Vol 2, No. 3 - Fall 2003

Inside This Issue:

  • Federal Funds Strengthen Response
  • Look to NCSC for Training and Assistance
  • California Focuses On Education
  • Resource Corner: Violence Against Women Activities, Guidebooks, & Technical Assistance
  • CCJ/COSCA Guidelines Project Focuses on Court Records

NCSC and the Violence Against Women Act
    
Did you know...
The reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (2000) ensured that state courts receive funding to improve their response to domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking cases. Each state and territory must allocate at least 5 percent of the state's STOP grants to courts. NCSC surveyed members of the Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA) on the use of STOP funds.
 
How do states distribute STOP funds to the courts?
Each state has its own distribution mechanism. Nearly half of the surveyed offices reported that STOP funds were distributed through a competitive bidding process.
    
How are state courts using their STOP funds?
STOP funds are used for (1) training judges; (2) training court staff; (3) developing judicial resource guides ("benchbooks"); (4) supporting programs for victims; and (5) supporting specialized courts or dockets.

What are the courts' needs?
The courts need technical assistance for: (1) training judges; (2) training court staff; (3) acquiring technology or collecting data; (4) becoming involved in coordinated community responses; and (5) developing judicial resource guides.

 

NCSC's 
Family Violence
Community of
Practice
newsletter shares ideas and keeps our colleagues informed about practices that improve the justice system's response in family violence cases. Contact Madelynn Herman, knowledge management analyst (mhermann@ncsc.dni.us or 757-259-1549) with comments or suggestions.

 

A Conversation with Diane Stuart

In September, National Center staff met with Diane Stuart, Director of the Office on Violence Against Women, to discuss the use of the 5-percent set-aside for the courts from the STOP Violence Against Women block grant program. Lynn Levey, NCSC court research associate, has summarized the conversation with Director Stuart below. It notes areas of advancement and remaining challenges for the courts in addressing violence against women.

LL:  What areas do you feel have improved substantially since VAWA passed?

DS: Well there are so many.  The coordinated community response really represents the spirit of what VAWA intended. More people are being trained to understand the issues. It has improved the resources available for both victims and others within the justice system. This has reduced the re-victimization of victims. In fact, new statistics show a decline in rape and an increase in its reporting.

LL: What areas would you like to see more emphasis on?

DS:

  • Sexual assault, stalking and the issues surrounding these crimes.
  • Educating those in leadership positions like judges.
  • Recommendations by communities as to how to achieve sustainability of newer initiatives.
  • Greater public education of the population as a whole to improve overall knowledge of issues related to violence against women. 

LL: What new directions seem promising for court-based programs?

DS: Some court systems have focused on improving their technology. As many know, too often courts are unable to access accurate information about involved parties or to provide information. Many parties may have multiple cases pending in multiple courts. Improving the record system by using technology enhances their ability to hold batterers accountable and improve victim safety. We have seen promising practices emerge from our Judicial Oversight Demonstration Initiative sites in Massachusetts, Michigan and Wisconsin. Some communities have used their 5% set aside for courts monies to do this. Coordination with state court administrators about these efforts allows a greater number of people to rely upon that information.  Courts must be a part of the coordinated community response. The six Greenbook sites (CA, CO, MO, NH, OR) also embrace the CCR concept more broadly. Specialized courts and/or dockets all contribute to this effort too.

LL: What steps can court administrators and judges take to improve court processes related to violence against women?

DS:

  • Education and training for all court personnel
  • Participation in demonstration projects
  • Improving coordination with community partners like police, advocates and health professionals

LL: What are the greatest problems for victims of violence that still need to be addressed?

DS: Access to courts and their resources continues to be an ongoing problem. This concept means different things around the country. Additional recommendations for courts include the need to create separate waiting for victims to encourage participation in the court process and to reduce opportunities for the abuser to intimidate her. Separate waiting areas and staggering arrivals and departures of victim and abuser will insure greater safety for all in the courthouse. Victims need greater advocacy on their behalf, particularly in the court setting. Enforcement of protection orders continues to vary widely. Confidentiality issues are always problematic, especially, it seems, in rural areas where there is less overall anonymity. There also needs to be greater consequences for breaking laws. I really believe that the more people (within the court community) understand about these issues, the better job they will be able to do.

LL: What didn’t I ask you that you want people to know more about?

DS: If everybody within the system and the community does their job to respond appropriately to these cases, we will continue to close gaps and increase safety and accountability overall. If we don’t close these gaps, there will continue to be a revolving door and more people will be hurt. The spirit of VAWA is really to adopt and sustain improvements within the system’s response.

Top

Federal Funds Strengthen Response

The S*T*O*P (Services, Training, Officers, and Prosecutors) Violence Against Women Formula Grants Program develops and strengthens the justice system's response to violence against women and supports and enhances services for victims.  Under the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, each state and territory must allocate at least five percent of the state's STOP monies to courts-based programs or initiatives. 

NCSC staff have conducted several projects to evaluate the use of funds, provide courts with comparative information, and recommend future enhancements.

VAWA Discretionary Funds: How are the states spending the money?

Madelynn Herman, NCSC knowledge management analysis, used the Court2Court and COSCA listservs to survey the courts on STOP funds use. The information she compiled in the summer of 2002 is available in the Family Violence topic folder of CourTopics. The direct URL to “Violence Against Women Act Court-Specific Funding: Listserv Survey Response” is www.ncsconline.org/WC/Publications/KIS_VAWAcourtfundingPub.pdf.

“There is quite a bit of variety in how the states are using the VAWA court-specific funding,” said Herman. Some examples include automated systems to communicate protection order information from the courts to the state highway patrol, staff positions to coordinate protection orders and provide pre-trial help, expanded training, advocacy programs, and consortia.

VAWA Funds for Courts: Results of a State Court Administrators Survey

In June 2003, Brenda Uekert, senior research associate and chair of NCSC’s Family Violence Community of Practice, surveyed state court administrators. Responses were received from 37 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, and Northern Mariana Islands.  Of the 40 respondents, 28 had a designated point person in the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) on family violence issues. 

The Distribution of Funds

The majority of state court administrative offices indicated that they were receiving the five percent set-aside from the STOP program. However, a significant number of administrative offices noted that the courts were not receiving all of the 5 percent set-aside (7 states or territories) or were simply not sure (8 states or territories).  Additionally, a number of states noted that the competitive bidding process created challenges in meeting the mandate, since few courts applied for STOP funds.

Perceptions of the effectiveness of the state’s current mechanism for distribution of STOP grants were influenced by the role of the AOC in the decision-making process. Approximately half of the respondents felt that the state’s current mechanism was effective in meeting the needs of the courts. Of the 40 respondents, 15 AOCs indicated that they had no role in the identification of court needs and priorities for the STOP program.  Only 3 of those 15 respondents perceived the state’s current mechanism for distribution as effective, compared to 18 of the 25 respondents from states where the AOC had some role in the distribution of STOP funds to courts. 

STOP funds are most often used for judicial and court staff training. Other training needs included technology acquisition/data collection; courts involvement in coordinated community responses; judicial resource guide development; and specialized courts or dockets. In addition to the rankings by specific choices, states indicated that STOP funds had been used to develop video-conferencing between courts and shelters or family centers, to conduct a legal needs study to determine groups of people that may currently be underserved, to conduct a pilot study to test the feasibility of electronic submission of Orders of Protection forms, to automate the filing of protection orders over the Internet on a pilot basis, and to support the interpretation and translation of court forms and information into Spanish, Russian, Vietnamese and Korean. 

Promising Practices

Finally, respondents were asked to identify STOP-funded projects in their states or territories that appear to be most promising.  The list includes:

Judicial training programs (Alaska, California, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Utah, Washington, West Virginia)

Training for support staff (Hawaii, Oregon, Utah)

Automated protection order registries (Arizona, Missouri, North Dakota)

Improvement of services/advocacy to victims (District of Columbia, Maryland, Massachusetts, South Carolina, South Dakota)

Assessment of domestic violence court processes (Florida, Montana)

Coordinated community responses (Georgia, Northern Mariana Islands, Wisconsin)

Development of “benchbooks” or protocols (Michigan, New Hampshire, Washington, Wyoming)

Hiring dedicated court staff (Nevada, New Mexico)

Development of specialized court (Texas)

For further details, see http://www.ncsconline.org/WC/Publications/KIS_FamVioVAWASurveyPub.pdf

VAWA Funds Address Acute Local Needs for Data Collection Tools and Communication Systems

Dawn Marie Rubio, NCSC senior court management consultant, directed a project that was one of several evaluations conducted for the National Institute of Justice to assess STOP grant awards. Rubio’s team surveyed, interviewed, and evaluated grantees that intended to improve data collection and/or communication systems with the federal funds.

The evaluation found that money was used by a large number of grantees to meet basic needs at the local level for equipment needed to reduce violence against women—computer hardware and software, fax machines, cell phones, and cameras. In addition, grantees said that many systems for collecting, analyzing, and sharing information among agencies would not have been developed in the absence of STOP grant funding.

During follow-up written surveys, respondents reported improved decision-making, enhanced ability to provide services to victims, and stronger linkages across agencies to provide a more coordinated response. Over a third said that victim safety has been increased through notification measures made possible by their projects.

Respondents felt that STOP funding was critical to the development and continuation of the data collection and communication systems. 43 percent of respondents reported either that permanent financial support was in the agency’s budget or plans were in place to permanently fund the system. Over half reported having no data or communication system before they received STOP funds, and a third had only a manual data collection system. These responses suggest that for many, STOP funds have been the catalyst for securing institutional support.

Several statewide and some local projects achieved greater success in meeting the goals outlined by VAWA through more coordinated efforts. For example, Virginians Against Domestic Violence created a web-based statewide data collection system that is accessible 24 hours a day/seven days per week (http://www.vadv.org/). The system has been used to enhance operations and increase services to survivors across the state. Delaware, which requires gun owners who are subject to a protection order (PFA) to relinquish firearms, automated printed notices from the court to registered gun owners when the PFA is issued. A component of this system application monitors the gun owner’s compliance with the relinquishment notice.

Accurate and reliable data systems and competent and secure communication methods are essential elements of a coordinated, coherent, and comprehensive government and community system for reducing violence against women. NCSC urged the Department of Justice to consider the following recommendations in funding future projects:

  • Develop standardized performance measures for statewide and national reporting.

  • Provide training and technical assistance to STOP administrators in strategic planning for the development and sustainability of systems.

  • Create an information clearinghouse for current and potential grantees about funding to complement, supplement, and potentially sustain support provided by federal funds.

  • Prioritize future funding on projects that collect standardized, statewide data; develop computer aided dispatch centers with automatic query capacity; create direct electronic links between civil and criminal protection order databases and courts; develop systems to easily and quickly check statewide civil court records, criminal records, arrest histories, warrants, in custody status (jail), and photos of offenders; and connect local data systems to systems that reduce violence against women.

Top

Look to NCSC
for training and
assistance that
improves the courts'
response to violence
against women

#1  Education and Training    

The National Center for State Courts is a leading resource for judicial and court management training. NCSC’s Institute for Court Management (ICM) has provided training to thousands of administrators, clerks, judges, and other personnel from the courts in the United States and internationally. In addition to traditional instructional methods, ICM offers “e-learning” through videoconferencing, WebCT (self-paced Internet learning program), and “live” Web courses. ICM conducts “live” Web courses on a variety of subjects, such as firearms and domestic violence, workplace domestic violence policies, and access to court records policies. ICM also delivers courses on violence against women issues related to the courts.

#2  Expertise in Court Operations and Specialized Dockets

NCSC’s hands-on experience in the courts enables staff to assist states in considering the advantages and disadvantages of specialized dockets and alternatives to specialized dockets. The National Center is also exploring ways to apply the principles and methods of problem-solving courts to general jurisdiction courts. NCSC, which conducted the only national survey of domestic violence case management in the courts, continues to study the operations and effectiveness of domestic violence courts in both urban and rural settings.

#3  Implementing and Evaluating Technology

The technology staff has expertise in areas such as systems and network design, assessment of existing software and network infrastructures, and evaluation of cost-effective solutions for court automation. NCSC develops functional requirements for case management systems, including domestic violence case management systems. NCSC staff are leading the national discussion on access to court records, an issue of primary importance to survivors of sexual assault, domestic violence, and stalking. Additionally, NCSC has both designed and evaluated protection order databases, such as Pennsylvania’s Protection from Abuse Database.

#4  Coordinated Community Responses

Coordinated community responses to violence against women have been shown to be effective in improving both victim safety and offender accountability. NCSC has experience in the development and maintenance of systemic approaches, which typically include the courts, law enforcement, prosecution, probation and corrections, social service agencies, and community-based service providers.  NCSC staff work to develop multidisciplinary and team-oriented approaches. For instance, NCSC’s regional meetings on Full Faith and Credit reached a broad audience and initiated a conversation on the interstate provisions of orders of protection.

#5  Court-Based Resources on Violence Against Women

NCSC’s Knowledge and Information Services has numerous online resource guides for the courts that address a variety of family violence related issues. Examples of resources include summaries of best or promising practices, model court programs, specialized benchbooks, and current research reports. All resources can be accessed through the NCSC Web site (www.ncsconline.org). The NCSC Knowledge and Information Services also serves as a national clearinghouse to the courts by reviewing over 300 periodicals.

NCSC Staff Expertise

NCSC’s staff has a wealth of knowledge, skills, and experience to offer those seeking to improve or evaluate how state courts handle family violence cases. 

Pamela M. Casey, Ph.D.

Dr. Casey has conducted national-scope research on trial court performance, therapeutic jurisprudence, and the organization and provision of health, mental health, and social welfare services to court-related populations.

Denise O. Dancy

Ms. Dancy has been involved in organizations centered on child and family needs, advocacy, and court processes.  She has researched behavioral impact of long-term foster care in abuse and neglect cases. 

Madelynn M. Herman

Ms. Herman provides technical assistance on child dependency, family courts, child custody, juvenile justice, and domestic violence topics.

Lynn S. Levey, J.D.

Ms. Levey provides technical assistance related to the Violence Against Women Act, including Full Faith and Credit and firearms.  Ms. Levey has worked on the GREEN-BOOK project, an initiative designed to improve child protective service and domestic violence agency response to families. 

Dawn Marie Rubio, J.D.

Ms. Rubio has expertise in family law, juvenile dependency, child welfare, domestic relations, domestic violence, drug courts, problem-solving courts, and court programs. 

Martha Wade Steketee

Ms. Steketee has experience in child welfare, juvenile justice, and advocacy programs for children in the protection system. 

Brenda K. Uekert, Ph.D.

Dr. Uekert specializes in criminal justice programs and coordinated community responses. She has directed evaluations of Violence Against Women Act programs, including the Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies program. 


California Focuses On Education On Sexual Assault

California's Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) is sharpening its focus on education and public outreach in sexual assault cases thanks to funds provided by the Violence Against Women Act. California inaugurated a course on sexual assault at the nationally recognized B. E. Witkin Judicial College this June, marking the first year that a course dedicated entirely to issues of sexual assault cases has been offered at the college. 

In the summer the course was expanded to one day and offered to 50 experienced judicial officers at the Continuing Judicial Studies Program (CJSP). The intensive program was based in part on a national curriculum, Understanding Sexual Violence:  The Judicial Response to Stranger and Non-stranger Rape and Sexual Assault, developed by the New York-based National Judicial Education Program (NJEP).  The course included a discussion of the neurobiology of trauma and characteristics of offenders.   Course participants received comprehensive materials including a compendium of California law on sexual assault.

Later this year, California will distribute to courts an information and resource brochure on services for victims of sexual assault.  The brochure, designed for distribution in jury assembly rooms and other public areas of the courthouse, will provide information to potential jurors or others who may have been sexual assault victims and need assistance.  The AOC is working in partnership with the California Coalition Against Sexual Assault (CAL CASA). 

The California AOC hopes to expand its sexual assault projects during the next year to include additional statewide and regional judicial education programs; a statewide policy forum to determine educational priorities and best practices in sexual assault cases; and publication of a judges’ bench handbook on sexual assault. 

About the Violence Against Women Education Program (VAWEP)

VAWEP is an AOC initiative to provide courts with information, educational materials, and training on their role in responding to cases involving domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking. VAWEP is funded by the California Governor’s Office of Criminal Justice Planning (OCJP) with resources designated for courts from the federal Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) STOP grant program.    

Major project efforts planned for 2003-2004 include:

  • A training program on sexual assault for criminal court judges;
  • Courses at the Continuing Judicial Studies Program Series;
  • Policy forums relating to domestic violence and sexual assault cases;
  • Courses at the 2004 B. E. Witkin Judicial College; 
  • The 2004 Family Violence and the Courts Conference, which will invite teams from every county in California; 
  • Bench guides on stalking, firearms restrictions, full faith and credit requirements, and immigration/cultural issues;
  • Broadcast series for court employees about domestic violence; and
  • Funding to courts to support their efforts to respond more effectively to domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking cases.

 *For more information, contact Bobbie Welling, VAWEP Project Director, AOC’s Center for Families, Children & the Courts, 415-865-7822; E-mail: bobbie.welling@jud.ca.gov. For a fact sheet about the project, please visit the following web site: www.courtinfo.ca.gov/programs/cfcc/pdffiles/VAWEP.pdf.

Resource Corner
Violence Against Women Activities, Guidebooks, & Technical Assistance
By Madelynn M. Herman

The following resources will assist you in furthering your efforts to combat violence against women in your community: 

  • Toolkit to End Violence Against Women. National Advisory Council on Violence Against Women and the Violence Against Women Office.  This 16-Chapter guidebook provides recommendations for strengthening prevention efforts and improving services and advocacy for victims.
  • Financial Guide. Office of Justice Programs This guide is also available in Spanish.

For additional resources on family violence, see the Resource Guide available in the CourTopics Family Violence file at: www.ncsconline.org/WC/Education/KIS_FamVioGuide.pdf

NCSC responds to requests for information and technical assistance from the court community, policy makers, and others. To request information see our online request form at www.ncsconline.org or call 800-616-6164. To inquire about technical assistance, please contact Brenda K. Uekert at 757-259-1861.

CCJ/COSCA Guidelines Project Focuses on Court Records
By Martha Wade Steketee

During the development of CCJ/COSCA's Public Access to Court Records: Guidelines for Policy Development for State Courts (see www.courtaccess.org), the project's advisory committee recognized that family and domestic relations records required special attention and review. In a follow-up project to implement the CCJ/COSCA Guidelines, researchers will use a range of information gathering strategies, including focus groups and discussions with relevant professional groups to identify state and local concerns in this area.  For example, project staff will talk with judicial officers at federally funded demonstration sites where creative policies and practices are used for cases that involve both child maltreatment and domestic violence.

Some key questions for family and domestic relations court records were identified at a special session on family court records during the 2nd annual Courtroom 21 Conference on Privacy and Public Access to Court Records at the William & Mary Law School in November 2002. These questions, which may provide a starting point for the project, include:

  • Should we protect interests of 3rd parties involved in family cases?

  • Should court restrict access to some personal identifiers in family case records?

  • Should detailed financial information contained in family case records be accessible to the public?

  • Should sensitive reports (e.g. financial and mental health) in family cases be available to the public?

  • How can courts address the special concerns presented in domestic violence case court documents?

  • How are court rules enforced in this arena, especially when many parties in family and domestic relations court cases are unrepresented?

The 15-month project “Public Access to Court Records: Implementing the CCJ/COSCA Guidelines” will allow The National Center for State Courts (NCSC) and the Justice Management Institute (JMI) to continue their work with CCJ and COSCA to refine and develop materials and models to assist the state courts as they develop their own policies and procedures for public access to court records.

The project will also focus on developing internal court policies and procedures by identifying the elements of a model policy that a court, or statewide judiciary, could adopt to govern internal access to, and use of, information in electronic court records by court employees, as opposed to public access to the information. Finally, the project will develop materials for courts to educate litigants, lawyers, and the public on access policies that are developed.

The project advisory committee includes court professional, privacy advocates, media representatives, and others. Readers are invited to contact project staff with ideas and examples from their jurisdictions in any of the project areas. For further information, contact Martha Wade Steketee at 703-841-5614, msteketee@ncsc.dni.us, or Alan Carlson at 415-816-3341, acarlson@jmijustice.org.
Do You Find this Newsletter Useful? Would You Like to Keep it Coming to Your E-mailbox in 2004? 
We Need Your Feedback!  
 
The Family Violence Community of Practice would like to hear from you.  Would you like to see us continue to produce this newsletter in 2004? Do you have any topic suggestions for the newsletter? Are you interested in low cost web-based training opportunities? What are your training needs? Just drop us a note so that we can better address the needs of the court community through our newsletter and other NCSC information-based products and services.  Contact: Madelynn Herman (mherman@ncsc.dni.us).    

National Center for State Courts
300 Newport Avenue  Williamsburg, VA 23185
  1331 17th St., Ste. 402  Denver, CO  80202-1554 
2425 Wilson Blvd., Ste. 350  Arlington, VA  22201

Association Services  (800) 616-6165
Consulting  (800) 466-3063
Education  (800) 616-6206
Government Relations  (800) 532-0204
International Programs  (800) 797-2545
Publications  (888) 228-6272
Research  (800) 616-6109
Technology  (888) 846-6746
 
Information  (800) 616-6164
Subscribe to NCSC E-newsletters
www.ncsconline.org
webmaster@ncsc.dni.us
Copyright © 2003 The National Center for State Courts. All Rights Reserved.