Friends of the Court Remind Staff They Are Valued and Missed

Interview with Suzanne Hollyer, Director, Oakland County Friend of the Court; and Lynn Bullard, Director, Van Buren County Friend of the Court and 36th Circuit Court Family Division Administrator

The negative effects of isolation experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic are no secret.  With most hearings moving to Zoom and support staff spread throughout the state in their home offices, court staff members are not immune to feeling alone and isolated during this time.  The “Connections” team asked two Friend of the Court (FOC) Directors to share some of their ideas for letting staff know not only that their work is valued, but also that they are missed.  Lynn Bullard is FOC Director and Circuit Court Administrator in Van Buren County, and past president of the Friend of the Court Association.  Suzanne Hollyer is FOC Director in Oakland County, and she currently serves as President of the Friend of the Court Association.

Adapting During the Pandemic Shutdown at the 23rd District Court Probation Department

By Steve DeSmet, Probation Director and Downriver Regional DWI Court Coordinator, 23rd District Court

In March 2020, most things in the world came to a halt.  The COVID-19 pandemic caused the closing of schools, restaurants, and other businesses in a way that had not been seen in more than 100 years.  However, even in these unprecedented times, the work of courts could not simply stop.  The criminal justice system is one of the rare parts of American society that continues to churn on, regardless of the externalities that threaten its ability to function. 

SCAO's Dawn Monk Retiring After 35 Years of Dedicated Service to the Courts

We wish Dawn the very best in her retirement.  We will miss her so much.

New Certified Court Manager (CCM) Graduates

Fifty court staff, including five SCAO management analysts, recently completed an intensive program offered by the National Center for State Courts and were awarded the status of Certified Court Manager (CCM).  The courses focused on accountability and court performance, caseflow and workflow management, budget and fiscal management, project management, purposes and responsibilities of the courts, and workforce management.

Battle Creek's 'Fusion' of Police and Supportive Services Response

By Phillip Amsterburg, Juvenile Probation Services Manager, 37th Circuit Court

Many communities today have recognized that there is a problem when service providers work only within their own silo and have minimal communication with other agencies.  In 2015, the Calhoun County Juvenile Probation Department was given the opportunity to have a juvenile probation officer work as an “embedded agent” directly within the Battle Creek Police Department.  This juvenile probation officer, along with the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) probation/parole officer, members of the county’s community mental health provider, and the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services together created the Battle Creek Police Department Fusion Program.  This team has opened doors of communication among agencies, which has created better opportunities to properly serve the youth and families of Calhoun County.

The Importance of Measuring Caseflow Management in Trial Courts

By Marie Bowen, Business Analyst, Statistical Research

Background
Caseflow management is central to the court's business.  It is the management of the processes and resources necessary to move a case from the point of initiation through disposition and into post-disposition activity.  It is concerned with active attention by the court to the progress of each case once it has been filed with the court.  In 1991 the Michigan Supreme Court, through Administrative Order 1991-4, explicitly recognized that ". . . the management of the flow of cases is properly the responsibility of the judiciary."  The court reaffirmed this commitment in 2003 and again in 2011 and 2013.  Further amendments were made through Michigan Supreme Court Administrative Order 2013-12.  

Baxter the Therapy Dog Alleviates Courthouse Trauma

By Deputy Tim Gondeck, Cass County Friend of the Court Bench Warrant Officer

Coming to court can be a scary and traumatic experience, especially for children and adults who may be suffering from past trauma.  There is a growing trend of canine advocates/therapy dogs being introduced into courts to work with these populations.  

Using the Court Improvement Program Data Reports

By Erin House, Court Analyst, Child Welfare Services

Data is power!  SCAO’s Child Welfare Services Division (CWS) recently updated the Court Improvement Program (CIP) data reports, which are designed to leverage your data, increase efficiency, and improve processes in neglect/abuse (NA) cases.  These reports are an effective way to analyze efforts to help children and families successfully achieve permanency.  The purpose of the CIP is to (1) promote the continuous quality improvement of child protective proceedings, and (2) enhance and expand collaboration between the judicial branch, the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS), attorneys, and tribes to improve child welfare outcomes.  CIP data reports are automatically generated through the Judicial Data Warehouse (JDW) using information from the court’s case management system and MDHHS.  Courts can easily use the data reports to evaluate hearing timeliness in child protective proceedings.

User Testing: Seeing From Your Audience's Perspective

By Ramzi Badwi, Program and Outreach Coordinator, Michigan Legal Help Program

MichiganLegalHelp.org is a website that depends on its ability to express information clearly and efficiently.  As a provider of legal information for those who cannot afford a lawyer, it is easy to imagine how desperate a visitor to the website may be to find what they need and thoroughly understand it.  We take several steps to ensure that our information is accessible and user-friendly, including writing our content at a sixth-grade reading level.  Another very important step we take toward accessibility is directly testing our materials on users and analyzing their feedback.

Combine ADR Processes to Get the Most Beneficial Dispute Resolution Processes

By Antoinette Raheem


Previously published in the Detroit Legal News on October 25, 2019.



Much has been written about the benefits of the different types of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR).  We know that arbitration can, among other things, bring finality.  Mediation can help parties to preserve relationships.  Negotiation can save time and money.  Case evaluation, much maligned but still regularly utilized in Michigan, can help parties close the final gap to resolution.  But what if your matter needs more than one of these benefits?  Which do you choose?  Well, the good news is that you do not have to choose at all.  There are many options for mixing different forms of ADR, making your dispute resolution process malleable in accordance with your particular needs.  This article will focus on the “A” in ADR, looking at some of the many alternative ways that dispute resolution can be applied to fit the unique needs of the parties in any given case.  The beauty of combining two or more types of conflict resolution is that parties can maximize the utility of several forms of dispute resolution.