,609 - - 165 

Senior 114 28,454 118 29,911 1 485 - - 119 

Retired 30 6,685 30 7,827 - 105 - - 30 

Court Staff 

Article III Judges' Staff 1,081 119,740 1,180 129,204 4 2,902 - - 1,184 

Circuit Executives 283 41,403 302 48,747 - 403 - - 302 

Clerks Offices 608 66,720 578 72,693 - 672 2 159 580 

Staff and Preargument Attorneys 557 82,199 562 88,303 - 829 10 1,234 572 

Librarians 213 25,784 224 28,779 - 474 - - 224 

Bankruptcy Appellate Panels 13 1,776 13 1,901 32 - - - 13 

Total Appeals 3,058 412,101 3,172 449,779 5 7,511 12 1,393 3,189 

DistrictJudges 

Article III Judges 

Active 564 130,688 626 150,850 8 4,360 - - 634 

Senior 480 109,638 484 114,093 5 2,818 - - 490 

Retired 112 23,092 119 27,885 - 135 - - 119 

Magistrate Judges 557 135,556 562 145,305 - 3,854 2 504 564 

Court of Federal Claims Judges 26 1,772 16 3,156 - 47 16 

Court Staff 

Article III Judges' Staff 2,809 327,874 3,047 365,968 56 9,479 - - 3,103 

Magistrate Judges' Staff 1,082 143,372 1,103 152,089 - 3,222 7 630 1,110 

Federal Claims Judges' Staff 44 5,192 68 8,082 - 475 - - 68 

Clerks Offices 5,740 638,690 5,770 690,362 - 13,702 28 2,270 5,798 

Pro Se and death penalty 464 77,128 469 83,551 - 1,772 - - 469 

Court Reporters 675 87,718 669 93,956 12 3,780 3 281 684 

Court Interpreters 101 17,356 91 17,334 - 466 1 129 92 

Total District 12,655 1,698,076 13,026 1,852,631 81 44,110 41 3,814 13,148 

Bankruptcy Judges

Bankruptcy Judges 326 80,327 328 84,504 1 2,373 - - 329 

Court Staff 

Bankruptcy Judges' Staff 678 87,290 681 91,692 3 2,233 - - 684 

Clerks 2,989 345,496 2,960 355,887 - 5,062 1 106 2,962 

Bankruptcy Administrators 46 6,259 46 6,189 131 - - - 46 

Total Bankruptcy 4,038 519,372 4,016 538,272 4 9,799 1 106 4,021 

Probation/Pretrial Services 1,044,541 7,968 8,034 1,129,528 - 30,668 94 9,418 8,128 

Total Judges 555,553 2,369 2,448 605,945 16 15,786 2 504 2,466 

Total Chambers 760,596 6,158 6,549 830,586 63 20,083 7 630 6,619 

Total Court Staff 2,357,942 19,193 19,250 2,533,679 12 56,219 139 13,597 19,401 

GRAND TOTAL 27,720 3,674,091 28,247 3,970,209 91 92,088 148 14,731 28,487 

Workload Adj.

FY 2019

Financial Plan

FY 2020
COURTS OF APPEALS, DISTRICT COURTS AND OTHER JUDICIAL SERVICES

Salaries and Expenses

Relation of Obligations to Outlays ($000)

FY 2019 

Actual

FY 2020 

Estimated 

Obligations

FY 2021 

Request

Total Obligations 5,841,378 6,338,432 6,327,249Obligated balance, start of year 153,672 175,808 143,969Adjustments to prior-year activity (36,992) (170,015) -Change in uncollected payments (12,648) - -Obligated balance, end of year (175,808) (143,969) (91,918)

Total Outlays 5,769,602 6,200,256 6,379,300

Less Offsets (218,380) (267,931) (186,150)

Net Outlays 5,551,222 5,932,325 6,193,150
4.10

GENERAL OVERVIEW

The judiciary performs a core government function that is a pillar of our democratic system of government. The scope and volume of 

the judiciary’s work is dictated by the functions assigned to it by the Constitution and by statute. The judiciary must adjudicate all 

criminal, bankruptcy, civil, and appellate cases that are filed with the courts and must protect the community by supervising

defendants awaiting trial and persons under supervision on post-conviction release. 

The rulings of the federal courts protect the rights and liberties guaranteed by the Constitution. Through fair and impartial judgments, 

the federal courts interpret and apply the law to resolve disputes. The district courts, courts of appeals, bankruptcy courts, and federal 

probation and pretrial services offices all work to ensure a fair and independent judicial process.

The fiscal year (FY) 2021 appropriations request for the courts’ Salaries and Expenses account totals $5,938.5 million to support the 

operation of the courts. The request includes $469.4 million in mandatory appropriations and $5,469.2 million in discretionary 

appropriations. Specifically, this request funds appropriations for the salaries, benefits, and other operating expenses of judges and 

supporting personnel for the United States courts of appeals, district courts, bankruptcy courts, Court of Federal Claims, and probation 

and pretrial services offices. The request also funds the judiciary’s national information technology (IT) initiatives and other 

operations supporting the business functions of the courts. The FY 2021 request for the Salaries and Expenses account supports the 

operations of the courts at a current services level, as well as program changes for two new magistrate judges and associated support 

staff, changes in court support staff due to caseload and workload estimates, and infrastructure costs associated with new courthouse 

construction projects.

This account makes up approximately 69 percent of the judiciary’s total appropriations request and supports approximately 28,500

employees, including judges, chambers staff, and court support staff positions in clerk of court and probation and pretrial services 

offices located throughout the United States in 597 federally-owned and leased court buildings and facilities (excluding Court of 

Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Court of Federal Claims, Court of International Trade, and Federal Defender Organizations).

The four components of this account are (1) District Courts; (2) Appellate Courts; (3) Bankruptcy Courts; and (4) Probation and 

Pretrial Services Program. Each is discussed separately below.
4.11

District Courts 

The district courts are responsible for administering justice in civil and criminal cases under federal jurisdiction in 94 judicial districts 

throughout the United States and its territories. The public benefits from effective and efficient district courts by having criminal 

defendants processed through the criminal justice system and by having civil disputes resolved quickly and fairly. 

The number of criminal defendants, the mix of civil cases, amount of juror activity, and the number of authorized judges require the 

courts to make staffing adjustments indicated by the district court staffing formulas, which are based primarily on civil and criminal 

cases and the number of judges supported. Projected caseload and workload through June 30, 2020, is used to determine district court 

support staffing requirements in FY 2021. 

Criminal Case Filings

Criminal case filings are, in part, influenced by the number of U.S. Attorneys and the emphasis placed on prosecution of offenses 

such as illegal immigration, drug crimes, and violations of firearms laws. The current Administration implemented new prosecution 

policies that led to higher caseloads in a number of criminal offense categories, and the national criminal caseload continues to 

increase. As shown in Table 4.1 on page 4.16, for the 12-month period ending June 30, 2019, criminal cases filed increased by 8.6

percent from the previous year. Defendants charged increased 6.7 percent for the same 12-month period. The national increase in 

criminal case activity is expected to continue in 2020. Criminal cases filed are projected to increase by 7.9 percent, and criminal 

defendants charged are projected to increase by 5.0 percent. 

Regardless of a district court’s location, several factors highlight the importance of the courts receiving adequate staffing resources, 

including: the time-sensitive nature of criminal cases, due to statutory deadlines in the Speedy Trial Act, multiple hearings for 

defendants (i.e., initial appearances, arraignments, and pleas in the early stages alone), and the need for interpreter services. 
4.12

Civil Case Filings

Civil case filings are driven by prisoner petitions, social security cases, U.S. plaintiff recovery cases, large-volume multi-district 

litigation cases, and diversity of citizenship cases1. As shown in Table 4.1 on page 4.16, for the 12-month period ending June 30, 

2019, civil case filings increased 4.4 percent from the previous year, due primarily to a significant increase in tort actions filed in 

product liability and personal injury cases. Projections for 2020 show civil case filing activity remaining close to 2019 levels, with a 

small 0.4 percent increase projected. 

Appellate Courts

The 94 judicial districts are organized into 12 regional circuits, each of which has a United States court of appeals. The appellate 

court is responsible for hearing appeals from the district courts and the bankruptcy appellate panel (if one exists) located within its 

circuit, as well as appeals from certain federal administrative agencies and, in limited situations, direct appeals from bankruptcy 

courts. The appellate courts also have original jurisdiction in some categories of cases, such as petitions for Writ of Mandamus, 

second or successive habeas corpus petitions, and petitions for Writ of Prohibition. A party has the right to appeal every federal case 

in which a district court enters a final judgment. When an appeal is filed, a court of appeals reviews the decision and record of 

proceedings in the lower court or administrative agency. The court of appeals affirms, reverses, or remands the case back to the 

original court. The court of appeals will issue a written order or opinion in each case. Appeals from the courts of appeals may be 

taken to the United States Supreme Court, which, unlike the courts of appeals, generally has discretion over the number and types of 

cases it hears. Projected caseload and workload through June 30, 2020, is used to determine appellate court support staffing 

requirements in FY 2021.

1 A district court has subject matter jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship when the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and 

costs, and is between parties not from the same state or country. 
4.13

Appellate Case Filings

As shown in Table 4.1 on page 4.16, for the 12-month period ending June 30, 2019, the number of appeals filed decreased 2.9 percent 

from the previous year. However, the judiciary currently projects that appellate case filings will increase by 6.5 percent in 2020, 

mainly due to significant projected increases in criminal appeals and other appeals, which would include bankruptcy appeals and 

administrative agency appeals. Administration initiatives, legislative initiatives, and court decisions can have significant effects on 

some annual totals. For example, in the early 2000s, filings of administrative agency appeals surged due to appeals of decisions by the 

Board of Immigration Appeals in the Justice Department and the executive branch’s efforts to address its backlog of immigration 

cases. 

Bankruptcy Courts

Bankruptcy courts exercise jurisdiction over bankruptcy cases and proceedings, pursuant to statute and by reference from the district 

courts. The Bankruptcy Code is set forth at Title 11 of the U.S. Code, and it provides different chapters under which a debtor may file 

bankruptcy. A key purpose of the Bankruptcy Code is to provide an orderly and equitable process for debtors to resolve their debts 

with creditors. Through the bankruptcy courts, the legal system protects business and individual debtors, as well as their creditors, as 

intended by law. Projected caseload and workload through June 30, 2020, is used to determine bankruptcy court support staffing 

requirements in FY 2021.

Bankruptcy Case Filings

Bankruptcy filings have decreased in each of the past several years, but the rate of decline is slowing and filings are projected to 

increase slightly in 2020. As shown in Table 4.1 on page 4.16, filings for the 12-month period ending June 30 decreased by only 0.3 

percent in 2019. The judiciary currently projects an increase of 1.8 percent between 2019 and 2020, for a projected total of 787,600 

bankruptcy case filings for the 12-month period ending June 30, 2020.

Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Cases

Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code allows for liquidation of a debtor’s nonexempt assets to pay back creditors as much as possible. 

Individuals and business entities (with certain exceptions) may file bankruptcy under Chapter 7. Bankruptcy courts are expected to 

handle 495,200 new chapter 7 cases during the 12-month period ending June 2020, approximately 16,157 (3.4 percent) more cases 

than in the previous year. 
4.14

Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Cases

Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code offers businesses the opportunity to reorganize or liquidate in an orderly manner. Individuals also 

may file bankruptcy under Chapter 11, when they are ineligible to file under Chapter 13 due to its debt limitations. In Chapter 11 

cases, bankruptcy courts are directly involved in reviewing and approving complicated business reorganization plans and asset sales 

focusing on the goal of achieving a benefit for all interested parties. Bankruptcy courts are expected to handle 7,000 new Chapter 11 

cases during the 12-month period ending June 2020, which is a decrease of approximately 0.1 percent from 2019. 

Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Cases

Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code assists individual debtors who have regular income to adjust their debts within a repayment plan. 

Under such a plan, debtors can save their homes from foreclosure by allowing them to catch up past-due payments. Bankruptcy courts 

are expected to handle 284,800 new Chapter 13 cases during the 12-month period ending June 2020, a decrease of approximately 0.6

percent from 2019.

Probation and Pretrial Services Program 

The federal probation and pretrial services program assists the federal courts by protecting the public and promoting the fair 

administration of justice. Probation and pretrial services officers provide the courts with in-depth and objective pretrial services and 

presentence reports. Pretrial services officers investigate defendants and recommend to the judge whether there are conditions that 

would reasonably assure the defendant’s appearance in court and protect the community while the defendant’s case is pending 

disposition, as set forth under 18 U.S.C. § 3142. Probation officers investigate persons convicted of federal crimes and recommend to 

the judge a sentence that addresses the factors set out in 18 U.S.C. § 3553. Courts rely on those reports to make release and 

sentencing decisions, and the reports also notify the litigants of all relevant release and sentencing issues. The presentence reports are 

also used by the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices to locate assets to be seized for any fines, restitution, or assessments ordered; the Federal 

Bureau of Prisons (BOP) relies on the presentence reports to guide its handling of offenders sentenced to incarceration; and the U.S. 

Sentencing Commission uses the reports to analyze federal sentencing practices.

Probation and pretrial services officers also support public safety by supervising defendants and persons under supervision living in 

the community. Many persons under post-conviction supervision lack adequate life skills to transition back into the community 

smoothly. Officers help persons under supervision to either re-establish, or secure for the first time, appropriate housing, employment, 

and legitimate community relationships. They provide life skills counseling and leverage programs offered by other federal agencies 
4.15

and local social service organizations. Successful supervision requires persons under supervision to overcome not only the original 

factors that contributed to their criminal behavior, but institutionalization, alienation from family and friends, and other consequences 

of a lengthy prison term. Throughout the country, officers secure resources for persons under supervision, cultivate employment 

prospects, and develop collaborative relationships with a wide variety of organizations. All these efforts assist in the transition of 

persons under supervision back into the community.

Where the court deems it appropriate, a client’s location and activities can be monitored electronically through the global positioning 

system and other technologies. Similarly, the court may authorize drug testing, restrict travel, or prohibit association with certain 

individuals. In higher risk cases, courts can order the persons under supervision to undergo polygraph examinations and authorize 

warrantless searches and seizures by probation officers.

Probation and Pretrial Services Workload

Probation and pretrial services workload is dictated by prosecutions brought by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and the number of inmates 

released by the BOP for supervision. In the past, prosecutorial policies at the Justice Department resulted in fewer total criminal 

filings and, therefore, reduced workload in some probation and pretrial services categories. For instance, pretrial services cases 

activated and pretrial services persons under supervision all decreased from 2014 to 2017. However, this trend changed in 2018 and 

2019. 

As noted above in the discussion of criminal filing and as shown in Table 4.1 on page 4.16, in the 12-month periods ending June 30, 

2018, and June 30, 2019, criminal filings and the number of criminal defendants charged have increased substantially. These criminal 

matters directly impact the probation and pretrial services program. In 2018, criminal filings increased by 15.7 percent, criminal 

defendants charged increased by 12.8 percent, and the number of pretrial services cases activated increased by 10.6 percent. For 2019, 

criminal filings increased by 8.6 percent, criminal defendants charged increased by 6.7 percent, and the number of pretrial services 

cases activated increased by 8.4 percent. 

Projected caseload and workload through June 30, 2020, is used to determine probation and pretrial services staffing requirements in 

FY 2021. For the 12-month period ending June 30, 2020, the judiciary projects an 8.4 percent increase in pretrial cases activated, a 

4.0 percent increase in pretrial supervision, and an increase of 8.4 percent in presentence reports. The number of persons under 

supervision is expected to increase, for the first time in four years, by 0.4 percent. For a more detailed explanation of the nuances and 

complexities of probation and pretrial services workload, see page 4.16.
4.16

Table 4.1, Comparison of Judiciary Workload Factors

Criminal Filings 64,027 60,866 61,021 58,121 67,257 73,012 78,800

Year-to-Year Change: -8.1% -4.9% 0.3% -4.8% 15.7% 8.6% 7.9%

Criminal Defendants Filed 84,017 79,154 79,968 75,235 84,828 90,541 95,100

Year-to-Year Change: -8.5% -5.8% 1.0% -5.9% 12.8% 6.7% 5.0%

Civil Filings 298,713 280,037 290,430 271,721 281,202 293,520 294,700

Year-to-Year Change: 5.5% -6.3% 3.7% -6.4% 3.5% 4.4% 0.4%

Appellate Filings 55,260 53,032 60,099 52,028 49,220 47,783 50,900

Year-to-Year Change: -2.0% -4.0% 13.3% -13.4% -5.4% -2.9% 6.5%

Bankruptcy Filings 1,000,083 879,736 819,159 796,037 775,578 773,361 787,600

Year-to-Year Change: -12.1% -12.0% -6.9% -2.8% -2.6% -0.3% 1.8%

Pretrial Services: Cases Activated 98,122 90,588 88,140 82,265 90,951 98,627 106,900

Year-to-Year Change: -4.2% -7.7% -2.7% -6.7% 10.6% 8.4% 8.4%

Pretrial Services: Persons Under Supervision 50,261 46,968 45,623 43,998 43,997 46,539 48,400

Year-to-Year Change: -5.2% -6.6% -2.9% -3.6% 0.0% 5.8% 4.0%

Probation: Presentence Reports 69,453 62,346 59,562 60,669 60,498 66,622 72,200

Year-to-Year Change: -2.0% -10.2% -4.5% 1.9% -0.3% 10.1% 8.4%

Probation: Persons Under Supervision 132,597 133,428 137,882 135,947 131,036 128,649 129,200

Year-to-Year Change: 0.2% 0.6% 3.3% -1.4% -3.6% -1.8% 0.4%

* Both actual and projected workload factors are for 12-month periods ending June 30 each year.

WORKLOAD FACTOR * Actual 2014 Actual 2015 Actual 2016 Actual 2017 Actual 2018 Actual 2019 Projected 2020
4.17

FISCAL YEAR 2020 APPROPRIATIONS 

The judiciary built the FY 2021 budget request for the Salaries and Expenses appropriation on the FY 2020 enacted appropriation. 

The FY 2021 discretionary appropriations request is built on the FY 2020 enacted level of $5,259.3 million. This amount maintains 

current services in FY 2020 and allows for funding of six additional magistrate judge positions, chambers staff associated with 81 

Article III judges confirmed in FY 2019, additional positions for the probation and pretrial services program as a result of an 

increasing workload, costs associated with new courthouse construction, as well as critical cybersecurity tools. The FY 2021 

mandatory appropriation request is built on the FY 2020 assumed financial plan level of $457.5 million.

Any changes to FY 2021 requirements due to the final FY 2020 financial plan will be included in the judiciary’s re-estimates of its 

FY 2021 budget request. 

For bill language, the judiciary used the language from P.L. 116-93, Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, 

2020. 

SIGNIFICANT ISSUES 

Increasing Workload for Probation and Pretrial Services Offices 

The workload of the probation and pretrial services program is increasing dramatically. As explained on page 4.15, in 2020, pretrial

services cases activated, pretrial services supervision, presentence reports, and the projected number of persons under post-conviction 

supervision are all expected to increase from their respective 2019 levels. The growth in pretrial services cases will almost certainly 

translate to higher future probation requirements, which will also increase staffing requirements.

In addition to growing total caseloads, the proportion of cases activated within the federal probation system that pose greater 

supervision challenges and higher risk of recidivism is also increasing. The probation and pretrial services program assesses the risk 

of its clients by classifying them into four categories – high risk, moderate risk, low/moderate risk, and low risk. High and moderate 

risk clients require substantially more supervision than lower risk clients, thus increasing the workload for probation and pretrial 

services officers and necessitating the expenditure of higher amounts of resources for officers and court ordered services. As shown in 

the chart on the following page, the time period spanning FY 2012 through FY 2018 (the last year for which there is complete data) 

witnessed a 79 percent increase in clients classified as high risk and a 39 percent increase in clients classified as moderate 
4.18

risk. Conversely, the percentage of offenders with the lowest risk classification declined by 27 percent and the percentage of 

offenders with low/moderate risk declined by 8 percent. There is no reason to expect this trend to reverse. 

 Table 4.2, Risk Level 

This increasing workload is due to two factors: 

1) Responding to Justice Department Priorities

The current Administration has publicly committed to increase prosecutions for illegal reentry to the United States, firearms, 

drugs, and violent offenses. For example, the Administration recently reported that federal firearm prosecutions have 

increased by over 40 percent compared to the last two years of the previous Administration. There is no indication that the 
4.19

Administration intends to change its prosecutorial priorities. In fact, the Justice Department has indicated to the judiciary that 

it is hiring a record number of prosecutors to continue carrying out its prosecution policies.

2) First Step Act of 2018

The President signed into law the First Step Act (the Act), P.L. 115-391, in December 2018. The law retroactively applies the 

reduced penalties under the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, expands “good time” credits, modifies compassionate release 

provisions, and creates a new method for inmates to earn early release from prison. The Act unequivocally increases the 

workload of the federal probation system by requiring officers to supervise BOP inmates on home confinement or in 

residential reentry centers earlier than previously planned or by requiring officers to supervise persons on supervised release in 

the community earlier than previously planned. The Justice Department already announced the July 2019 release of 3,100 

inmates under the First Step Act.2

Comprehensively quantifying the workload impact of the Act on the probation and pretrial services program is difficult at this 

time, as BOP is still working to define the implementation plan for several significant provisions. However, based on current 

information and projections, a total of over 13,000 additional persons under supervision will enter the probation system due to

provisions of the Act. The judiciary will keep Congress apprised as more information and estimates are developed. 

The Fair Sentencing Act retroactivity and the good time credit recalculation provisions of the First Step Act are the provisions 

with the most immediate impact on probation and pretrial services workload. These two provisions are expected to result in 

approximately 5,700 inmates being released earlier than anticipated through FY 2020. Nearly all of these former inmates will 

remain on supervision through FY 2021. 

The spike in pre-release home confinement cases under the Federal Location Monitoring Program, including the Elderly Home 

Confinement provision, is also one of the Act’s immediate workload drivers. The Act generally requires probation offices to 

supervise these cases3

. Location monitoring cases are labor intensive, and the officers who supervise them are on-call 24 hours 

a day, 7 days per week. Since passage of the Act, there has been a nearly 150 percent increase in these cases. Officers receive 

over 300,000 location monitoring alerts each year (at all hours of the day) and must respond to all of them. The burdens of 

2 U.S. Department of Justice Press Release, “Department of Justice Announces Enhancements to the Risk Assessment System and Updates on First Step Act 

Implementation,” Jan. 15, 2020, available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-announces-enhancements-risk-assessment-system-and-updatesfirst-step-act. 3 See 18 U.S.C. §§ 3624(c)(3), 3624(g)(7) and (8); 34 U.S.C. § 60541(G)(4).
4.20

these cases have required the probation and pretrial services program to recommend caps for officers assigned to 

them. Exceeding the recommended caseload caps will place more stress on officers and lead to alerts not being addressed 

promptly, risking public safety. Unless adequately resourced, probation offices may need to decline accepting home 

confinement referrals from the BOP; declining such referrals could thwart one of the primary objectives of the First Step Act.

Another provision of the First Step Act with immediate workload implications is the expanded use of compassionate release

under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). Inmates may now petition a court for compassionate release from BOP custody. The expanded 

compassionate release provision has resulted in releasing some of the BOP’s inmates with the greatest health challenges. The 

demands these extremely ill clients place on probation officers are significant. As BOP is mandated to inform inmates of the 

availability of compassionate release, inmate awareness of this provision will grow as will the number of motions for release. 

This workload is likely to increase throughout FY 2020 and FY 2021.

Successful supervision outcomes depend on sufficient resources that can be used for personnel, treatment and monitoring services, and 

training and program implementation. The growth in cases supervised per officer is detrimental to an officer’s ability to support 

behavioral change and properly monitor the behaviors of those under supervision. Accordingly, unless there are sufficient resources 

to keep pace with rising workload, officers will be assigned larger caseloads and find it more challenging to provide adequate 

supervision. Supervision resources will be focused on higher risk cases, and moderate and lower risk individuals will receive less 

supervision. This will likely increase re-arrest rates4 and, thus, increase the risk to public safety.

4 Re-arrest rates within three years are as follows: For low risk, 10.1%. For low/moderate risk 22.5%. For moderate risk, 33.9%. For high risk, 38.9%. 
4.21

Judicial Confirmations

The number of filled Article III judgeships has a direct impact on the requirements for the Salaries and Expenses account. This 

account funds all Article III judges and associated costs, except for justices of the U.S. Supreme Court and judges of the U.S. Court of 

Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the Court of International Trade (as those courts have stand-alone appropriations). While the 

salaries and benefits of judges are paid from the Salaries and Expenses account’s mandatory requirements, the number of active 

Article III judges impacts this account’s discretionary requirements. The discretionary account funds chambers staff, court support 

staff, and associated operating and maintenance costs that are necessarily increased when a new or replacement Article III judge is 

confirmed. Operating and maintenance costs include space, travel, training, courtroom digital audio recording equipment, telephone 

systems, staff furniture and furnishings, and law books. 

Currently, there are 844 authorized Article III judgeships. However, not all judgeships are filled at any given time. In its annual 

budget requests, the judiciary makes an assumption regarding the number of expected confirmations each year to help determine the 

number of anticipated filled Article III judgeships. Typically, the judiciary has estimated between 40 and 45 Article III confirmations 

each year. In FY 2018 and FY 2019, however, a change in legislative priorities and Senate procedural rules resulted in the number of 

Senate confirmations of Article III judges substantially increasing. Actual confirmations outpaced the judiciary’s usual confirmation 

estimate by 16 judges (35.5%) and 36 judges (80%) in FY 2018 and FY 2019, respectively. As shown in the chart below, these rates 

are significantly higher than in recent years.
4.22

Table 4.3, Article III Judge Confirmations

39 

55 

61 

40 

75 

32 

14 

6 

61 

81 85 

40 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021

Number Confirmed

Fiscal Years

Article III Judge Confirmations

FY 2010 - FY 2021

When the number of judge confirmations is higher than expected, funding must still be provided for all confirmed judges’ chambers 

staff, court support staff, and other operating and maintenance costs. Therefore, fewer resources are available for other areas funded 

by this account, notably, current court support staffing. The assumed FY 2020 financial plan includes a projection of 85 Article III 

judge confirmations. Looking to FY 2021, the judiciary’s request includes the funding needed to sustain confirmation-related costs 

from FY 2020 and to accommodate an assumption of 40 additional Article III judge confirmations (confirmations are projected to 

decline in FY 2021 as the number of remaining vacancies also declines). The judiciary will update this assumption as part of its 

budget re-estimates.
4.23

Consolidated Financial Statement Initiative

The judiciary is committed to robust financial management practices including strong oversight, internal controls, and independent 

auditing. The judiciary has undergone regular audits and investigations of its appropriated and other funds and has an infrastructure of 

controls designed to prevent fraud, waste and abuse. Individuals supporting these functions – including external independent auditors 

– make reports directly to a specific committee of the Judicial Conference comprised of federal judges from throughout the country. 

The judiciary plans to begin a new, multi-year financial management initiative – the Judiciary Data Integrity, Reporting, and Controls 

Program (JDIRC) in FY 2020. If the judiciary’s assumed FY 2020 financial plan is approved, this initiative will build upon the 

judiciary’s foundation of strong financial management practices and robust internal controls. Ultimately, this program will result in 

the judiciary submitting a consolidated, audited financial statement to the Treasury Department that is compliant with Federal 

Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB) generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) or other comprehensive basis of 

accounting. Existing judiciary financial processes, internal control evaluations and financial systems were not designed to support 

assertion to and the production of GAAP compliant, consolidated, auditable financial statements on an annual basis. Additional 

resources are required to reach that goal.

The Treasury Department and the Government Accountability Office (GAO), which audits the government-wide financial statements,

have asked that the judiciary submit annual, audited financial statements to ensure compliance with government-wide reporting 

requirements. Although the judiciary (like the legislative branch) is not subject to Office of Management and Budget financial 

reporting requirements and FASAB standards to produce these statements, providing these consolidated statements will aid the 

Treasury Department’s priority to receive an unqualified audit opinion on the government-wide statements. The goal of this initiative 

is to allow the judiciary to submit financial statements in the same manner the executive and legislative branches currently do. At the 

same time, through this initiative, the judiciary will further strengthen its transparency and accountability with all stakeholders –

including Congress, the executive branch, persons interacting with the judiciary, and the American public. 

For this initiative, the judiciary has developed a five-year approach to prepare consolidated financial statements and strengthen

internal controls. There are three principal elements to the JDIRC: 

1. Data Integrity: Implement a data management program to include financial data models, data lineage, data policy and 

processes, and data standards.

2. Financial Reporting: Ensure all material financial transactions are appropriately documented, presented, and disclosed to 
4.24

assert to the accuracy of the consolidated financial statements and achieve and unqualified audit opinion. 

3. Internal Controls: Follow the industry best practices for documenting and evaluating internal control in a continuous cycle.

To successfully submit a consolidated financial statement that meets GAAP standards requires extensive preparation. Development of 

a more integrated and data driven approach to internal controls is a prerequisite to the development of consolidated financial 

statements. The accuracy and integrity of financial reporting is dependent on the controls over the processes and quality of data that is 

reflected in the data reported on a financial statement or used internally for management decisions. 

The judiciary currently anticipates beginning this project in FY 2020. The judiciary assumes this project will be funded at $7.3 

million in the FY 2020 financial plan. In FY 2020, the AO anticipates hiring seven Salaries and Expenses reimbursable positions 

(four FTE and $843,000) and utilizing $6.5 million in contractor support. For FY 2021, this budget request maintains funding for the 

JDIRC initiative at $7.3 million, including $3.1 million for 22 positions (15 FTE) and $4.3 million in contractor support. The funding 

for the seven positions hired in FY 2020 would be annualized, and 15 additional reimbursable positions will be filled during FY 2021. 

These 22 positions are needed for internal and external teams to train and support court units and staff at the Administrative Office and 

for other data management functions. After implementation is complete, these 22 positions will be needed to support the ongoing 

sustainment of this effort. Contractors are needed in the early phase of the project to support the initial risk assessment; map all 

significant business process, data elements, posting logic and key controls; and identify gaps. As the program continues, fewer 

contractor resources will be needed. 

 

New Courthouse Infrastructure

In FY 2016, Congress provided $948 million in funding to the General Services Administration (GSA) for the construction of new 

courthouses, as prioritized by the judiciary’s September 2015 Courthouse Project Priorities (CPP) list. These resources fully funded

the top eight courthouse projects on that CPP plan, including: Nashville, Tennessee; Toledo, Ohio; Charlotte, North Carolina; Des 

Moines, Iowa; Greenville, South Carolina; Anniston, Alabama; Savannah, Georgia; and San Antonio, Texas. Partial funding was also 

provided for Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, the ninth project on that CPP list. In addition, $53 million was appropriated for new 

construction and acquisition of facilities that are joint U.S. courthouses and federal buildings in Greenville, Mississippi, and Rutland, 

Vermont.
4.25

The Rutland, Vermont project is complete, while completion of three projects is anticipated in FY 2021: Charlotte, NC (annex); 

Nashville, TN; and Savannah, GA (annex). Harrisburg, PA completion is expected to follow in November 2021.

Although the construction of new courthouses and annexes is funded by GSA, the judiciary is responsible for a variety of associated 

infrastructure that is needed to ensure that new facilities will be fully functional at the time that major construction is completed. For 

those courthouse projects that were funded in FY 2016, this FY 2021 request includes $15.4 million to fund furniture, information 

technology, and other space-related infrastructure costs required during the design and construction of the new courthouses. 

Additional information about these FY 2021 costs can be found on page 4.40. Remaining funding requirements for the full 

functionality and operations of the new courthouses will be included in future requests. 

In FY 2018, Congress provided the remaining funding necessary to complete the Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, project ($137.2 million), 

as well as funding for two additional projects: Huntsville, Alabama ($110.0 million) and Fort Lauderdale, Florida ($190.1 million). 

Both the Huntsville and Fort Lauderdale projects received congressional authorization on February 5, 2019. Judiciary-related 

infrastructure costs associated with the courthouse projects in Huntsville and Fort Lauderdale are still being developed and will be 

included in future funding requests. 

Evidence-Based Practices

Evidence-based practices are the use of the best available evidence to inform decision making about the supervision of individuals to 

achieve positive outcomes, including the reduction of recidivism. Empirical research over the past several decades has consistently 

demonstrated that interventions in community corrections are most effective in reducing recidivism when they adhere to three 

evidence-based principles: risk, need, and responsivity. According to the risk principle, the level of correctional intervention should 

match the person under supervision’s risk of recidivism. Under the need principle, correctional interventions should target known and 

changeable predictors of recidivism (also referred to as “criminogenic needs”). Finally, according to the responsivity principle, 

interventions should involve the treatment modality most capable of changing known predictors of recidivism; research has 

demonstrated that cognitive behavioral strategies are the most effective way to influence change. The FY 2021 request includes $9.2

million to continue the probation and pretrial services program’s evidence-based practices initiative. Highlights of this initiative are 

below. 

Risk Assessment (Post-Conviction): The Post-Conviction Risk Assessment (PCRA) classifies the risk level of persons under 

supervision and identifies the criminogenic needs that could reduce the risk of re-offending. The PCRA includes a violence 

assessment, which helps officers identify persons on supervision who pose a greater risk of committing a violent offense. The PCRA 
4.26

tool enhances the abilities of officers to prioritize their casework and appropriately target services to higher risk cases. In FY 2019, 

the average treatment expenditure for low risk persons under supervision was $1,055, while it was $3,602 for high risk persons under 

supervision. By identifying a risk level, the probation and pretrial services program uses its resources as efficiently as possible. 

Risk Assessment (Pretrial Services): The judiciary has developed the Pretrial Risk Assessment (PTRA), which is an objective, 

actuarial instrument providing a consistent method of predicting risk of failure-to-appear, new arrests, and technical violations while 

on pretrial release. Pretrial services offices currently use the tool in approximately 80 percent of all cases to recommend to a court 

whether a defendant should be released pending trial. Judiciary staff continue to promote PTRA and provide education on evidencebased practices in pretrial services through the Detention Reduction Outreach Program (DROP), a program designed to reduce 

unnecessary pretrial detention through collaboration with pertinent stakeholders.

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Curricula: In addition to risk assessment, the probation and pretrial services program is expanding the 

availability of cognitive-behavioral therapy programming by developing curricula that address the top criminogenic needs of persons 

under supervision: antisocial thinking patterns, social networks, substance abuse, and educational or employment deficits. An 

additional curriculum was developed to address violent tendencies. Implementation of these curricula is focused on developing a 

group of 38 national trainers to engage in a pilot study to evaluate the implementation plan and initial outcomes. 

Staff Training Aimed at Reducing Re-Arrest (STARR): When implemented, core correctional practices improve officers’ abilities to 

positively influence people under supervision and reduce recidivism. In the probation and pretrial services system, core correctional 

practices are being deployed through the STARR program. The training includes discussing the theory of core correctional practices, 

a demonstration of each skill, exercises, and an opportunity for officers to practice each skill and receive feedback. As of the end of 

FY 2019, the judiciary has trained more than 5,354 officers (which represents approximately 67 percent of current probation and 

pretrial services officers) through the STARR program. The judiciary is conducting an evaluation of STARR implementation in 

FY 2020 and will use the results to refine training and implementation procedures in FY 2021.
4.27

COST CONTAINMENT

Judiciary’s Space Reduction Program

Space reduction has been one of the judiciary’s major cost-containment initiatives. The Judicial Conference established a national 

space reduction target of three percent in September 2013, which was equivalent to a total reduction of 870,305 usable square feet 

(USF)5

. At the time of the deadline for this goal (January 2019), approximately 1.2 million USF of space had been removed from the 

judiciary’s rent bill. Therefore, the judiciary has exceeded its national space reduction goal by approximately 37 percent. In fact, all 

circuits exceeded their space reduction goals. Through the substantial investments the judiciary made in this initiative, it has resulted

in approximately $36 million in annual rent avoidance. Since 2013, the judiciary has achieved an estimated $116 million in 

cumulative rent avoidance via space reduction. 

Following the success of the three percent reduction goal, the judiciary has turned its focus to another Judicial Conference-approved 

cost-containment initiative, the No Net New policy. This policy requires that any increase in square footage within a circuit must be 

offset by an equivalent reduction in square footage identified within the same fiscal year.

6

 As courts expand their workforces, Article 

III judges take senior status, and new judges are appointed, demand will increase for space, particularly chambers space required for 

new judges. As a result, circuits need to improve the utilization of their space to ensure that they do not expand their space footprints. 

For this reason, similar to the FY 2019 and FY 2020 budget requests, this FY 2021 budget request includes $15 million to undertake 

projects needed to reconfigure space more efficiently and offset space increases to maintain compliance with the No Net New policy. 

The ten No Net New projects that were approved in FY 2019 are expected to reduce the judiciary’s space footprint by 57,000 square 

feet, equating to $3 million in additional annual rent cost avoidance. 

5 This target was prorated among the circuits based on the square footage occupied by each, taking into consideration the amount of square footage allotted to the 

circuit under the current version of the U.S. Courts Design Guide. The target excluded: new courthouse construction, renovation, or alterations projects 

approved by Congress, and is contingent upon the judiciary having access to funding to analyze, design, and implement space reductions. The baseline for this 

policy was the square footage of total space holdings within each circuit as of the beginning of FY 2013 (JCUS-SEP 13, p. 32). 6 The No Net New policy is subject to the following exclusions: new courthouse construction, renovation, or alterations projects approved by Congress. The 

baseline for this policy is the square footage of total space holdings within each circuit as of the beginning of FY 2013 (JCUS-SEP 13, p. 32; JCUS-SEP 14, p. 

29).
4.28

Beyond this three percent reduction goal and the No Net New policy, the judiciary has implemented other space-related costcontainment initiatives including the Service Validation Initiative, which is a cooperative effort of the AO, the courts, and GSA to 

maximize the value derived from the judiciary’s space rental payments. 

Bankruptcy Noticing Center and Electronic Bankruptcy Noticing

Bankruptcy noticing is required both by the United States Bankruptcy Code (11 U.S.C. § 101 et seq.) and the Federal Rules of 

Bankruptcy Procedure. The Bankruptcy Noticing Center (BNC) facilitates these requirements by centrally transmitting bankruptcy 

notices for all bankruptcy courts to case participants through a private contractor. Since its creation in 1993, the BNC has allowed the 

judiciary to reduce bankruptcy clerk’s office staff dedicated to manually producing and mailing notices, to secure U.S. Postal Service 

bulk discount rates, and to implement more extensive cost-saving and avoidance measures than could have been achieved if noticing 

were managed locally. One such measure is “multi-stuffing,” where the contractor places all notices from all courts for a single 

recipient into a single mail piece.

Another initiative that saves a significant amount of resources is Electronic Bankruptcy Noticing (EBN). Pursuant to federal 

bankruptcy rules (Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2002(g)(4) and 9036), the BNC obtains consent from creditors and other parties to accept notices 

electronically, thereby avoiding the expense of producing and mailing paper notices and ensuring faster delivery. The judiciary is 

seeking ways to expand electronic noticing. For example, a proposed change to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9036, which is currently open for 

public comment, would mandate electronic noticing for high volume paper notice recipients (entities that receive a large number of 

bankruptcy notices each month). Increased EBN noticing to date contributed approximately $8.4 million in cost avoidance in 

FY 2019. The $8.4 million in cost avoidance takes into account approximately $900,000 in contractor costs for EBN customer 

support and outreach to high-volume paper notice recipients. EBN’s rate of adoption has continued to grow – increasing by 

approximately six percent over the last two years alone. Today, approximately 46% of all bankruptcy notices in the United States are 

sent electronically. The judiciary is currently working to expand use of EBN in the future, which will result in additional savings. 

Work Measurement 

The judiciary has employed work measurement since 1970 to determine its staffing requirements, and to provide a reliable tool to 

allocate staffing resources equitably across court types and individual court units. Though the methodology has changed over the 

years, work measurement’s primary purpose remains to bring an empirically-based and practical approach to staffing allocations.
4.29

The staffing formulas estimate the number of staff required to perform the work of judiciary units, which include appellate and circuit 

offices, district courts, bankruptcy courts, probation and pretrial services offices, and federal defender organizations (FDOs). The 

formulas define both administrative and operational staffing requirements of each judiciary unit. 

Although the judiciary has used work measurement for several decades, the shifting fiscal environment has further amplified the 

importance of work measurement as an effective management tool available to the judiciary. The judiciary updates the staffing 

formulas, generally at five-year intervals, to incorporate efficiencies derived from information technology initiatives, best practices, 

and other process improvements as well as to evaluate new work requirements in a consistent manner across the courts. The work 

measurement process uses a combination of statistical modeling and other measurement techniques to define court units’ staffing 

needs for all required work. 

In FY 2019, the judiciary completed a work measurement study on appellate courts and circuit offices. This updated staffing formula 

is in use for FY 2020 financial plan allocations and was included in the FY 2021 budget request. In FY 2020, the judiciary will 

complete the staffing formula update for the probation and pretrial services offices Additionally, in FY 2020, the judiciary will begin 

a study to evaluate staffing needs for common support activities across the district clerks, bankruptcy clerks, and probation and pretrial 

offices. 

Shared Administrative Services and Alternative Organizational Models 

Building on earlier efforts to encourage efficiencies through shared administrative services, the Judicial Conference has established an 

initiative to develop and evaluate a host of organizational models that courts may adopt to further efficiencies. These models include:

1) “vertical” consolidation of district and bankruptcy clerks’ offices within a judicial district;

2) “horizontal” consolidation of bankruptcy clerks’ offices across judicial districts; and 

3) shared administrative services arrangements, which may comprise a range of approaches (including inter-district

sharing arrangements, intra-district sharing arrangements, and establishing regional or national service centers for 

specific administrative functions.) 

The judiciary has also developed practical information for the courts considering consolidation and/or shared administrative services. 

This information describes the various sharing arrangements courts have developed to deliver administrative services, identifies issues 

to consider when developing sharing arrangements, assesses the effect of sharing arrangements, and provides resource materials. At 

the local level, courts throughout the country have implemented a significant number of voluntary shared administrative services 
4.30

arrangements. These practices have helped to control costs without sacrificing efficiency or quality of service to judges and the 

public.

Regarding horizontal consolidation, in 2016, the Judicial Conference approved a horizontal consolidation pilot project. The horizontal 

consolidation pilot is based on three-year voluntary sharing arrangements between two bankruptcy courts regarding all services of the 

bankruptcy clerks’ offices. The judiciary identified four districts and is working to identify additional courts for a maximum of six 

districts. The Federal Judicial Center will prepare a final report evaluating the pilot within one year after its conclusion. 
4.31

FISCAL YEAR 2021 REQUEST

The FY 2021 discretionary appropriation request for the 

Salaries and Expenses account totals $5,469.2 million, 

including $9.7 million for requirements funded from the 

Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund. The judiciary also 

requests $469.4 million for requirements funded from 

mandatory appropriations. The FY 2021 discretionary request 

is a 4.0 percent increase over the FY 2020 enacted

discretionary appropriation level of $5,259.3 million. 

In addition to appropriated funds, the Salaries and Expenses 

account utilizes other funding sources to offset its 

appropriation requirements, including current year fee 

collections, carryover of fee balances from the prior year, and 

no-year appropriation balances (excluding encumbered 

carryforward). The judiciary projects that these sources of 

non-appropriated funds will total $388.7 million in FY 2021, 

$62.9 million less than the $451.6 million expected to be 

utilized in FY 2020.

Total Requested Discretionary Appropriation Increases:

$209,871,000

Total Mandatory Appropriation Increases: $11,885,000

JUSTIFICATION OF CHANGES

The changes in the FY 2021 budget request are divided into 

two sections: adjustments to base and program increases. 

Adjustments to base totaling $204.4 million (92.2 percent of 

the requested change) are for:

• an increase to mandatory appropriations for personnel 

costs for judges and costs associated with an increase in 

filled Article III judgeships, bankruptcy judgeships, and 

Article III judges who have taken or are expected to 

take senior status (+$11.9 million);

• an increase in personnel costs for Court of Federal 

Claims judges, magistrate judges, chambers staff, and 

other court support staff (+$107.2 million);

• an increase in chambers staff to support filled Article 

III and bankruptcy judgeships and Article III judges 

who have taken or are expected to take senior status, 

and related costs (+$8.3 million); 

• financing adjustments to replace non-appropriated 

sources of funds with appropriated funds; 

(+$62.9 million); 

• a base reduction to court salary and non-salary

allotments (-$33.0 million);

• inflationary and miscellaneous adjustments 

(+$13.6 million);
4.32

• an increase for personnel and related costs for the 

Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund 

(+$0.6 million);

• A net increase for General Services Administration 

(GSA) rent and related costs (+$18.3 million); and

• a net increase for information technology requirements 

(+$14.6 million).

Program changes totaling $17.4 million (7.8 percent of the 

requested change) are for: 

• two new magistrate judges and associated staff 

($1.3 million); 

• an increase in court support staffing due to caseload and 

workload changes ($13.6 million); and

• infrastructure costs associated with new courthouse 

construction projects ($2.5 million).

ADJUSTMENTS TO BASE TO MAINTAIN CURRENT 

SERVICES

The following provides information and justification for each 

of the adjustments to base for the Salaries and Expenses 

account. This section is divided into three subsections: judges, 

court personnel and programs, and other adjustments. 

A. JUDGES AND ASSOCIATED STAFF

1 . Pay and benefit cost adjustments

a. Proposed 2021 pay adjustment

Requested Discretionary Increase: $1,521,000

Mandatory Increase: $4,178,000

The judiciary is assuming federal pay rates will increase by 1.0 

percent in January 2021. The requested increase provides for 

the cost of nine months of the anticipated pay raise in FY 2021, 

from January 2021 to September 2021. (If the pay adjustment 

included in the President’s FY 2021 budget request is different 

than 1.0 percent, the judiciary will revise this line item in its 

FY 2021 budget re-estimate.) 

b. Annualization of 2020 pay adjustment

Requested Discretionary Increase: $965,000

Mandatory Increase: $2,974,000

The requested increase provides for the annualized costs of the 

2020 pay adjustment associated with the Employment Cost 

Index (ECI). Based on the FY 2020 enacted appropriation, 

federal pay rates for judges increased by 2.6 percent, effective 

as of January 2020. The requested increase provides for the 

cost of three months (from October 2020 to December 2020) of 

the enacted 2020 pay increase in FY 2021. 

c. Benefits Increases

i. Health Benefits

Requested Discretionary Increase: $82,000
4.33

Mandatory Increase: $167,000

Based on information from the Office of Personnel 

Management, agency health benefit premium contributions are 

projected to increase by an average of 3.2 percent both in 

January 2020 and January 2021. The requested increase 

annualizes the 2020 premium increase and includes a ninemonth provision for an estimated 3.2 percent increase 

anticipated for FY 2021.

ii. FICA adjustment

Requested Discretionary Increase: $75,000

Mandatory Increase: $231,000

Based on information from the Social Security Administration, 

employer contributions to the Old Age, Survivor, and 

Disability Insurance (OASDI) portion of the FICA tax will 

increase in 2020. The salary cap for OASDI increased from 

$132,900 to $137,700 in January 2020. The requested amount 

is needed to pay the agency’s contribution in FY 2021. 

iii. FERS adjustment

Requested Discretionary Increase: $1,258,000

Mandatory Increase: $717,000

Consistent with guidance from the Office of Management and 

Budget, funds are requested for an increase in the agency 

contribution rate to Federal Employees Retirement System 

(FERS) plans for FY 2021. For most employees, the agency 

contribution rate will generally increase from 16.0 percent to 

17.3 percent. Any FERS increase is in accordance with revised 

estimates of the cost of providing benefits by the Board of 

Actuaries of the Civil Service Retirement and Disability 

System.

2. Increase in average number of filled Article III judgeships 

Requested Discretionary Increase: $4,824,000 FTE: 43

Mandatory Increase: $1,816,000 FTE: 8

In FY 2020, the judiciary anticipates that an average of 791 out 

of the 844 authorized Article III appellate and district 

judgeships will be filled. Based on historical confirmation 

patterns, the judiciary projects 40 Article III judges will be 

confirmed during FY 2021, offset by 34 active judges who take 

senior status or retire. As a result of the anticipated timing of 

these confirmations and departures from active Article III 

status, the FY 2021 request includes funding for 799 Article III 

appellate and district court judgeships, a net increase of 8 FTE 

above FY 2020. 

This request also includes funding for chambers support staff 

(23 law clerks, 8 courtroom deputies, 5 secretaries, and 7 court 

reporters) associated with the increase in 8 judges’ FTE. 

This line item includes $1.8 million for the salaries and 

benefits of judges, $3.9 million for the salaries and benefits of 

supporting staff, and $1.0 million for supporting costs such as 

law books, furniture, travel, supplies, and equipment.
4.34

Table 4.4, Active Article III Judgeship Vacancies and FTEs*

Fiscal 

Year

Authorized Article 

III Judgeships

Average 

Vacancies

Avg. Number of 

Active Judges

2015 844 53 791

2016 844 73 771

2017 844 113 731

2018 844 140 704

2019 844 125 719

Estimates

2020 844 53 791

2021 844 51 799

* The number of authorized Article III judgeships excludes the U.S. 

Supreme Court, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the U.S. 

Court of International Trade but includes territorial courts.

3. Increase in average number of senior judges 

Requested Discretionary Increase: $3,142,000 FTE: 30

Mandatory Increase: $1,556,000 FTE: 7

Funding is requested in FY 2021 for a net increase of seven 

senior judge FTE and the associated chambers staff. The 

request includes $1.6 million for the salaries and benefits of 

judges, $2.9 million for the salaries and benefits of supporting 

staff (13 law clerks, 7 secretaries, 5 courtroom deputies, and 5 

court reporters) and approximately $0.2 million for supporting

costs such as law books, furniture, travel, supplies, and 

equipment. Table 4.5 provides the historical levels of senior 

judges. 

Table 4.5, Article III Senior Judgeship FTEs

2015 567

2016 566

2017 569

2018 563

2019 594

Estimates

2020 602

2021 609

Avg. Number of 

Senior Judges (FTE) Fiscal Year

Under federal law, an Article III judge has three options when 

leaving active service. 28 U.S.C. § 371(a) allows the judge to 

retire from office and receive an annuity for life equal to the 

salary in effect at the date of retirement. 28 U.S.C. § 372(a) 

allows the judge to retire on disability grounds, and provides 

that the judge receives the salary of the office for life after 

serving 10 years. 28 U.S.C. § 371(b) allows the judge to take 

senior status and to retain the office, but retire from regular 

active service. Senior status allows the judge to continue 

rendering substantial judicial service for a number of years, 

notwithstanding his or her retirement.

As of October 1, 2019, there are 171 U.S. Court of Appeals and 

U.S. District Court judges eligible to take senior status or 

retire. In FY 2020, the judiciary projects 21 judges will 

become eligible and an additional 41 judges will become

eligible in FY 2021. For FY 2021, the judiciary estimates that 

38 active Article III judges will either take senior status or 

retire and 25 senior or retired judges will leave the judiciary’s 
4.35

payroll. As a result of the projected timing of these actions, the 

FY 2021 budget request reflects a net increase of seven senior 

judge FTE.

4. Increase in average number of filled bankruptcy 

judgeships 

Requested Discretionary Increase: $366,000 FTE: 3

Mandatory Increase: $246,000 FTE: 1

The judiciary projects a total of 328 FTE (including recalled 

bankruptcy judges) for the 347 authorized bankruptcy 

judgeships will be funded in FY 2020. Based on historical 

patterns, it is anticipated that one additional judgeship will be 

filled during FY 2021, increasing the average number of filled 

bankruptcy judgeships to 329 FTE (including recalled 

bankruptcy judges) in FY 2021. This request also funds one

law clerk and one courtroom deputy associated with the 

increase of one bankruptcy judge FTE.
4.36

Positions FTE ($000) Positions FTE ($000) Positions FTE ($000) Positions FTE ($000)

167 165 42,414 167 165 44,023

677 626 150,850 677 634 155,210

756 179,716 758 183,259

347 328 84,504 347 329 86,877

16 16 3,156 16 16 3,226

547 540 141,899 549 542 145,212

32 22 3,405 32 22 3,991

1,191 1,875 457,484 1,191 1,886 469,369 595 578 148,460 597 580 152,429

1 Includes territorial judges.

2 FTE include recalled bankruptcy judges.

3 FTE include recalled Court of Federal Claims judges.

Table 4.7 U.S. Court of Federal Claims Judges Table 4.8 Bankruptcy Judges (excludes recalled) Table 4.9 Magistrate Judges (Full-Time)

Fiscal Year

Authorized Court of 

Fed. Claims 

Judgeships

Average 

Vacancies

Avg. No. 

Active 

Judges

Fiscal 

Year

Authorized 

Bankruptcy 

Judgeships

Avg. 

Vacancies

Avg. No 

Active 

Judges

Fiscal 

Year

Authorized 

Magistrate 

Judgeships

FTE

2015 16 4 12 2015 349 24 325 2015 531 515

2016 16 6 10 2016 349 20 329 2016 534 518

2017 16 7 9 2017 349 19 330 2017 536 532

2018 16 11 5 2018 350 23 327 2018 537 535

2019 16 9 7 2019 347 27 320 2019 541 535

Estimates Estimates Estimates

2020 16 7 9 2020 347 26 321 2020 547 540

2021 16 5 11 2021 347 25 322 2021 549 542

Magistrate Judgeships - Full-time

Magistrate Judgeships - Part-time4

Total 

4 FTE include recalled magistrate judges. 

Appellate Judgeships

District Judgeships1

Senior/Retired

Bankruptcy Judgeships2

U.S. Court of Federal Claims3

Table 4.6 Summary of Judicial Officers

Article III & Bankruptcy Judges (Mandatory Costs) Claims & Magistrate Judges 

FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2020 FY 2021
4.37

B. COURT PERSONNEL AND PROGRAMS

5. Pay and benefit cost adjustments

a. Proposed 2021 pay adjustment

Requested Increase: $25,639,000

The judiciary is assuming federal pay rates will increase by 1.0 

percent in January 2021. The requested increase provides for 

the cost of nine months of the anticipated pay raise in FY 2021, 

from January 2021 to September 2021. (If the pay adjustment 

included in the President’s FY 2021 budget request is different 

than 1.0 percent, the judiciary will revise this line item in its 

FY 2021 budget re-estimate.)

b. Annualization of January 2020 pay adjustment

Requested Increase: $25,810,000

The requested increase provides for the annualized costs of the 

enacted 2020 pay adjustment for the ECI and locality pay

adjustments. Based on the enacted FY 2020 appropriation, 

federal pay rates increased by an average of 3.1 percent, 

effective as of January 2020. The requested increase provides 

for the cost of three months (from October 2020 to December 

2020) of the assumed 2020 pay increase in FY 2021. 

c. Promotions and within-grade increases

Requested Increase: $25,639,000

The requested increase provides for promotions and withingrade increases for personnel. The salary plan for judicial 

support personnel provides for periodic within-grade increases 

for staff who receive at least a satisfactory performance rating.

d. Benefits Increases

 i. Health Benefits

Requested Increase: $5,451,000

Based on information from the Office of Personnel 

Management, agency health benefit premium contributions are 

projected to increase by an average of 3.2 percent both in 

January 2020 and January 2021. The requested increase 

annualizes the 2020 premium increase and includes a ninemonth provision for an estimated 3.2 percent increase 

anticipated for FY 2021.

ii. FICA adjustment 

Requested Increase: $2,814,000

Based on information from the Social Security Administration, 

employer contributions to the Old Age, Survivor, and 

Disability Insurance (OASDI) portion of the FICA tax will 

increase in 2020. The salary cap for OASDI increased from 
4.38

$132,900 to $137,700 in January 2020. The requested amount 

is needed to pay the agency contribution in FY 2021. 

iii. FERS adjustment

Requested Increase: $31,648,000

Consistent with guidance from the Office of Management and 

Budget, funds are requested for an increase in the agency 

contribution rate to Federal Employees Retirement System 

(FERS) plans for FY 2021. For most employees, the agency 

contribution rate will generally increase from 16.0 percent to 

17.3 percent. Any FERS increase is in accordance with revised 

estimates of the cost of providing benefits by the Board of 

Actuaries of the Civil Service Retirement and Disability 

System. 

e. One less compensable day

Requested Decrease: ($13,679,000)

There is one less compensable day in FY 2021 than in 

FY 2020. The decrease in personnel compensation and 

benefits is associated with one less compensable day.

6. Funding necessary to maintain FY 2020 service levels 

due to anticipated decline in non-appropriated funds

Requested Increase: $62,924,000

In addition to appropriations from Congress, the judiciary 

relies on other funding sources to finance its requirements. 

These non-appropriated funds include current year fee 

collections, carryforward of fee balances from the prior year, 

no-year appropriation balances, and Judiciary Information 

Technology Fund balances. The use of these funds allows the 

judiciary to reduce its appropriations request on a dollar-fordollar basis. This Salaries and Expenses account FY 2021 

discretionary appropriation request of $5.5 billion reflects a 

projected availability of $388.7 million in these nonappropriated funds. Without these funds, the judiciary’s 

request in discretionary appropriations would have totaled 

approximately $5.9 billion.

While the use of these funds benefits the judiciary (and reduces 

the need for appropriated funds), the amounts available 

fluctuate year-to-year due to changes in filing fee collections, 

changes in unobligated balances from prior years, etc. If total 

non-appropriated funds in the budget year exceed the total nonappropriated funds in the prior year, the budget year’s 

appropriations request can be reduced further. However, if 

total non-appropriated funds in the budget year are lower than 

the total non-appropriated funds in the prior year, 

appropriations are needed to replace those lost non-
4.39

appropriated funds to maintain a current services level of 

obligations. 

The FY 2020 obligation level assumes new fee collections and 

prior-year unencumbered carryforward from FY 2019 totaling 

$451.6 million. The FY 2021 request estimates that fee 

collections and prior-year carryforward will total $388.7 

million, a net decrease of $62.9 million from the $451.6 

million available in FY 2020. This is displayed in Table 4.10

below. The judiciary requests appropriated funds for FY 2021 

to replace these non-appropriated funds to maintain the same 

level of services as provided in FY 2020. The judiciary’s 

estimates for non-appropriated funds typically fluctuate during 

the fiscal year. AO staff will update the appropriations 

subcommittee staff on changes in non-appropriated funding 

levels.

Table 4.10 Non-Appropriated Sources of Funding

FY 2020 FY 2021

Plan Request

Fee Collections 203,489 213,705 10,216

Other Carryforward 248,140 175,000 -73,140

Total, Non-Appropriated 

Sources of Funding, 

Excluding Enumbered 

Funds

451,629 388,705 -62,924

Dollars in Thousands Difference

7. Reduction to FY 2021 base due to decrease in court salary 

and non-salary requirements

Requested Decrease: ($33,000,000)

The judiciary is requesting a decrease of $33.0 million 

associated with periodic re-assessments of courts needs that 

reduces base requirements for court salaries and operating 

expenses. 

C. OTHER ADJUSTMENTS

8. Inflationary and miscellaneous adjustments 

Requested Increase: $13,566,000

Consistent with guidance from the Office of Management and 

Budget, this requested increase is required to fund inflationary 

adjustments of 2.0 percent for operating expenses such as 

travel, communications, printing, contractual services, supplies 

and materials, furniture and equipment, and other minor 

miscellaneous adjustments.

9. Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund adjustment 

Requested Increase: $630,000

The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 

(42 U.S.C. § 300aa) created a special fund to pay judgments 

awarded under the Act. This legislation also created the Office 

of Special Masters within the U.S. Court of Federal Claims to 

hear vaccine injury cases, and further stipulated that up to eight 
4.40

special masters may be appointed for this purpose. The special 

masters’ expenditures are reimbursed to the judiciary for 

Vaccine Injury Act cases from a special fund set up under the 

Act.

For FY 2021, the judiciary requests $9.7 million from the 

Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund, an increase of 

$630,000 above the amount assumed to be received from the 

Trust Fund in FY 2020. The increase is due to pay and nonpay inflationary adjustments.

10. GSA space rental and related services

Requested Increase: $18,257,000

The judiciary requests a net increase of $18.3 million in 

FY 2021 for GSA rent and related services. This net increase 

is made up of: 

(a) new space to be delivered in FY 2021 (+$5.2 million), 

(b) inflationary adjustments to the GSA space rental base 

costs (+$21.0 million),

(c) space reduction savings (-$2.0 million), and

(d) other space-related adjustments (-$6.0 million). 

a. New space to be delivered in FY 2021

Requested Increase: $5,231,000

In FY 2021, the judiciary anticipates there will be a net 

increase of 231,324 useable square feet related to projects to be 

occupied by the courts of appeals, district courts, bankruptcy 

courts, and probation and pretrial services offices. The 

requested increase of $5.2 million is based on projected 

occupancy dates and rental rates provided by GSA. Table 4.11

on page 4.41 identifies major projects that GSA plans to

complete in FY 2021. 

b. GSA rent inflation

Requested Increase: $20,981,000

This request represents a 2.0 percent inflationary increase in 

the cost of GSA space rental and maintenance of facilities 

occupied by the courts in FY 2021. This increase is based on 

rent estimates prepared by GSA.

c. Space Reduction 

Requested Decrease: ($2,000,000)

A net cost savings of $2.0 million is estimated to be achieved 

in FY 2021 due to reductions in court-occupied space. 

d. Other space-related adjustments 

Requested Decrease: ($5,955,000)

A net adjustment of $5,955,000 is required in FY 2021, 

including a decrease to cyclical maintenance, tenant alterations, 

and furniture (-$10.5 million), annualization of new space 

delivered in FY 2020 (+3.6 million), and a base increase in 

tenant improvement projects (+$1.0 million).
4.41

Table 4.11 GSA Space Rental Increase

Square Feet 

of Space

Avg. Cost 

per Square 

Ft.*

Amount in 

$000

FY 2020:

 Space occupied at start of year 39,134,097 $1,050,991

 Adjustments to FY 2020 base $3,102

 Estimated savings due to reduction in footprint $0

 Estimated new space to be delivered in FY 2020 75,984 $2,063

Total, FY 2020 39,210,081 $26.94 $1,056,156

FY 2021 Adjustments:

 Increase for estimated inflation (2.0%) $20,981

 Estimated savings due to reduction in footprint (50,000) ($2,000)

 Annualization of new space assigned in FY 2020 $3,570

 Estimated new space to be delivered in FY 2021 231,324 $5,231

Total, FY 2021 Budget Request 39,391,405 $27.52 $1,084,018

FY 2021 Increase over FY 2020 181,324 $27,862

 *The fiscal year average cost per square foot includes the annualization of rent costs for space added in the succeeding fiscal year.
4.42

Table 4.12 Space to be delivered in FY 2021 - Prospectus projects, displayed in order of GSA estimated delivery dates

City State

Net Rentable 

Square Feet to 

be Delivered

Estimated 

Occupancy 

Date

Fiscal Year 

2021 Rent 

Cost New 

Space

Fiscal Year 

2022 Rent 

Cost 

Total 

Annual 

Rent Cost

Savannah GA 46,000 11/1/2020 $787,624 $71,602 $859,226 

Charlotte NC 107,524 4/1/2021 $3,151,248 $3,151,248 $6,302,496 

Council Bluffs IA Lease 

Replacement 6/1/2021 $159,610 $319,219 $478,829 

Nashville TN 77,800 7/1/2021 $1,132,764 $3,398,291 $4,531,055 

Total 231,324 $5,231,245 $6,940,361 $12,171,605 
4.43

11. Information Technology Requirements

Requested Net Increase: $14,556,000

a. Continued implementation of ongoing 

information technology projects

Requested Increase: $15,456,000

A net increase of $15.5 million is requested for the Information 

Technology (IT) program for current operations and system 

maintenance to the judiciary’s integrated financial 

management, human resources, rent and property management 

systems; telecommunications; case management systems; 

cybersecurity capabilities; and infrastructure support for 

national IT applications.

The judiciary continues to implement programs and systems to 

support the IT needs of the courts. The IT program allows the 

judiciary to operate and maintain its information technology 

infrastructure, products, projects, and services, which are 

essential to the judicial process and the operations of the 

courts.

A more detailed description of the judiciary’s IT program can 

be found in section 11 of this submission, “Judiciary 

Information Technology Fund.”

 b. Contractor conversion savings

Requested Decrease: ($900,000)

A decrease of $0.9 million is requested to convert contractors

to permanent federal employees. Following an FY 2017 reassessment of functions Administrative Office contractors 

perform, the AO is implementing a third round of contractor 

conversions, a process that began in 2012 as a part of the AO’s 

cost-containment efforts. The goal is to improve 

project/program management contract operations, as well as 

reduce costs by converting more expensive contractor positions 

to less expensive government positions. In this third round of 

contractor conversions, 114 total cumulative contractor 

conversions (from FY 2018 through FY 2020) are planned, and 

all are scheduled to be completed by the end of FY 2020. In

total, with this third round of conversions Salaries and 

Expenses account will have reduced requirements by $5.2 

million. (The FY 2019 request was reduced by $2.6 million 

and the FY 2020 request was reduced by $1.7 million for 

previous contractor conversions.) The remaining $900,000 in 

savings is included in the FY 2021 request. 
4.44

PROGRAM INCREASES

12. New FY 2021 full-time magistrate judges and staff

Requested Increase: $1,302,000 FTE: 9

The judiciary requests an additional $1.3 million for 2 

additional magistrate judge positions (2 FTE), 7 support staff 

(7 FTE), and associated operating costs. Because of the critical 

need for these positions, they have been “accelerated;” thus, a 

full-year’s funding is assumed for these magistrate judge 

positions in FY 2021.

Table 4.13 Cost of Additional Magistrate Judge

Positions FTE

Total

Request

New Full-Time Magistrate

Judges

2 2 $504,280

Supporting Personnel 7 7 $630,147

Operating Expenses $167,994

Total 9 9 $1,302,421

The Judicial Conference authorizes new magistrate judge 

positions based upon an individualized showing of need by the 

requesting district courts. The Conference takes into account 

all relevant factors in its deliberations on magistrate judge 

position requests, including the number and locations of 

authorized district judges. In evaluating requests for full-time 

magistrate judge positions, the Conference generally considers: 

the comparative need of the district judges for the assistance of 

magistrate judges and the overall workload of the district court; 

the commitment of the court to the effective utilization of 

magistrate judges; and the availability of sufficient work of the 

type that the district judges wish to assign to magistrate judges 

to justify the authorization of additional full-time positions. 

Consideration is also given to the geographical areas and 

population to be served, convenience to the public and bar, the 

rights of criminal defendants to prompt court proceedings, the 

number and extent of federally administered lands in the 

district, transportation and communication facilities, and other 

pertinent local conditions. As an alternative to authorizing 

additional full-time magistrate judge positions, the feasibility 

of using recalled magistrate judges may be explored with 

individual district courts in response to their requests for 

additional magistrate judge positions.

In September 2019, the Judicial Conference authorized two 

additional magistrate judge positions in the following 

locations:

• Eastern District of Missouri at St. Louis 

• Southern District of California at San Diego 
4.45

13. FY 2021 Court Support Staffing due to workload 

changes 

Requested Increase: $13,599,000 FTE: 139

The judiciary requests a program increase for court support 

staff (278 new positions or 139 FTE) in appellate, district, and

bankruptcy courts, and probation and pretrial services offices 

in FY 2021 in anticipation of changes in projected caseload and 

workload changes. Table 4.14 provides a breakdown of FTE 

and funding. To calculate the number of staff needed, the 

judiciary’s request uses the current staffing formulas. To 

determine FY 2021 FTE, projected caseload and workload data

through June 30, 2020, is used. Some staffing formulas use 

caseload data for multiple years so, depending on the formula, 

a single year increase or decrease in workload will not 

necessarily result in a corresponding increase or decrease in 

formula results.

Table 4.14 Fiscal Year 2021 Staffing Changes

Appellate 12 $1,393 

Bankruptcy 1 106 

District 32 2,682 

Probation/Pretrial 94 9,418 

Total 139 $13,599 

Court Support Staffing

Program

Fiscal Year 

2021 FTE

Dollars in 

Thousands

14. Infrastructure Costs for New Courthouse Construction 

Projects

Requested Increase: $2,482,000

GSA’s construction costs associated with eight major new 

courthouse projects were funded in FY 2016, but the judiciary 

is responsible for a number of ancillary infrastructure costs 

associated with the construction of these facilities. This 

request includes a total net increase of $2.5 million over the 

assumed FY 2020 level for a total FY 2021 investment in new 

courthouse infrastructure of $30.8 million. 

This net increase is comprised of a $0.5 million decrease in 

revised requirements for furniture, moves, and other 
4.46

miscellaneous costs and an increase of $3.0 million due to 

projected courthouse IT requirements. 

FINANCING THE FISCAL YEAR 2021 REQUEST

15. Estimated FY 2021 Fee Collections

Estimated funds available: $213,705,000

Congress has authorized the judiciary to collect fees for civil 

and bankruptcy filings as well as fees for a variety of case 

services, including registry account administration and 

miscellaneous court case administration costs. A portion of the 

fees collected by the courts are deposited into a special fund 

maintained by the Treasury Department and may be used to 

reimburse judiciary accounts for expenses incurred. These fees 

are available without fiscal year limitation. The judiciary 

estimates that $213.7 million in revenue from these sources 

will be available in FY 2021 to finance requirements in the 

Salaries and Expenses account, an increase of $10.2 million 

from the $203.5 million estimated to be available in FY 2020. 

Table 4.15 lists offsetting receipts from collections by type and 

displays the amounts collected in FY 2019, and estimates for 

FY 2020 and FY 2021 collections. The judiciary will continue 

to monitor filings and other collections throughout FY 2020 

and will advise appropriations subcommittee staffs of changes 

to these estimates.

Table 4.15 Offsetting Receipts from Collections

Fees

Subtotal, Fees 221,369 214,199 224,953

65,808

4,330

5,918

Type of Collection and 

Source

TOTAL TO SALARIES 

& EXPENSES

Registry Administration 

Fees 2,075 1,000

Fee allocation to Admin. 

Office3

FY 2019 

Actual 

Collections 

($000s)

FY 2020 

Estimated 

Collections 

($000)

Bankruptcy Filing and 

Misc. Fees 1

Civil Filing and Misc. 

Fees 2

Central Violations Bureau 

Fees 

Immigration Adjudication 

and Naturalization Fees 6,083

FY 2021 

Estimated 

Collections 

($000)

210,301 203,489 213,705

144,845

68,527

4,330

6,251

-11,068 -10,710 -11,248

142,666

65,952

4,593

1,000

137,143

1 Includes statutory bankruptcy filing fees and bankruptcy court miscellaneous fees.

2 Includes statutory civil filing fees and appellate court and district court 

miscellaneous fees.

3 Based on Judicial Conference policy, up to five percent of total fees collected may 

be used to support Administrative Office requirements. 
4.47

16. Anticipated Unencumbered Carryforward from FY 2020 

Estimated funds available: $175,000,000

The judiciary estimates that $175.0 million will be available 

through anticipated savings in FY 2020 to carry forward into 

FY 2021 and offset the FY 2021 appropriation request for the 

Salaries and Expenses account. Savings generally become 

available due to delays in GSA space delivery schedules that 

reduce space rental and furniture expenses; and unobligated 

funds returned from the nearly 400 court units throughout the 

judiciary. This carryforward balance includes the carryforward 

of fee balances from the prior year, no-year appropriation 

balances, and Judiciary Information Technology Fund 

balances. 

The judiciary will advise appropriations subcommittee staffs of 

changes to this estimate.