This measure evaluates the implementations of two current or upcoming changes in law and is designed to be administered by someone outside the court. Selection of the changes should be based on their significance and measurability. (Note: for a distinction between the legal procedures examined here and administrative procedures, see Measure 2.3.2, Implementation of Changes in Administrative Procedures.)

Planning/Preparation. First, judges or court staff must identify current or very recent changes in the law. Ask the State administrative office of the courts for copies of (1) summaries of State and Federal legislation affecting the courts with effective dates occurring during the 12 months following the request and (2) new Federal regulations (e.g., regarding child support) that affect the trial courts. If letters, memoranda, or directives concerning these changes were distributed by the State administrative office of the courts, copies should be gathered.

Second, select the changes to be examined. Select at least two items from the information provided by the court and the State administrative office of the courts. Changes selected should have clearly measurable requirements/changes specified. For example, if one of the changes requires that all divorce decrees including child support include provision for health insurance coverage by one of the parents, the decrees issued after the effective date of that changed requirement could be reviewed to determine the proportion in which insurance coverage was included.

Data Collection. Data collection on compliance with required changes and the timeliness of that compliance will vary with the nature of the changes. One possible approach is to review records for 3 months immediately following the effective date of the change to ascertain whether new forms or order provisions appear in case files. The percentage of cases in compliance can be calculated: the higher the percentage, the better the court’s performance. Additionally, or if the change is not easily quantifiable, attorneys might be interviewed to determine their perceptions of the courts’ promptness in implementing change in general as well as in specific instances.

Evaluators should focus on three aspects of the change implementation process: (1) whether all relevant staff and judges are informed of the impending change in a timely and uniform manner, (2) whether there is a plan for implementing the change, and (3) whether the change is implemented in a timely and uniform manner. Progress toward full implementation of this plan should be checked periodically until the court is in full compliance over multiple monitoring periods. Though this goes beyond the issue of timeliness, evaluators might also check whether judges or court staff checked with appropriate authorities during their planning for implementing the change to determine whether the court’s interpretation of the new law is consistent with the intent of the law.

Data Analysis and Report Preparation. Compile the data collected into a report for use by the court. If one or more indicators of compliance (e.g., attorney interviews) indicate a problem with prompt implementation, the court should take whatever actions are necessary to ameliorate the problem.