New Hampshire Citizens Commission on State Courts Draft Recommendations for Consideration March 13, March 20 Recommendation #4 Research Committee: Communication and Customer Service Recommendation: Create a customer service-based court environment. A. Designate a greeter at each courthouse and a Family Law case manager in each judicial facility; set up a 1-800 Help Line. B. Create a court-wide ombudsman’s office. C. Establish fixed and non-traditional court hours. D. Create judicial facilities with greater attention to litigant needs. Rationale: Initial entry into our courthouses is a matter of mystery to many. Questions as simple as "Am I in the right place? Where in the building will my case be heard? When will it be heard?” and many others make the experience even more uncomfortable and foreboding. Court security officers absorb much of burden of providing this information. Each court should be staffed with a clearly identified greeter charged with meeting the basic informational needs of the public. This need not be a new position and existing court staff may be so designated. Centralized and obvious signage containing dockets, schedules and other information should be provided in an obvious place easily noticed upon entry. Family Law Division case managers should be provided to assure that litigants understand the required forms and the proper way to complete them. They will be available to provide information regarding mediation, available social services and to explain basic procedural questions. This will save judicial time and help ensure that information is presented accurately. A 1-800 Help Line can also help alleviate the burden to the system of pro se litigants by providing guidance through the process. The State of Alaska’s court system provides a model for this option. Restrictions on ex parte communication with judges, while necessary to preserve judicial fairness, are powerful roadblocks to receiving information. A system-wide court ombudsman should be appointed to provide the public with a valuable avenue for articulating problems and avoiding further misunderstanding. Not only will this service aid the public in voicing their concerns and complaints, but it will also provide the judiciary with an important channel to obtain information often unavailable to it. The ombudsman could also be charged with coordinating a judicial public outreach program. The New Jersey and Maryland court systems provide models. Litigants are unnecessarily losing income and incurring increased legal fees. Too often all cases are scheduled for 9 a.m. or 1 p.m. without regard to the probability that some portion will not be reached until much later in the day. Not all cases need to be scheduled for the same hour. Scheduling certain court time during traditional non-working hours will further reduce adverse economic impact on litigants. We recommend that courts be open during such hours on selected days. Judicial facilities provide inadequate public space. Pleas and settlement negotiations take place in hallways, heavily populated areas and even outdoors. Courthouses should have work areas with adequate tables, chairs and privacy to allow litigants to complete forms, settlement documents and private conversations. The matters are too serious to be handicapped by inadequate facilities. More and more litigants bring children to court. In order to avoid unnecessary distractions, an area should be designated for litigants and children while waiting. Recommendation #5 Research Committee: Communication and Customer Service Recommendation: Rapidly implement and maintain up-to-date technology and related equipment. A. Implement a system-wide computer system within two years. B. Make better use of video/teleconferencing to reduce physical presence at court-mandated hearings. C. Improve the functionality of the court Web site. Rationale: Any consumer-oriented business must use up-to-date technology. In the case of the court system, technology can be used to help save time and reduce expense. Too, the Web provides an opportunity for informing the public and providing training for staff. Using computers, video and teleconferencing is not without cost, but failing to secure their benefits is a failure to employ the single best means to render the judicial system more consumer-friendly and less costly overall. Thirty-six District Courts, 11 Superior Courts, 10 Probate Courts, the emerging Family Courts and the Supreme Court schedule cases every day. Presently, each of their dockets is produced with little or no knowledge of counsel's schedule resulting in frequent conflicts. Scheduling conflicts occur under the current system, and when they do they are resolved by a series of phone calls and motions to continue. While these efforts do nothing to help the litigants or their cases, they generally produce legal fees as lawyers reschedule cases. In addition, substantial court time is spent deciding those motions and providing notices for the rescheduled cases. While it would be nearly impossible for the more than 58 clerk’s offices to identify such conflicts, a system-wide data bank could identify most of them instantaneously. Public access to computers should also provide access to and guidance on a variety of legal forms. This will provide necessary information in a more uniform format. Pro se litigants will have a far easier time negotiating the system with such guidance. Teleconferencing and videoconferencing eliminate travel. Such services can avoid the substantial cost of providing travel and security for some court appearances by incarcerated individuals. To the extent that travel costs and lawyer time are removed from legal bills, clients will enjoy the savings. In most cases, structuring conferences and hearings on preliminary matters could be handled by electronic conferencing. While all or some of these capabilities are already available, they are underemployed. Aside from assuring the availability of these tools, rule changes should be implemented indicating the preference for such conferencing, except in extraordinary circumstances. The current court system Web site is an attractive and functional communications tool. However, its use can be improved to provide relevant information across a wide range of to-be-identified needs. The Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County, web site provides a model of excellence. Recommendation #6 Research Committee: Communication and Customer Service Recommendation: Review the staff compensation structure to assure recruiting and retaining a well-trained and qualified staff, and provide adequate staff facilities in which to work. Rationale: A motivated, well-trained staff is essential to first-class customer service. Without an adequate compensation structure, and functional facilities, the courts will suffer attrition to its qualified workforce and customer service will decline. The impending loss, due to retirement, of experienced judicial staff makes it particularly important that these recommendations be implemented quickly. The New Hampshire judicial system has been blessed by remarkably competent and loyal employees. This is in spite of an entry level Court Assistant II starting salary of $20,125 per year. Furthermore, long-term employees are capped at various levels without regard to developing expertise or outstanding performance. But for health insurance, dental insurance and the New Hampshire Retirement System pension, there is little incentive for highly qualified employees to join or remain among its ranks. In most cases, private sector employment in related areas provides a more lucrative alternative. It is particularly important that staff be involved in the quest for better customer service. Staff and judicial officers should receive continuing training regarding sensitivity, bias and court ethics. Court staff and judges should hold regular meetings where all concerned are free to express their views as to problems and ideas in a continuing effort to better serve the public. Staff should be regularly evaluated with emphasis not only on regular work performance, but customer service, problem solving and creative thinking. Annual training sessions should be scheduled to review developments in the law and procedures, working with the public, working with difficult parties and technical advancements. Assembling staff in cramped areas with inadequate workspace affects both health and efficiency. For many courthouses, not only are work areas cramped and inefficient, they even lack proper security to protect staff from the risk of physical harm. The failure to protect court staff represents a serious failure standing alone. Unsafe environments provide but one more barrier to successfully recruiting and retaining competent employees. Recommendation #7 Research Committee: Communication and Customer Service Recommendation: Dedicate a person to establish and administer an outreach and education program targeting internal and external audiences. Rationale: It is apparent that New Hampshire’s court system is a mystery to most citizens. This is a barrier to their effective use of the courts. The public must understand the value, role and limits of the system. According to the study conducted by the UNH Survey Center, only 4 percent of New Hampshire’s population reported being very familiar with the state courts. Another 34 percent reported being somewhat familiar with the court system. It is the remaining 62 percent of the population, as well as New Hampshire’s school children, who need more exposure to how state courts operate. Additionally, with 73 percent of those surveyed reporting that they get most of their information from news media, more attention needs to be paid to how the courts are portrayed in New Hampshire media. This information gap is an opportunity for New Hampshire's court system to educate the public on how it works, how it is going to change, its limitations and how the courts are relevant to today’s needs. The Committee recommends that an aggressive outreach campaign should be initiated on multiple fronts to overcome the ignorance, mystery and misapprehension that appear among a significant portion of New Hampshire’s citizens. The audience must be thoughtfully identified and selected, so that key messages may be developed. A press conference announcing the campaign and its contours should be held with key judges providing faces for the system and emphasizing their own efforts to make the courts more user-friendly. Designated judges should remain available as a speaker’s bureau to present speeches to strategically selected audiences. Articles and speaking engagements on public and private broadcasting facilities should explain the history of the courts, why they are what they are and how they are changing to better serve the public. Linkage with “We the People,” Kids Voting New Hampshire and other public school programs should be employed to explain the court system and make it more relevant to this group of soon-to-be-served citizens. The state court Web pages should provide information on the campaign. This is a particularly useful place for the court to publicize its efforts to provide better service for all whom it serves. Recommendation #8 Research Committee: Communication and Customer Service Recommendation: The Chief Justice will report to the Commission as a whole on the implementation of the recommendations contained in its report within six months of submission. Rationale: We are recommending that the Chief Justice report back to the full Commission within six months of issuing the report in order to give an update on implementation. Our aim is to create accountability on the part of the court to make changes based on the Commission's report. It will also provide a level of assurance that this Citizens Commission report is taken seriously by all; the judicial branch, the legislative branch, the executive branch and the public. Recommendation #9 Research Committee: The Courts as a Business Recommendation: Human Resource Management: The critical ingredient to the court’s future is its human resources: the judiciary and court staff. With that in mind, the Courts as a Business Research Committee’s first recommendation addresses the court’s human resources and is in three parts: A. That the NH justice system be served by a full time judiciary. Specifically, this policy should be in place for all new appointments, effectively phasing in the timing and cost of this policy shift. B. That the justice system should significantly increase its investment in training and development of the judiciary and court staff. This investment should include funding for courses and seminars and making available adequate judiciary and staff time to attend such educational opportunities. Further, minimum standards and continuing education requirements should be established by job title and monitored in performance reviews. C. As the justice system moves to be more outcomes or performance driven, see the Committee’s recommendation #10, job descriptions and annual reviews should include measures of personal accountability for outcomes. And the human resource system should provide support, where appropriate, for remediation, assistance, and corrective action. And excellence in the delivery of superior outcomes should be rewarded. Rationale: New Hampshire has benefited from the talents and efforts of the Judicial Branch’s judges and staff. To meet the future demands on the New Hampshire Judicial branch for high quality service and justice by its citizens and institutions without continuing significant increases in expense and resources will require continuing substantial productivity gains and process innovations fueled largely by the justices and staff of the judiciary. To attract and develop the talent necessary to achieve those high objectives will required investments in human capital. In addition, human resource management should set standards for training and expertise, reward excellence and innovation, and address lagging performance to improve the productivity and effectiveness of all staff. Finally, the public is increasingly sensitive to real or potential conflicts of interest in both public and private institutions. Accordingly, even if part time judges maintain in fact high levels of impartiality and are scrupulous in dealing with persons they may see in private law practice, the perception of possible bias and unequal or unfair treatment will erode the public’s confidence in the judiciary.