Electronic Document Management Systems E-Filing Collaboration with Courts
E-Filing in Los Angeles
Process, Procedure & Lessons Learned
Jennifer A. Coultas
Division Chief, Court Operations County of Los Angeles
Some background information…
County of Los Angeles
Child Support Services Department • 7 Public Contact Offices
• 1680 Employees
• 350,000 Open Cases
• Open 4,500 Cases per month
• Generate 3,000 Summons & Complaints per month • E-File 4,000 S&C’s per month
Automation: Friend or Foe?
• CSSD has historically had an effective use of automation
• Electronic filing of S&C’s in the 1990’s
• Challenge of conversion to statewide system & implementation of “New” E-Filing interface
First things First
• After case is opened
– Summons & Complaint and Proposed Judgment will print automatically If NCP income is known
– If income unknown, S&C and PJ will print 21 days after case initiation
• Once S&C is generated it is electronically filed with the court • Once S&C and PJ filed, system is automatically updated with
court case number and filed date
First things First
• After E-Filing, the system generates a Pre-Service Notification form set
– Includes filed S&C and PJ
– Notice of Acknowledgment Service forms to the NCP
• NCP is advised that the support agency needs to serve the S&C/PJ
– NCP requested to visit the office to avoid embarrassment of being served in public
• System electronically sends service documents to process server 30 days after S&C file date, if service still necessary
First things First in technical lingo
• State DCSS produces a (ZIP) file containing
image of the S&C document and associated
metadata for each case to be e-filed
• Court programmatically retrieves (ZIP) file
– For each case in the file, the court system
programmatically evaluates to determine if they have the necessary information to file the case
First things First in technical lingo
• If the court has all information needed, then programmatically:
– Case is initiated in Superior Court case management system
– Electronically stamps the S&C document image as Filed – Print a copy of the S&C document for Court Operations
staff
• Court programmatically sends a (ZIP) file back to DCSS containing the filing status of each case
What problem had to be solved?
• LCSA had effective E-filing interface with Superior Court
• CA needed federal certification of statewide system • Logistics & challenges reconfiguring local interface
with State DCSS requirements for federal certification
How to solve the problem?
• Get the right people to the table
• Communicate regularly
• Identify point person within each agency/entity
who has authority to make decisions
– State DCSS
– Los Angeles Superior Court – Los Angeles County CSSD
Procedural Steps taken
• Kick off meeting between DCSS & Court in January 2008
• Court connectivity to the State WAN in May 2008 • Court devotes 5 months to the project
• New E-Filing system brought online in November 2008 when LA transitioned to statewide computer system
From the Court’s Perspective
• Existence of functioning E-Filing Interface
• Recognition of problem that State DCSS had
to solve
• Financial resource issues
• Court accommodated request to build new
interface
– Replication of existing functionality
Key Strategies for Success
• Ensure everyone understands the common goal • Understand implementation requires commitment
– Anticipate unexpected cost – Anticipate time delays
– Anticipate need to address unexpected technical interface issues
• Have a plan to address responsibility for cost increases
• No assumptions as to responsibility
Implement the Process Change Model
• Identify current paper driven filing process • Document the current process
• Analyze the process
– Opportunity for change
– Opportunity for refinement
• Improve the process
• Utilize experts to create the electronic interface • Manage the new process
Keeping your eye on the prize
• Increase efficiencies
• Increase customer service
• Decrease process costs
• Decrease cumbersome, paper driven process
• Decrease time delay to file documents
Anticipate Surprises
• Increased use of paper in the facility where
documents are e-filed
• Increased use of toner
• Managers must pay attention to lull in
production
– Is there a problem?
– Subordinate managers must keep Executives apprised so issues can be resolved
E-Filing in Iowa
With Child Support and Courts
Joe Finnegan
Policy Unit Manager
Child Support Recovery Unit
Iowa Department of Human Services
Traci McCaughey
Program Planner
Child Support Recovery Unit
Today’s Session
Discuss ongoing project between Child Support and Iowa Courts to e-file all
documents Focus on:
Background/Project overview Web application demo
Lessons learned
Iowa Demographics
State Population 3,046,355 (2010)
Caseload Size 184,955 (as of 6/30/2011) Iowa’s caseload includes:
TANF
TXIX (at customer request) State paid & IV-E Foster Care Non Public Assistance (NPA)
23 Local CSRU Offices/100 Court Counties All offices file in all court counties
Average of 305,000 filings per year
Iowa Demographics (cont.)
State Administered Program 435 staff
37 attorneys (all do CSRU work only)
Quasi-Administrative for Legal Actions
CSRU initiates most legal proceedings administratively All administrative processes have opportunity for case parties to request a court hearing
Filings often done at the end of an administrative process Judge reviews and signs all administrative orders
No statute of limitations on collecting arrears
Imaging Background
Four offices imaged since 1995 Physical space savings initiative
All offices imaged as of July 2008
Some offices did 100% back-file conversion Two locations
Reason: Needed additional space
11 million documents currently imaged
Imaging Background (cont.)
Software consists of a customized web-based document management, imaging, and workflow system that resides on
Windows® 2003 Servers
Utilizes SQL server 2005/2008 databases with SAN and Centera optical storage
User interface is a customized .NET web parts application
Kodak® i420 Scanners in each office
G360 Scan Manager® software version
Project Background
Court initiated requirement to e-file
Iowa Supreme Court issued rules on March 1, 2007 Rules published May 1, 2007
CSRU’s first involvement with the project
Rules required e-filing for all docket types Civil, criminal, appeals, traffic
Rules included all 100 counties and all types of filers
Private attorneys, pro se, government agencies
CSRU Project Initiation
CSRU legal and policy staff met to discuss rules
Reviewed and provided comments on Supreme Court e-filing rules
Attended public hearing regarding e-filing rules
CSRU created a joint steering committee Project Manager
Business and IT management Other key staff
CSRU Project Initiation (cont.)
CSRU organized a joint workgroup CSRU field attorneys
CSRU field supervisors
Central Office policy & IT staff Clerks of court
Court IT staff
Court business analysts
First workgroup meeting held April 4th, 2008
CSRU applied for Special Improvement Project (SIP) grant from OCSE
Awarded to Iowa CSRU July 1st, 2008
Project Initiation:
Lessons Learned
Get involved early
Ensure that you have an official role in the procurement process
Effective project management & structure is vital
Need subject matter expertise on project management team
Problem resolution protocol is critical Business rules matter
Important to have a clear set of rules agreed upon in advance
Work out as much of the details as possible in advance
Project Initiation:
Lessons Learned (cont.)
Identify and resolve differences between local child support agencies & courts
In automated process, same set of rules need to apply to all locations
Exceptions tend to create complexity and will delay development
Maintain detailed involvement at multiple levels
Critical at local level
Ongoing involvement saves time
Project Development
CSRU is the second largest filer with the Court
Approximately 305,000 filings per year
CSRU has different requirements than other Iowa filers
Federal and State safeguarding regulations CSRU files under own sections of code
Need for customized interface
Critical need for highest level of automation and integration into IV-D automated computer system
Project Development (cont.)
Project Development (cont.)
User interface is very straightforward Programming is very complex
Allows user to bring documents into e-filing process from various sources
User interface is flexible regarding editing, office protocol, and e-filing options
Batch option (under development) does not require a user to oversee the process
Project Development (cont.)
Project Development (cont.)
Access to various screens based on roles Allows the user to search for information three different ways
“My Notifications”
Notifications by CSRU office All notifications for state
Project Development (cont.)
Provides the user with the ability to control the number of packets that are displayed on screen
Allows user to sort packets
Documents received from Court can be immediately indexed to imaging
Documents initiated by CSRU
Documents initiated by external case parties
Project Development (cont.)
Project Development (cont.)
One stop shop
User is able to upload documents from multiple locations
Imaging system catalog
List of documents that a user tagged in the imaging system
Locations outside of the imaging system (ex: user C drive or shared network folder)
Project Development (cont.)
Can create a new filing at the same time that documents are being imaged
Pull case information from CSRU case records Add indexing attributes for specific documents Store document prior to moving packet for e-filing
Provides capability to review draft and rejected filings
Review packet specific comments from Court or CSRU approvers/attorneys
Make corrections or modifications to packets
Project Development (cont.)
Project Development (cont.)
Utilizes dropdown boxes
Supports consistency throughout CSRU and Court
Use of event codes
What documents are filed in packets
Provides user with decision point of
sending to draft, approver, or Court based on role
Critical to have document viewer to verify what is being sent
Project Development:
Lessons Learned
Working with local CSRU offices is key
Court’s experience with e-filing in advance of interface project is beneficial
Documenting decisions and rationale proves valuable
Attorney involvement critical
Having court’s system as back up is nice
Project Development:
Lessons Learned (cont.)
IT and Business need to work closely together
IT needs to understand business requirements
Business needs to be aware of IT limitations and issues Be prepared for changes
Maintain regular ongoing meetings between partners
Communicate changes Keep process simple
Start basic and add bells and whistles later
Project Testing:
Lessons Learned
Create your test plans in advance
Create ongoing protocol to resolve issues If possible, have multiple jurisdictions
involved in testing
Testing must reflect real-life situations Testing must include all levels of users
Project Implementation:
Lessons Learned
Start slow
Give enough time to address your issues as well as your partner’s issues
Project Training
Sample of Training Document
Project Training:
Lessons Learned
Piloting is critical
Seek feedback from users at various points Critical to continued development of project
Provides opportunity to improve training of future users
Conclusion
Business rules
Project management protocol that is closely followed
Give yourself lots of time