H. R. 2657—4
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—An individual assigned to serve as
a judge of the Family Court of the Superior Court who
is serving as a judge of the Superior Court on the date
of the enactment of the District of Columbia Family Court
Act of 2001 shall serve for a term of not fewer than 3
years.
‘‘(B) REDUCTION OF PERIOD FOR JUDGES SERVING IN
FAMILY DIVISION.—In the case of a judge of the Superior
Court who is serving as a judge in the Family Division
of the Court on the date of the enactment of the District
of Columbia Family Court Act of 2001, the 3-year term
applicable under subparagraph (A) shall be reduced by
the length of any period of consecutive service as a judge
in such Division immediately preceding the date of the
enactment of such Act.
‘‘(3) ASSIGNMENT FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICE.—After the term
of service of a judge of the Family Court (as described in
paragraph (1)) expires, at the judge’s request and with the
approval of the chief judge, the judge may be assigned for
additional service on the Family Court for a period of such
duration (consistent with section 431(c) of the District of
Columbia Home Rule Act) as the chief judge may provide.
‘‘(4) PERMITTING SERVICE ON FAMILY COURT FOR ENTIRE
TERM.—At the request of the judge and with the approval
of the chief judge, a judge may serve as a judge of the Family
Court for the judge’s entire term of service as a judge of
the Superior Court under section 431(c) of the District of
Columbia Home Rule Act.
‘‘(d) REASSIGNMENT TO OTHER DIVISIONS.—The chief judge may
reassign a judge of the Family Court to any division of the Superior
Court if the chief judge determines that in the interest of justice
the judge is unable to continue serving in the Family Court.’’.
(b) PLAN FOR FAMILY COURT TRANSITION.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the chief judge of the Superior
Court of the District of Columbia shall prepare and submit
to the President and Congress a transition plan for the Family
Court of the Superior Court, and shall include in the plan
the following:
(A) The chief judge’s determination of the role and
function of the presiding judge of the Family Court.
(B) The chief judge’s determination of the number of
judges needed to serve on the Family Court.
(C) The chief judge’s determination of the number of
magistrate judges of the Family Court needed for appoint-
ment under section 11–1732, District of Columbia Code.
(D) The chief judge’s determination of the appropriate
functions of such magistrate judges, together with the com-
pensation of and other personnel matters pertaining to
such magistrate judges.
(E) A plan for case flow, case management, and staffing
needs (including the needs for both judicial and nonjudicial
personnel) for the Family Court, including a description
of how the Superior Court will handle the one family,
one judge requirement pursuant to section 11–1104(a) for
all cases and proceedings assigned to the Family Court.
H. R. 2657—5
(F) A plan for space, equipment, and other physical
plant needs and requirements during the transition, as
determined in consultation with the Administrator of Gen-
eral Services.
(G) An analysis of the number of magistrate judges
needed under the expedited appointment procedures estab-
lished under section 6(d) in reducing the number of pending
actions and proceedings within the jurisdiction of the
Family Court (as described in section 11–902(d), District
of Columbia, as amended by subsection (a)).
(H) Consistent with the requirements of paragraph
(2), a proposal for the disposition or transfer to the Family
Court of child abuse and neglect actions pending as of
the date of enactment of this Act (which were initiated
in the Family Division but remain pending before judges
serving in other Divisions of the Superior Court as of
such date) in a manner consistent with applicable Federal
and District of Columbia law and best practices, including
best practices developed by the American Bar Association
and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court
Judges.
(I) An estimate of the number of cases for which the
deadline for disposition or transfer to the Family Court,
specified in paragraph (2)(B), cannot be met and the rea-
sons why such deadline cannot be met.
(2) IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN FOR TRANSFER OR DIS-
POSITION OF ACTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS TO FAMILY COURT.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subparagraph
(C), the chief judge of the Superior Court and the presiding
judge of the Family Court shall take such steps as may
be required as provided in the proposal for disposition
of actions and proceedings under paragraph (1)(H) to
ensure that each child abuse and neglect action of the
Superior Court (as described in section 11–902(d), District
of Columbia Code, as amended by subsection (a)) is trans-
ferred to the Family Court or otherwise disposed of as
provided in subparagraph (B).
(B) DEADLINE.—
(i) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi-
sion of this Act or any amendment made by this Act
and except as provided in subparagraph (C), no child
abuse or neglect action shall remain pending with a
judge not serving on the Family Court upon the expira-
tion of 18 months after the filing of the transition
plan required under paragraph (1).
(ii) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—The chief judge of
the Superior Court should make every effort to provide
for the earliest practicable disposition of actions.
Nothing in this subparagraph shall preclude the imme-
diate transfer of cases to the Family Court, particularly
cases which have been filed with the court for less
than 6 months prior to the date of enactment of this
Act.
(C) RETAINED CASES.—Child abuse and neglect cases
that were initiated in the Family Division but remain
pending before judges, including senior judges as defined
in section 11–1504, District of Columbia Code, in other
H. R. 2657—6
Divisions of the Superior Court as of the date of enactment
of this Act may remain before judges, including senior
judges, in such other Divisions when—
(i) the case remains at all times in full compliance
with Public Law 105–89, if applicable; and
(ii) the chief judge determines, in consultation with
the presiding judge of the Family Court, based on
the record in the case and any unique expertise,
training, or knowledge of the case that the judge might
have, that permitting the judge to retain the case
would lead to permanent placement of the child more
quickly than reassignment to a judge in the Family
Court.
(D) 
PRIORITY
FOR
CERTAIN
ACTIONS
AND
PRO-
CEEDINGS.—The chief judge of the Superior Court, in con-
sultation with the presiding judge of the Family Court,
shall give priority consideration to the disposition or
transfer of the following actions and proceedings:
(i) The action or proceeding involves an allegation
of abuse or neglect.
(ii) The action or proceeding was initiated in the
family division prior to the 2-year period which ends
on the date of enactment of this Act.
(iii) The judge to whom the action or proceeding
is assigned as of the date of enactment of this Act
is not assigned to the Family Division.
(E) PROGRESS REPORTS.—The chief judge of the Supe-
rior Court shall submit reports to the President, to the
Committee on Appropriations of each House, the Com-
mittee on Governmental Affairs of the Senate, and the
Committee on Government Reform of the House of Rep-
resentatives at 6-month intervals for a period of 2 years
after the date of submission of the transition plan required
under paragraph (1) on the progress made towards dis-
posing of actions or proceedings described in subparagraph
(B).
(F) RULE
OF
CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this sub-
section shall preclude the chief judge, in consultation with
the presiding judge of the Family Court, from transferring
actions or proceedings pending before judges outside the
Family Court at the enactment of this Act which do not
involve allegations of abuse and neglect but which would
otherwise fall under the jurisdiction of the Family Court
to judges in the Family Court prior to the deadline as
defined in subparagraph 2(B), particularly if such transfer
would result in more efficient resolution of such actions
or proceedings.
(3) EFFECTIVE DATE OF IMPLEMENTATION OF PLAN.—The
chief judge of the Superior Court may not take any action
to implement the transition plan under this subsection until
the expiration of the 30-day period which begins on the date
the chief judge submits the plan to the President and Congress
under paragraph (1).
(c) TRANSITION TO REQUIRED NUMBER OF JUDGES.—
(1) ANALYSIS BY CHIEF JUDGE OF SUPERIOR COURT.—The
chief judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia
H. R. 2657—7
shall include in the transition plan prepared under subsection
(b)—
(A) the chief judge’s determination of the number of
individuals serving as judges of the Superior Court who—
(i) meet the qualifications for judges of the Family
Court of the Superior Court under section 11–908A,
District of Columbia Code (as added by subsection
(a)); and
(ii) are willing and able to serve on the Family
Court; and
(B) if the chief judge determines that the number of
individuals described in subparagraph (A) is less than 15,
a request that the Judicial Nomination Commission recruit
and the President nominate (in accordance with section
433 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act) such addi-
tional number of individuals to serve on the Superior Court
who meet the qualifications for judges of the Family Court
under section 11–908A, District of Columbia Code, as may
be required to enable the chief judge to make the required
number of assignments.
(2) ROLE OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA JUDICIAL NOMINATION
COMMISSION.—For purposes of section 434(d)(1) of the District
of Columbia Home Rule Act, the submission of a request from
the chief judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia
under paragraph (1)(B) shall be deemed to create a number
of vacancies in the position of judge of the Superior Court
equal to the number of additional appointments so requested
by the chief judge, except that the deadline for the submission
by the District of Columbia Judicial Nomination Commission
of nominees to fill such vacancies shall be 90 days after the
creation of such vacancies. In carrying out this paragraph,
the District of Columbia Judicial Nomination Commission shall
recruit individuals for possible nomination and appointment
to the Superior Court who meet the qualifications for judges
of the Family Court of the Superior Court.
(d) REPORT BY COMPTROLLER GENERAL.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall
prepare and submit to Congress and the chief judge of the
Superior Court of the District of Columbia a report on the
implementation of this Act (including the implementation of
the transition plan under subsection (b)), and shall include
in the report the following:
(A) An analysis of the procedures used to make the
initial appointments of judges of the Family Court under
this Act and the amendments made by this Act, including
an analysis of the time required to make such appointments
and the effect of the qualification requirements for judges
of the Court (including requirements relating to the length
of service on the Court) on the time required to make
such appointments.
(B) An analysis of the impact of magistrate judges
for the Family Court (including the expedited initial
appointment of magistrate judges for the Court under sec-
tion 6(d)) on the workload of judges and other personnel
of the Court.
H. R. 2657—8
(C) An analysis of the number of judges needed for
the Family Court, including an analysis of how the number
may be affected by the qualification requirements for
judges, the availability of magistrate judges, and other
provisions of this Act or the amendments made by this
Act.
(D) An analysis of the timeliness of the resolution
and disposition of pending actions and proceedings required
under the transition plan (as described in paragraphs (1)(I)
and (2) of subsection (b)), including an analysis of the
effect of the availability of magistrate judges on the time
required to resolve and dispose of such actions and pro-
ceedings.
(2) SUBMISSION
TO
CHIEF
JUDGE
OF
SUPERIOR
COURT.—
Prior to submitting the report under paragraph (1) to Congress,
the Comptroller General shall provide a preliminary version
of the report to the chief judge of the Superior Court and
shall take any comments and recommendations of the chief
judge into consideration in preparing the final version of the
report.
(e) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The first sentence of section
11–908(a), District of Columbia Code, is amended by striking ‘‘The
chief judge’’ and inserting ‘‘Subject to section 11–908A, the chief
judge’’.
(f) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections for chapter
9 of title 11, District of Columbia Code, is amended by inserting
after the item relating to section 11–908 the following new item:
‘‘11–908A. Special rules regarding assignment and service of judges of Family
Court.’’.
SEC. 4. IMPROVING ADMINISTRATION OF CASES AND PROCEEDINGS
IN FAMILY COURT.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 11 of title 11, District of Columbia,
is amended by striking section 1101 and inserting the following:
‘‘§ 11–1101. Jurisdiction of the Family Court
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Family Court of the District of Columbia
shall be assigned and have original jurisdiction over—
‘‘(1) actions for divorce from the bond of marriage and
legal separation from bed and board, including proceedings
incidental thereto for alimony, pendente lite and permanent,
and for support and custody of minor children;
‘‘(2) applications for revocation of divorce from bed and
board;
‘‘(3) actions to enforce support of any person as required
by law;
‘‘(4) actions seeking custody of minor children, including
petitions for writs of habeas corpus;
‘‘(5) actions to declare marriages void;
‘‘(6) actions to declare marriages valid;
‘‘(7) actions for annulments of marriage;
‘‘(8) determinations and adjudications of property rights,
both real and personal, in any action referred to in this section,
irrespective of any jurisdictional limitation imposed on the
Superior Court;
‘‘(9) proceedings in adoption;
H. R. 2657—9
‘‘(10) proceedings under the Act of July 10, 1957 (D.C.
Code, secs. 30–301 to 30–324);
‘‘(11) proceedings to determine paternity of any child born
out of wedlock;
‘‘(12) civil proceedings for protection involving intrafamily
offenses, instituted pursuant to chapter 10 of title 16;
‘‘(13) proceedings in which a child, as defined in section
16–2301, is alleged to be delinquent, neglected, or in need
of supervision;
‘‘(14) proceedings under chapter 5 of title 21 relating to
the commitment of the mentally ill;
‘‘(15) proceedings under chapter 13 of title 7 relating to
the commitment of the at least moderately mentally retarded;
and
‘‘(16) proceedings under Interstate Compact on Juveniles
(described in title IV of the District of Columbia Court Reform
and Criminal Procedure Act of 1970).
‘‘(b) DEFINITION.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In this chapter, the term ‘action or pro-
ceeding’ with respect to the Family Court refers to cause of
action described in paragraphs (1) through (16) of subsection
(a).
‘‘(2) EXCEPTION.—An action or proceeding may be assigned
to or retained by cross-jurisdictional units established by the
Superior Court, including the Domestic Violence Unit.
‘‘§ 11–1102. Use of alternative dispute resolution
‘‘To the greatest extent practicable and safe, cases and pro-
ceedings in the Family Court of the Superior Court shall be resolved
through alternative dispute resolution procedures, in accordance
with such rules as the Superior Court may promulgate.
‘‘§ 11–1103. Standards of practice for appointed counsel
‘‘The Superior Court shall establish standards of practice for
attorneys appointed as counsel in the Family Court of the Superior
Court.
‘‘§ 11–1104. Administration
‘‘(a) ‘ONE FAMILY, ONE JUDGE’ REQUIREMENT FOR CASES AND
PROCEEDINGS.—To the greatest extent practicable, feasible, and
lawful, if an individual who is a party to an action or proceeding
assigned to the Family Court has an immediate family or household
member who is a party to another action or proceeding assigned
to the Family Court, the individual’s action or proceeding shall
be assigned to the same judge or magistrate judge to whom the
immediate family member’s action or proceeding is assigned.
‘‘(b) RETENTION OF JURISDICTION OVER CASES.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In addition to the requirement of sub-
section (a), any action or proceeding assigned to the Family
Court of the Superior Court shall remain under the jurisdiction
of the Family Court until the action or proceeding is finally
disposed, except as provided in paragraph (2)(D).
‘‘(2) ONE FAMILY, ONE JUDGE.—
‘‘(A) FOR
THE
DURATION.—An action or proceeding
assigned pursuant to this subsection shall remain with
the judge or magistrate judge in the Family Court to whom
the action or proceeding is assigned for the duration of
H. R. 2657—10
the action or proceeding to the greatest extent practicable,
feasible, and lawful, subject to subparagraph (C).
‘‘(B) ALL CASES INVOLVING AN INDIVIDUAL.—If an indi-
vidual who is a party to an action or proceeding assigned
to the Family Court becomes a party to another action
or proceeding assigned to the Family Court, the individual’s
subsequent action or proceeding shall be assigned to the
same judge or magistrate judge to whom the individual’s
initial action or proceeding is assigned to the greatest
extent practicable and feasible.
‘‘(C) FAMILY COURT CASE RETENTION.—If the full term
of a Family Court judge to whom the action or proceeding
is assigned is completed prior to the final disposition of
the action or proceeding, the presiding judge of the Family
Court shall ensure that the matter or proceeding is
reassigned to a judge serving on the Family Court.
‘‘(D) EXCEPTION.—A judge whose full term on the
Family Court is completed but who remains in Superior
Court may retain the case or proceeding for not more
than 6 months or, in extraordinary circumstances, for not
more than 12 months after ceasing to serve if—
‘‘(i) the case remains at all times in full compliance
with Public Law 105–89, if applicable; and
‘‘(ii) if Public Law 105–89 is applicable, the chief
judge determines, in consultation with the presiding
judge of the Family Court, based on the record in
the case and any unique expertise, training or knowl-
edge of the case that the judge might have, that permit-
ting the judge to retain the case would lead to perma-
nent placement of the child more quickly than reassign-
ment to a judge in the Family Court.
‘‘(3) STANDARDS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS.—The actions of a judge
or magistrate judge in retaining an action or proceeding under
this paragraph shall be subject to applicable standards of
judicial ethics.
‘‘(c) TRAINING PROGRAM.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The chief judge, in consultation with
the presiding judge of the Family Court, shall carry out an
ongoing program to provide training in family law and related
matters for judges of the Family Court and other judges of
the Superior Court who are assigned Family Court cases,
including magistrate judges, attorneys who practice in the
Family Court, and appropriate nonjudicial personnel, and shall
include in the program information and instruction regarding
the following:
‘‘(A) Child development.
‘‘(B) Family dynamics, including domestic violence.
‘‘(C) Relevant Federal and District of Columbia laws.
‘‘(D) Permanency planning principles and practices.
‘‘(E) Recognizing the risk factors for child abuse.
‘‘(F) Any other matters the presiding judge considers
appropriate.
‘‘(2) USE
OF
CROSS-TRAINING.—The program carried out
under this section shall use the resources of lawyers and legal
professionals, social workers, and experts in the field of child
development and other related fields.
H. R. 2657—11
‘‘(d) ACCESSIBILITY OF MATERIALS, SERVICES, AND PROCEEDINGS;
PROMOTION OF ‘FAMILY-FRIENDLY’ ENVIRONMENT.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—To the greatest extent practicable, the
chief judge and the presiding judge of the Family Court shall
ensure that the materials and services provided by the Family
Court are understandable and accessible to the individuals
and families served by the Family Court, and that the Family
Court carries out its duties in a manner which reflects the
special needs of families with children.
‘‘(2) LOCATION OF PROCEEDINGS.—To the maximum extent
feasible, safe, and practicable, cases and proceedings in the
Family Court shall be conducted at locations readily accessible
to the parties involved.
‘‘(e) INTEGRATED COMPUTERIZED CASE TRACKING AND MANAGE-
MENT SYSTEM.—The Executive Officer of the District of Columbia
courts under section 11–1703 shall work with the chief judge of
the Superior Court—
‘‘(1) to ensure that all records and materials of cases and
proceedings in the Family Court are stored and maintained
in electronic format accessible by computers for the use of
judges, magistrate judges, and nonjudicial personnel of the
Family Court, and for the use of other appropriate offices
of the District government in accordance with the plan for
integrating computer systems prepared by the Mayor of the
District of Columbia under section 4(b) of the District of
Columbia Family Court Act of 2001;
‘‘(2) to establish and operate an electronic tracking and
management system for cases and proceedings in the Family
Court for the use of judges and nonjudicial personnel of the
Family Court, using the records and materials stored and main-
tained pursuant to paragraph (1); and
‘‘(3) to expand such system to cover all divisions of the
Superior Court as soon as practicable.
‘‘§ 11–1105. Social services and other related services
‘‘(a) ONSITE COORDINATION OF SERVICES AND INFORMATION.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Mayor of the District of Columbia,
in consultation with the chief judge of the Superior Court,
shall ensure that representatives of the appropriate offices of
the District government which provide social services and other
related services to individuals and families served by the Family
Court (including the District of Columbia Public Schools, the
District of Columbia Housing Authority, the Child and Family
Services Agency, the Office of the Corporation Counsel, the
Metropolitan Police Department, the Department of Health,
and other offices determined by the Mayor) are available on-
site at the Family Court to coordinate the provision of such
services and information regarding such services to such
individuals and families.
‘‘(2) DUTIES OF HEADS OF OFFICES.—The head of each office
described in paragraph (1), including the Superintendent of
the District of Columbia Public Schools and the Director of
the District of Columbia Housing Authority, shall provide the
Mayor with such information, assistance, and services as the
Mayor may require to carry out such paragraph.
‘‘(b) APPOINTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES LIAISON WITH FAMILY
COURT.—The Mayor of the District of Columbia shall appoint an
H. R. 2657—12
individual to serve as a liaison between the Family Court and
the District government for purposes of subsection (a) and for
coordinating the delivery of services provided by the District govern-
ment with the activities of the Family Court and for providing
information to the judges, magistrate judges, and nonjudicial per-
sonnel of the Family Court regarding the services available from
the District government to the individuals and families served
by the Family Court. The Mayor shall provide on an ongoing basis
information to the chief judge of the Superior Court and the pre-
siding judge of the Family Court regarding the services of the
District government which are available for the individuals and
families served by the Family Court.
‘‘§ 11–1106. Reports to Congress
‘‘Not later than 90 days after the end of each calendar year,
the chief judge of the Superior Court shall submit a report to
Congress on the activities of the Family Court during the year,
and shall include in the report the following:
‘‘(1) The chief judge’s assessment of the productivity and
success of the use of alternative dispute resolution pursuant
to section 11–1102.
‘‘(2) Goals and timetables as required by the Adoption
and Safe Families Act of 1997 to improve the Family Court’s
performance in the following year.
‘‘(3) Information on the extent to which the Family Court
met deadlines and standards applicable under Federal and
District of Columbia law to the review and disposition of actions
and proceedings under the Family Court’s jurisdiction during
the year.
‘‘(4) Information on the progress made in establishing loca-
tions and appropriate space for the Family Court that are
consistent with the mission of the Family Court until such
time as the locations and space are established.
‘‘(5) Information on any factors which are not under the
control of the Family Court which interfere with or prevent
the Family Court from carrying out its responsibilities in the
most effective manner possible.
‘‘(6) Information on—
‘‘(A) the number of judges serving on the Family Court
as of the end of the year;
‘‘(B) how long each such judge has served on the Family
Court;
‘‘(C) the number of cases retained outside the Family
Court;
‘‘(D) the number of reassignments to and from the
Family Court; and
‘‘(E) the ability to recruit qualified sitting judges to
serve on the Family Court.
‘‘(7) Based on outcome measures derived through the use
of the information stored in electronic format under section
11–1104(d), an analysis of the Family Court’s efficiency and
effectiveness in managing its case load during the year,
including an analysis of the time required to dispose of actions
and proceedings among the various categories of the Family
Court’s jurisdiction, as prescribed by applicable law and best
practices, including (but not limited to) best practices developed