Volume 23, No. 9 June 2013 

E-SJI NEWS SJI NEWS

In this Issue 

FY 2013 3rd Quarter 

Grant Awards 

1 

Improving Collections 2 

Self-Represented 

Litigation and the State 

Courts 

 

3 

Page 1 

SJI Awards FY 2013 Third Quarter Grants 

The SJI Board of Directors met 

at the Supreme Court of Connecticut on June 24, 2013, to 

consider grant applications for 

the 3rd quarter of FY 2013. 

A total of 13 grants were 

awarded during this meeting. 

One Project Grant was awarded 

to the Supreme Court of Ohio 

to for a statewide initiative that 

will provide a forum for domestic relations judges and their 

justice system partners to assess protocols, examine 

resources, and share promising practices. 

A total of nine (9) Technical Assistance (TA) Grants 

were awarded, including grants to: the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) to test and evaluate approaches used in three states to adjudicate domestic 

relations cases in order to develop a triage system for 

these case types; the Missouri Office of the State 

Courts Administrator for a forms and selfrepresented litigant website six-language translation 

project; Okanogan County, Washington, to assess 

the performance of the Office of the Clerk; the National Association of Women Judges (NAWJ) to 

develop a training program for judicial officers on 

human trafficking and increase outreach on this critical topic area; the Henderson Municipal Court in 

Nevada to conduct an operational review and recommend best practices to improve court administration; 

the Eugene Municipal Court in Oregon to assess 

caseflow management; the Oregon Judicial Department for a pilot project designed to improve language access in Oregon’s courts; the Idaho Supreme 

Follow SJI on 

Facebook and 

Twitter

For the latest information on 

projects, grant application deadlines, and updates. Connect 

with us on both forums by visiting our Facebook and Twitter

pages. 

Court and Judicial Council for a statewide judicial 

performance evaluation; and, the Administrative 

Office of the Illinois Courts to develop and implement a statewide caseload data evaluation for adult 

and juvenile probation and pretrial services 

caseloads. 

Three (3) Curriculum Adaptation & Training (CAT) 

Grants were also awarded including grants to: the 

National Judicial College (NJC) to develop an advanced skills curriculum for state appellate judges; 

the Connecticut Judicial Branch to implement a 

training program for court staff and judges that better 

identifies and serves individuals with hidden disabilities; and, the Superior Court of Fresno County, 

California, to deliver a situational leadership training 

program to 50 current and future court leaders. 

The deadline for FY 2013 4th quarter grant applications is Thursday, August 1, 2013. Consultation with SJI staff prior to, and during the preparation of, grant applications is strongly encouraged. 
E-SJI News Volume 23, No. 9 June 2013 

Page 2 

SJI Project, Technical Assistance (TA), and 

Curriculum Adaptation and Training (CAT) 

Grant programs directly address the issues 

most commonly faced by state courts throughout the United States. 

Frequently, TA grant applications identify 

growing areas of concern for numerous jurisdictions. These grants often require expert 

assistance outside the court. One of the these 

critical areas is increasing collections, especially in recent years as court budgets have 

been significantly reduced. Both the South 

Dakota Unified Judicial System (SJI-11-T160) and the Kansas Supreme Court (SJI-12-T

-074) recently completed statewide assessments of collections operations. 

The National Center for State Courts (NCSC) 

has been involved in technical assistance to 

courts in the area of collections since the early 

1990s. The NCSC currently maintains an 

online resource guide that addresses key 

issues faced by state courts in collecting fines 

and costs assessed against civil litigants and 

criminal defendants. The following is a brief 

outline of what courts should expect when 

they initiate evaluations of their effectiveness 

in this area, as well as the key indicators that 

necessitate a collections review. 

Jurisdictions in need of assistance typically 

exhibit deficiencies in one or more of the following areas: 

current collections performance is unknown; 

lack of adequate statutory authority; 

inadequate policies or guidance; 

lack of leadership for collections; 

inconsistent enforcement; and/or, 

lack of goals or standards. 

The state courts focus on improving collections for a variety of reasons. Usually, there 

are one or more drivers or events that prompt 

these jurisdictions to seek assistance. The 

most common include: 

Legislative mandate or request – State and 

local policy makers often press courts to account for overdue receivables. In some instances this has been in the form of requests 

for information, and in others cases have been 

prompted by legislative requirements imposed 

on the courts for reporting and accountability. 

Leadership – Interest in collections by influential judicial leadership, either individuals or 

committees, can be the motivating factor for 

making collections a high priority. 

Fiscal stress – Probably one of the most common drivers in recent years is the search for 

additional revenues to offset budget cuts to 

courts and other government agencies that 

receive court revenues. 

Public relations – Negative attention focused 

on the judiciary, such as unsatisfied restitution 

for victims, may prompt action. 

Focus on performance – Interest in improving 

collections is sometimes embraced as part of a 

larger effort to develop and apply performance 

measures. 

In 2008, the NCSC assessed collections efforts, programs, and techniques across the 

U.S.. This effort resulted in the second edition 

of Current Practices in Collecting Fines and 

Fees in State Courts. Most recently, the 

NCSC has focused on developing a systemic 

view of collections that resulted in the development of a collections framework to guide 

assessments. The framework contextualizes 

key success factors and conditions for collections. There are four layers in the framework 

that describe business requirements for the collections function. They include the following: 

Policy and Governance 

Whether at the local or state level, successful 

systems require leadership, statutory and/or 

court rule authority, and goals and standards. 

Practice and Operations 

The actual activities that are performed as part 

of the business process of collections occur 

primarily in two phases: assessment and enforcement. Best practices in each of these areas 

have been well-documented and have been the 

focus of major efforts in the past. In addition, 

courts need reliable financial controls and systems for evaluation and measurement linked to 

performance standards and goals. 

Information 

Courts need reliable information to manage 

individual cases as well as provide information 

for analysis and performance measurement. 

Good information systems depend on the adequacy of information systems and record keeping infrastructure. 

Infrastructure 

There are a number of physical elements required to support collections, including reliable 

record systems, easy access to court information, facilities that promote easy compliance, 

and technology infrastructure. 

The framework provides not only a high level 

view of the critical elements of collections programs, but allows the courts to “drill down” into 

the details to identify specific needs and deficiencies. 

To review additional readings on collections 

and the reports from SJI grantees, please visit 

the NCSC Library eCollection. 

Recent Technical Assistance Grants Address 

the Complexities of Collections 
Page 3 

SJI Board of Directors

Chairman 

James R. Hannah 

Chief Justice 

Supreme Court of Arkansas 

Little Rock, AR 

Vice Chairman 

Daniel J. Becker 

State Court Administrator 

Utah AOC 

Salt Lake City, UT 

Secretary 

Gayle A. Nachtigal 

Judge 

Washington County Circuit Court 

Hillsboro, OR 

Treasurer 

Hernan D. Vera 

President & CEO 

Public Counsel Law Center 

Los Angeles, CA 

Chase T. Rogers 

Chief Justice 

Supreme Court of Connecticut 

Hartford, CT 

Jonathan Lippman 

Chief Judge of the State of New York 

New York Court of Appeals 

New York, NY 

David V. Brewer 

Justice 

Oregon Supreme Court 

Salem, OR 

Wilfredo Martinez 

County Judge 

9th Judicial Circuit of Florida 

Orlando, FL 

Marsha J. Rabiteau 

Executive Director 

Legal Policy Strategies Group 

Bloomfield, CT 

John B. Nalbandian 

Partner 

Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP 

Cincinnati, OH 

Isabel Framer 

President 

Language Access Consultants, LLC 

Copley, OH

Jonathan D. Mattiello 

Executive Director 

The State Justice Institute is a federallyfunded, non-profit corporation established by 

federal law in 1984 to improve the quality of 

justice in the state courts. 

E-SJI News Volume 23, No. 9 June 2013 

Update on Strategic Initiatives Grants Addressing 

Self-Represented Litigation and the State Courts 

In FY 2012, SJI awarded 6 Strategic Initiatives 

Grants (SIGs) totaling $275,158 addressing 

one of SJI's Priority Investment Areas: SelfRepresented Litigation and the State Courts. 

SIG grants were made to the: 1) Judicial 

Council of California to train bilingual JusticeCorps volunteers to provide enhanced services for self-represented litigants (SRLs); 2)

Indiana Administrative Office of the Courts to 

train volunteer college and law students to 

serve statewide pro se clinic clients; 3) the 

National Center for State Courts (NCSC) to 

develop a standard set of definitions and 

counting rules for cases involving one or more 

SRLs; 4) the Self-Represented Litigation Network (SRLN) and the NCSC to develop formal case triage protocols for assistance to 

SRLs; 5) the SRLN to facilitate state court 

reimbursement under Title IV-D, and promote 

awareness of this resource; and 6) the South 

Carolina Access to Justice Commission for 

delivery of legal information to SRLs in underserved areas of South Carolina. 

The Judicial Council of California, Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) has, 

through its Court Interpreter Program, made 

significant strides towards developing and 

implementing a statewide training program 

that will allow 40 bilingual Justice Corps 

members to learn how to direct SRLs to selfhelp resources . In addition to an in-person 

training curriculum being finalized, the AOC 

will deploy an online training module this 

month. 

The NCSC and SRLN continue to assist the 

state courts in updating court websites and 

downloadable materials that can be easily accessed by SRLs. The NCSC is also developing 

a set of standardized definitions and counting 

rules for pro se cases. This report and accompanying resources is expected to be available in 

early January 2014. 

SJI will continue to provide updates on these 

projects.