The
extent to which the courthouse is perceived as a safe environment is
measured through the administration of a questionnaire to regular users of
the court (e.g., court employees, attorneys, probation officers, and
jurors). The measure requires the assistance of someone skilled in survey
research methods.
Planning/Preparation.
Measure 1.2.6, Evaluation of
Accessibility and Convenience by Court Users, and Measure
1.4.1, Court Users’ Assessment of Court Personnel’s Courtesy and
Responsiveness, also involve surveying regular users of the court. If these
measures are being applied in the court, coordinators for these measures may
find it efficient to combine the three measures into a single survey
instrument.
The
first step in applying the measure is to review Form
1.2.3, Survey on Courthouse Security. The survey form consists of three
sections. The first section seeks to gauge the respondents’ sense of
threat to their person and property while visiting the courthouse. The
second section asks about actual victimizations experienced in the
courthouse. The third section seeks general background information such as
gender, age, and relationship to the court. The questions are adapted from
the National Crime Survey—Attitude Questionnaire and the National Crime
Survey—Basic Screening Questionnaire.9 The
survey form can be used as is or modified to better fit the specific
characteristics of the court. For example, smaller jurisdictions conducting
this measure may want to eliminate some or all of the background information
questions included in the third section of the survey. Small jurisdictions
may have fewer respondents and thus responses to demographic questions could
essentially reveal the identity of individual respondents. Courts in this
situation will have to weigh the benefits of including the demographic
information to allow for more detailed analysis against a possible low
response rate because anonymity cannot be guaranteed.
Data
Collection. The
survey form is administered to four groups of individuals who use the court
on a regular basis: court employees, attorneys, probation officers,10
and jurors. To ensure that each group is represented in the sample of survey
recipients, stratified sampling should be used. A sample of at least 80
individuals11 should be drawn for a total
sample of 320 individuals.12
Court
employees should be selected from a list of employees maintained by the
court’s personnel office. Probation officers should be selected from
personnel lists maintained by the probation department. Attorneys should be
selected according to the procedure described in Measure
3.3.1. A list of individuals who served as jurors for the court during
the previous 18 months should be prepared and used for obtaining the juror
sample.
A
questionnaire is sent to each person in all four groups. For best results, a
stamped envelope with the administrator’s name and address on it should be
included with each questionnaire. As a means to track which surveys have
been returned while still preserving the confidentiality of the respondents,
each questionnaire should be accompanied by an index card with a code number
that corresponds to a master list of the survey recipients. The code number
should not be included on the questionnaire itself. Recipients should be
instructed to return the card with their completed survey or, if they
prefer, in a separate envelope. They should also be informed that the
code-numbered cards will not be used for identification of the surveys, but
only to determine which surveys are still outstanding and thus require a
"reminder" note. The card should be destroyed once the return of
the survey is recorded on the master list. To increase the response rate,
those who have not returned their surveys should be sent a reminder notice
after 10 days.
Data
Analysis and Report Preparation. The responses for each item of the
questionnaire are associated with a number code. For example,
"male" is coded as 1 and "female" is coded as 2. The
responses for each questionnaire are recorded using these number codes.
These codes subsequently are entered into a computer file and tabulated
using a statistical software program.
In
general, court performance depends on two factors: the number of courthouse
areas rated safe by a majority of respondents and the number of crime
incidents reported by respondents. As perceived safety increases and
reported crime decreases, court performance on this measure improves.
Two
sets of analyses are conducted. The first set examines the frequency (or
percentage) of responses for each category of each item. For example, an
analysis of question 1 will indicate the number of survey respondents who
thought crime in the courthouse had increased, the number who thought crime
had decreased, and the number who thought crime had remained about the same.
If the majority of respondents thought that crime had increased in the
courthouse, then the court is not performing well on this measure.
The
second set of analyses compares the responses on one item with the responses
on other items through the use of a cross-tabulation procedure and the gamma
coefficient. These analyses will help explain some of the percentages
derived from the first set of analyses. For example, of those respondents
who thought that crime had increased, how many had actually been victimized
in the courthouse? (See Part II of the survey form.) The result of this
analysis will clarify whether a response of "increased crime" is
based on actual incidents of crime.
The
needs of the court should dictate the dissemination and utilization of the
results of this measure. Results will provide useful feedback to the Trial
Court Administrator and Supervisor of Courthouse Security. If actual
incidents of courthouse crime were reported, the court will need to examine
its security more closely. If there is a perception that crime has increased
but no incidents were reported, the court may have to better publicize its
security efforts.
Court
employees should be selected from a list of employees maintained by the
court’s personnel office. Probation officers should be selected from
personnel lists maintained by the probation department. Attorneys should be
selected according to the procedure described in Measure
3.3.1. A list of individuals who served as jurors for the court during
the previous 18 months should be prepared and used for obtaining the juror
sample.
A
questionnaire is sent to each person in all four groups. For best results, a
stamped envelope with the administrator’s name and address on it should be
included with each questionnaire. As a means to track which surveys have
been returned while still preserving the confidentiality of the respondents,
each questionnaire should be accompanied by an index card with a code number
that corresponds to a master list of the survey recipients. The code number
should not be included on the questionnaire itself. Recipients should be
instructed to return the card with their completed survey or, if they
prefer, in a separate envelope. They should also be informed that the
code-numbered cards will not be used for identification of the surveys, but
only to determine which surveys are still outstanding and thus require a
"reminder" note. The card should be destroyed once the return of
the survey is recorded on the master list. To increase the response rate,
those who have not returned their surveys should be sent a reminder notice
after 10 days.
