Please note that these materials are provided for historical purposes only. The information presented is out of date and may be neither accurate nor useful. External hyperlinks may no longer be valid.
CHAPTER ONE
Introduction and Summary
For many years, courts have been contending with recordkeeping problems. Many clerks admit that lost or misplaced paper files are chronic problems. Most courts handle constantly increasing volumes of paper. How many courthouses have you seen with file cabinets occupying every inch of wall space? How many of those courthouses have basements filled with boxes of decaying records? We have talked about the paperless courthouse and other high- technology solutions at endless conferences and seminars, but we still have all those records. Why?
Computers may be the heart of our solution. Courts at all levels are progressing nicely with computer systems. Most courts now use computer case processing systems to perform their docketing, indexing, calendaring, notice generation, and financial operations. Courts supplement this with word processing to produce orders, letters, and other documents. Some even have integrated these capabilities. While these types of systems have addressed the basic case processing needs, they have not solved the recordkeeping problem.
Now the time is at hand to apply computers to recordkeeping. What will it take? A number of technologies now exist, or soon will exist, to attack the problem. One that exists now is imaging which--considered with case processing, word processing, and other technologies--will be a major part of the solution.
Solving recordkeeping problems using computers will not be easy. The migration to computer case processing systems took years, and so will the movement from manual to electronic records. But the recordkeeping migration will be much more rapid for several reasons. First, court personnel are no longer intimidated by computers. Computers are old hat--maybe even friends--by now. Second, while these technologies are complicated, they are easier to install and use with today’s graphics and other user aids than full-scale case processing systems were with yesterday’s technology.
Why is the time right for imaging and other recordkeeping technologies? First, the records continue to accumulate, resulting in the document loss, inefficient processing, and poor service that characterize recordkeeping operations that are out of control. Second, technologies are advancing rapidly and some, such as imaging, now are widely used. Third, their costs are decreasing so that they no longer are prohibitively expensive. Fourth, case processing and word processing systems, whose functions and information complement those of imaging and other recordkeeping technologies, are commonplace and ready for their recordkeeping counterparts.
The solution to the recordkeeping problem is multi-faceted. Imaging is only a step along the way. As things appear today in the constantly changing world of computer technology, court files of the future will be stored in computers and are likely to consist primarily of the contents of documents but not the documents themselves. In some instances, it still will be necessary to store the complete documents in the computer files.
Pleadings, warrants, notices, citations, and other present-day documents, therefore, would be stored as data but not as complete documents in the electronic database of the future. Except in unusual situations, the court may not need them as documents. They can enter and leave the court system electronically over telephone lines using emerging technologies that permit data to be exchanged through techniques such as the Judicial Electronic Document and Data Interchange (please see discussion of JEDDI in Chapter Two).
On the other hand, even in the electronic databases of the future, actual documents will be stored in some instances. The documents may be highly textual or nonstandard, such as correspondence and court orders; they may contain essential graphics, signatures, or inscriptions; or system users may want to retain the complete document for some other reason.
When the choice between retention of document contents or complete documents becomes realistic, the essential question will be: Is it important to store only the information or both the information and its form in the computer?
To assist in making this choice, this report discusses imaging
- As an interim solution to the recordkeeping problem until JEDDI, or some other technology that accomplishes the same objectives, matures; and
- As a solution to the recordkeeping problem for those situations that require storage of complete documents.
Imaging should not be considered in a vacuum. If you regard imaging as an interim solution, you should know at least the general nature of your ultimate solution, how imaging relates to that solution, and how you intend to use imaging for special situations that require complete documents. In any circumstance, today’s imaging should be integrated with other technologies such as data processing (e.g., case processing in courts) and word processing systems.
Most court managers regard imaging as a possible solution to recordkeeping problems. The preceding discussion should help you put imaging in the proper perspective as you look for solutions.
But exactly what is imaging? What are its functions? How much does it cost? What are its advantages and disadvantages? How do you evaluate it? How do you obtain it? How do you implement it? This report is intended to help you --as a court manager--answer these questions so that you can
- Evaluate the applicability of imaging to your situation; and
- Be familiar with the steps in obtaining and implementing imaging if it is applicable.
This report is Volume 5 of the Court Technology Reports series, prepared by the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) under a grant from the State Justice Institute (SJI).
Volume 5 was prepared by Carter C. Cowles, consultant, with assistance from NCSC publications and secretarial staff. The project was managed by J. Douglas Walker, Director of Court Technology Research, under the overall management oversight of Lawrence P. Webster, Executive Director of Court Technology Programs. After internal NCSC review by Messrs. Walker and Webster and James E. McMillan, Director of the Court Technology Laboratory, the report was reviewed by SJI and NCSC’s Advisory Committee on Technology (ACT).
The report is based on a wide selection of imaging reports, articles, and other publications, as well as visits to six imaging sites. These sites were selected to represent a variety of court, state agency, and corporate organizations and a cross section of imaging objectives and capabilities. We made no attempt to visit massive imaging operations such as the Internal Revenue Service, other large federal users, and the larger insurance companies for two reasons. First, it would be difficult and time-consuming to obtain a concise view of their operations. Second, such large operations would not be as relevant to the courts as the sites we visited.
The final sections of this introductory chapter clarify some of the basic terminology used throughout the report and then present a summary of imaging. The remainder of Volume 5 gives a comprehensive survey of imaging. It describes imaging as we know it today, imaging of the future, and examples of imaging in court and non-court sites.
Chapters Two through Four describe today’s imaging (although they also provide glimpses of tomorrow's technologies). They cover what imaging is, whether it is right for you, and how to acquire and implement it.
The chapters that describe today’s imaging are organized as follows:
- Chapter Two, Functions and Technology, gives basic descriptions of imaging functions, equipment, and software. These basic descriptions constitute a summary of the technology for court managers and analysts.
- Chapter Three, Is Imaging Right For You?, explores situations in which imaging applies; the issues associated with imaging; its advantages, disadvantages, costs, and standards; the management considerations; and invaluable advice from the sites we visited.
- Chapter Four, Implementation Strategy, acquaints you with the steps in acquiring and implementing an imaging system, including analysis and planning, approval, procurement, and implementation.
Chapter Five, which describes the future of imaging, gives overall emphasis to integration and specific coverage to open architecture, client/server and desktop computing, workflow, optical character recognition, text retrieval, and compound documents.
Then, equipped with an understanding of what imaging is and where it is going in the future, you are ready to look at several examples of actual imaging applications. Each of the six sites we visited presents imaging from a different perspective. While each has impressive technical expertise, collectively they illustrate most of the current and some of the future technologies, as well as exemplary planning, development, and implementation strategies. Chapter Six, Summary of Imaging Sites, gives the features of each site in list and table form for easy comparison.
The main body of the report concludes with Chapter Seven, Imaging In Courts, which examines three California courts. We visited sites that use imaging in general jurisdiction civil, jury, and municipal court case processing applications.
To give a balanced picture of imaging in other government agencies and private industry, we visited two state executive branch agencies and one major transportation corporation. Appendix A contains descriptions of these visits.
I.E. Terminology Used In This Report
Several technical terms used throughout the report require clarification:
- Computer Nomenclature. Throughout this report, the term mainframe will refer to any single central large-scale or mid-range computer that supports processing within an organization. Mainframe will be used in contrast to smaller computers (e.g., PCs) in networks or functioning individually on user desktops.
- Computer System Character Representations.
Computer systems and their character representations
(i.e., letters, numbers, punctuation marks, and other
characters) are of three basic types: office systems
(e.g., word processing) that mainly process unformatted
text; data processing systems (e.g., court case
processing) that process formatted numbers and text; and
imaging systems that store, retrieve, and disseminate
imaged pictures of printed pages.
Throughout this report, we will consider imaging, word processing, and data processing systems. Despite the fact that they all include data and text in their respective character representations, except when explicitly stated in unique situations such as indexing, we will refer to the contents of imaging systems as imaged documents, the contents of word processing systems as text, and the contents of data processing systems as data. - Scope of Imaging Systems. The scope of some imaging systems may be expanded to include functions with character representations outside the conventional definition of imaging. For example, indexing is an integral part of imaging. But indexes contain formatted text and data, which makes indexing a data processing function. Nevertheless, in some instances, the index may be regarded as part of a particular imaging system.
I.F.1. Definition
The basic purpose of imaging, which is intended to replace manual recordkeeping, is to record and store document representations for reference purposes. Imaging systems capture, store, retrieve, display, process, distribute, and manage documents.
Imaging systems consist of scanners to get images of documents into the system, storage devices to store documents, printers and display devices to print and view documents that come out of the system, workstations to permit users to manage documents and work with images, and communications to distribute documents. A computer and its software make this technology work together. Additional communications technology permits the imaging system to transfer images and information to or from other systems, computers, and networks. Imaging systems have greatly enhanced value when used with other systems such as court case processing systems.
I.F.2. Imaging and You
The primary purposes of this report are to (1) guide you in deciding whether to use imaging and (2) help you obtain and implement imaging if you decide to use it.
The decision to use imaging should not be made lightly. Even though its costs are declining, imaging still is expensive. To evaluate whether imaging is the correct solution to your problems, you must know
- What you are trying to accomplish with imaging and how it fits into your organization;
- What technology you need, how and from whom you are going to obtain it, and how the imaging acquisition and implementation project will proceed;
- How imaging will affect the organization in terms of operations, equipment and software, staffing, and cost;
- How the change to imaging will affect your overall work environment, morale, and existing systems;
- How you will ensure that managers, users, and technical staff are committed to and support imaging and will communicate throughout the project; and
- Which of the advantages and disadvantages listed below apply to you and whether, after considering them, imaging represents a net advantage or disadvantage.
These considerations cannot be left to chance or passed off to someone else. You should address them explicitly. If imaging appears to be the right solution, you should identify the specific requirements to be satisfied by imaging, develop a detailed plan for the imaging project, and proceed carefully and systematically through acquisition and implementation of the system.
I.F.3. Advantages and Disadvantages
If you do it properly, imaging can yield significant benefits. Some of them are listed below:
- Dramatically improved turnaround time in recordkeeping, document retrieval, and document storage activities, yielding improved service to people who need information and records;
- Better control of documents and the work done on them (because of the central imaged document repository), better document tracking and distribution, better control of staff workloads, and the ability of several people to access and work on imaged documents concurrently; and
- Reduced costs and more efficiency because staff can handle greater volumes of work more rapidly and accurately, with less paper handling and less office space.
Imaging has disadvantages that you should consider. Some of them are as follows:
- Potentially costly and complex technology that may be difficult to implement and maintain and may consume excessive computer resources;
- Difficulty in reading and using imaged documents because they must be viewed page by page on a computer screen, they can be unclear, and they generally cannot be modified or used as a source of extracted text;
- Potential staff increases because of the need for a separate work unit to scan documents;
- Feelings of enslavement and low morale by some imaging users because of feared staff cutbacks (other than in the scanning unit) and the perceived loss of control and decision-making authority; and
- Potential for the entire operation to be immobilized by system failures.
I.F.4. Use in Courts - Current and Future
The court clerk’s office receives documents from many different sources and then must docket the filing (e.g., enter it in the register of actions), accept the accompanying fees and generate receipts, take the appropriate action, place the documents in the case file, and maintain records on attorneys and other parties in the cases. Case processing systems usually perform docketing, maintain party records, and assist in the action that results from the filing. Typical of these actions are scheduling hearings, generating notices and other outgoing documents, and assisting in other activities such as consolidating cases. Word processing systems generate textual documents such as correspondence and court orders.
Most of these activities involve documents in files and records. Many courts that maintain paper documents have recordkeeping problems. They attack the problem by reducing their paper usage. The emerging ultimate solution is, when possible, to enter, file, and send out the data contained in the documents but not the documents themselves. This leads to the JEDDI data interchange approach noted above and described later in this report. This should eliminate most documents altogether. Data would be entered directly into case processing systems from the interchange and would be output directly to the interchange from these systems. Otherwise, the case processing systems would function as they do today. Word processing would be partially supplanted by the direct data input and output between the case processing systems and the interchange.
Until JEDDI becomes a mature technology, we will continue to be confronted with manual files unless we find an interim solution. This report discusses imaging as that solution.
I.F.4.a. Basic Court Uses
Most court imaging systems currently function as a document repository and a means to retrieve and display documents. Documents are imaged when filed, and imaged records substitute for the manual case records. While imaged records can be used for the same purposes as manual records, imaging used with case processing and word processing systems is even more likely to let courts realize the benefits described above. Figure 1 illustrates the flow of information in a court with such a combined system.
Under this combined approach, documents are scanned into the imaging system and used with the case processing system for data entry and information. During data entry, the imaged document usually is displayed on a split screen with the data entry screen from the case processing system (see Figure 2). When records are subsequently retrieved, the images can be used to supplement standard case information contained in the system to meet inquiry needs and to generate documents.
I.F.4.b. Imaging and Other Technologies
Imaging should not be regarded as an isolated technology. Its effectiveness can best be realized if it is considered in conjunction with complementary technologies, technology platform alternatives, and integration with other components of an overall technology solution.
OCR
Where there was a data entry workgroup, now there is an imaging workgroup. A technique called optical character recognition (OCR) can permit the computer to extract information from the imaged document and transfer it into the case processing system, thereby eliminating manual data entry. This would enable the same clerk who receives pleadings to scan them into the system with no separate data entry operation. While OCR is reaching the point where it can be used in this manner with specific forms, it cannot yet be used efficiently with general-purpose forms.
Figure 1: Document/Image Flow in Court Data/Image Processing System
Compound Documents
Some imaging systems can create an official document by superimposing data from case processing systems into blank spaces on pre-imaged forms that contain the necessary inscriptions and signatures. Given the number of official documents (e.g., notices and orders) prepared by courts, this process--which could be regarded as the reverse of OCR--would yield significant benefits in document generation.
Compound documents consist of images, text (e.g., from word processing systems), and data (e.g., from case processing systems). Official documents created as described above are examples of rudimentary compound documents (see Figure 3). OCR raises possibilities for enhancing the compound document capability by permitting easy integration of images with text and data. This would, for example, permit judges and law clerks to assemble orders and opinions by combining parts of existing orders and opinions with new text and case processing data.
Figure 2: Integrated Imaging System Displaying Document and Data
Client/Server and Desktop Computing
Like other types of computing, imaging systems are available and becoming more widely used on local area networks (LANs) and individual personal computers (PCs). The mainframe computer, formerly the only option, now should be considered with LANs and PCs on users’ desktops as one of several alternatives. Whether you are dealing with a case processing, imaging, or some other type of system, you should carefully consider which alternative is best for you.
Workflow
Imaging systems increasingly include automated workflow, in which the system routes documents around to workstations for processing. The choice of the appropriate computer for workflow in courts requires a decision whether to use a mainframe, LAN, or PC. In the clerk’s office, where each type of document follows a standard route around the office, workflow would be on the computer that supports imaging for the entire court. In a judge’s office, where orders, opinions, and other documents may follow a more flexible route based on staff availability, workflow could be on an intraoffice LAN.
Integration
Imaging would best maximize its potential if documents, data, and text from imaging, case processing, and word processing systems were fully integrated. This level of integration would embrace all of the technologies summarized above.
For example, a court clerk helping a litigant should be able to see on his or her computer screen information from imaged documents and the case processing system as well as from systems external to the court, such as law enforcement, probation, and the state division of motor vehicles.
The clerk should have the capability to scan documents into the imaging system and, using OCR, automatically transfer the information into the case processing system. He or she should be able to form compound documents using extracted
parts of imaged and word processing documents and records from the case processing system. Workflows should be available to route documents to the workstations that perform these functions. Finally, these capabilities should be available on whatever computer platform--mainframe, client/server network, or desktop PC--is appropriate.
Integration of these various computers, systems, and capabilities means imaging systems should be able to share images and information with other systems that use standard communications, computer connections, and data formats.
While this concept is not yet a reality, imaging and the related technologies are moving toward this level of integration.
Figure 3: Example of a Simple Compound Document
