A
court must regularly monitor whether it is keeping up with its incoming
caseload. A key indicator of court performance on this issue is the
disposition or clearance ratio: the number of cases that are disposed in a
given year divided by the number of filings in the same year for
identifiable case types. Courts should aspire to dispose at least as many
cases as are filed each year (i.e., it should have a clearance ratio of 1.0
or higher). If the court is disposing of fewer cases than are filed each
year, a growing backlog is inevitable. Knowledge of clearance ratios for
various case categories over a period of 3 to 5 years can help to pinpoint
emerging problems and where improvements must be made.
Planning/Preparation.
This measure requires information on the numbers of cases filed and disposed
each year. It is most valuable to courts if data are available for
particular case types for at least 5 years.
Data
Collection. The
data required for this measure should be available from the clerk’s office
or court manager’s records.
Data
Analysis and Report Preparation. For
each case type, divide the number of cases disposed of by the number of
cases filed. The resulting ratios represent the court’s annual clearance
rates for those case types. (Form 2.1.2,
Ratio of Dispositions to Filings Worksheet, can be used as a guide for
calculating the ratios.) Compute the same calculation for the court’s
total caseload.
Display
the data in a graph showing the clearance rates for both individual case
types and the court’s total caseload over a 5-year period (see Form
2.1.2). If a court is keeping up with its incoming caseload, all the
ratios on the graph will be close to 1.0. A court that is not keeping up
with its incoming caseload will plot values less than 1.0, indicating that a
backlog is developing or that an existing backlog is increasing.
A
consistent trend of 1:1 ratios between case dispositions and case filings is
evidence that a court is keeping pace with its incoming caseload. A court
that is not performing well on Measure 2.1.2, as evidenced by clearance
ratios well below 1.0, should examine the size and characteristics of its
pending caseloads. Measure 2.1.3, Age of Pending
Caseload, offers a workable procedure to address that issue.