Print Version - Arizona Judicial Department

More documents

Recommendations

Info

and workflows for similarly sized and staffed general and limited jurisdiction court environments. In 2005, the Commission on Technology created an ad hoc committee to prioritize and select processes, research “best practices,” and make recommendations on code standardization. This project contributed to the functional specifications for new case management systems for general and limited jurisdiction courts. The development of those specifications for use by the originating court is helping identify key processes that would benefit from being simplified and standardized statewide through the rollout of the new case management systems. Code standardization and data conversion are not enough. Those business processes and associated workflows that underlie the new case management systems must be adopted by courts as the statewide rollout occurs. Without common processes and uniform processing of case-related data, the efficiencies promised by a statewide case management system will be forfeited. Support of the new systems will be much more complex and costly, as well. Court business processes must be standardized to match the business process underlying the automation system. This effort involves extensive local process documentation, mapping to the applicable case management system, somewhat customized training materials, and extra training time for local users. All these translate into initial productivity losses, which are being factored into the business case for the CMS transition activities, the rollout timeline, and resource leveling. Table code standardization supports statewide consistency of information recorded in case management systems. It is difficult to transfer data to other local and state entities, write standardized reports, and aggregate statewide statistics when every court uses different words, abbreviations, or codes for the same event or activity. This is currently an issue in AZTEC courts and mapping has proven to be a labor intensive task with unsatisfactory results. Integration, statistical analysis reporting, and shared information projects have highlighted the need for courts to record, count, and report events in a consistent manner. Even within the AZTEC courts, which are using the same application software, differences in various code table values have made reporting difficult and made integration projects more complex due to data transformation and mapping requirements. Superior, Justice of the Peace, and Municipal Courts are addressing the need for consistency through the establishment of standardized code sets to be used statewide. The sets include, but are not limited to, standard codes for: Case Type, Party Type, Case Status, Party Status, Calendar Events, and Courtroom Events. ARIZONA JUDICIAL BRANCH | INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN: 2013-2015 192
These projects are planned to dovetail with state-level integration projects with other agencies to identify XML tags and valid values/codes for a variety of criminal-justicerelated events. In an effort to create more usability of the calendaring and scheduling functionality in the AJACS system, the General Jurisdiction Steering Committee designated 4 courts (later to become 5) that would represent all Superior Courts in development of improvements. The Focus Group of 5 courts created an initial Business Requirements that became a technical requirements document for AmCad and planned for the 3.6 release of AJACS. This has been delivered and will complete deployment to all 13 courts, OPDJ and the AVT master by the end of August 2011. Ongoing meetings of the Calendaring/Scheduling Focus Group will keep the functionality in step with the evolving needs of the courts. ARIZONA JUDICIAL BRANCH | INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN: 2013-2015 193
Page 1 and 2:
FISCAL YEARS 2013—2015 ARIZONA JU
Page 3 and 4:
ARIZONA JUDICIAL BRANCH INFORMATION
Page 5 and 6:
are now focusing, in cooperation wi
Page 7 and 8:
Creation of standardized processing
Page 9 and 10:
information requires coordination o
Page 11 and 12:
I. INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND The Ariz
Page 13 and 14:
justice history files. Being centra
Page 15 and 16:
CHAIR HON. ANDREW HURWITZ Vice Chie
Page 17 and 18:
COURT AUTOMATION COORDINATING COMMI
Page 19 and 20:
CHAIR ANDREW HURWITZ Vice Chief Jus
Page 21 and 22:
Justice 20/20: A Vision of the Futu
Page 23 and 24:
III. JUDICIAL BRANCH VISION We must
Page 25 and 26:
objective data with the risk level
Page 27 and 28:
1-B SIMPLIFYING AND ENHANCING SYSTE
Page 29 and 30:
GOAL 2 MAINTAINING A PROFESSIONAL W
Page 31 and 32:
GOAL 3 IMPROVING COMMUNICATIONS Pub
Page 33 and 34:
Review the current processing of do
Page 35 and 36:
5-B MODERNIZING THE ATTORNEY ADMISS
Page 37 and 38:
Determine the allocation of availab
Page 39 and 40:
Improved effectiveness in jury mana
Page 41 and 42:
STRATEGIC TECHNOLOGY PROJECT ALIGNM
Page 43 and 44:
VI. FISCAL YEAR 2012 ACCOMPLISHMENT
Page 45 and 46:
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FY 2012 AJIN EN
Page 47 and 48:
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FY 2012 ARIZONA
Page 49 and 50:
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FY 2012 ENTERPR
Page 51 and 52:
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FY 2012 STATEWI
Page 53 and 54:
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FY 2012 ACCOMPL
Page 55 and 56:
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FY 2012 EDMS El
Page 57 and 58:
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FY 2012 automat
Page 59 and 60:
Pima Courts Pinal Courts Clerk’s
Page 61 and 62:
VII. CURRENT ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS H
Page 63 and 64:
ARIZONA JUDICIAL BRANCH INFORMATION
Page 65 and 66:
need to balance the immediate need
Page 67 and 68:
BACKGROUND The Judicial Branch is d
Page 69 and 70:
IMPACTS The impact is widespread. E
Page 71 and 72:
First-level support assists court p
Page 73 and 74:
CENTRALIZED HELP DESK Improved ove
Page 75 and 76:
BACKGROUND The digital world is bec
Page 77 and 78:
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT BUSINESS VALUE
Page 79 and 80:
BACKGROUND As courts enter the real
Page 81 and 82:
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT BUSINESS VALUE
Page 83 and 84:
BACKGROUND The courts embarked on t
Page 85 and 86:
to proceed with development using t
Page 87 and 88:
DEPENDENCIES The maintenance and c
Page 89 and 90:
een expanded to accept an XML data
Page 91 and 92:
Improved quality of service to the
Page 93 and 94:
BACKGROUND Courts are following ind
Page 95 and 96:
output a stream of digital data. An
Page 97 and 98:
ELECTRONIC CASE FILING Extend fili
Page 99 and 100:
Background In addition to supportin
Page 101 and 102:
Provided project milestone reports,
Page 103 and 104:
IX. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY STRATEGI
Page 105 and 106:
STRATEGIC PROJECTS BY OBJECTIVE Tra
Page 107 and 108:
A Description section describes the
Page 109 and 110:
TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PROJECTS Elect
Page 111 and 112:
created basic infrastructure and bu
Page 113 and 114:
STRATEGIC PROJECTS UTILITY ENHANCEM
Page 115 and 116:
SUPPORT SERVICES PROVIDED: An aver
Page 117 and 118:
design sessions. Training staff spe
Page 119 and 120:
PROJECT GOALS Provide specific tra
Page 121 and 122:
impact. TAC created a survey tool t
Page 123 and 124:
PROJECT GOALS COMPUTER/TABLET REFRE
Page 125 and 126:
PROJECT GOALS CORE SOFTWARE & SUPPO
Page 127 and 128:
1. Automated validation tables (AVT
Page 129 and 130:
o Migrated current APETS software t
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
The data collection mechanism for t
Page 141 and 142:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION This project re
Page 143 and 144:
SNAPSHOT CLASS STATUS RISK Utility
Page 145 and 146: PROJECT GOALS ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT M
Page 147 and 148: Enhancement On-going Medium Frontie
Page 149 and 150: during the workday by storing image
Page 151 and 152: Review functions (and their corresp
Page 153 and 154: Enable court users and/or the CMS i
Page 155 and 156: CENTRAL CASE INDEX (CCI) Began uti
Page 157 and 158: electronic filing submissions. The
Page 159 and 160: filing “front door,” a single e
Page 161 and 162: solution. Discussions were held abo
Page 163 and 164: Inside the court system, the issue
Page 165 and 166: SNAPSHOT CLASS STATUS RISK Utility
Page 167 and 168: PROJECT GOALS INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTE
Page 169 and 170: Continued to expand hardware and ap
Page 171 and 172: Firewalls and security monitoring e
Page 173 and 174: Create a single governance structur
Page 175 and 176: then printed and delivered, or soon
Page 177 and 178: PROJECT GOALS JOLTSAZ NEXT GENERATI
Page 179 and 180: PROJECT GOALS JUDGE’S AUTOMATION
Page 181 and 182: ARIZONA JUDICIAL BRANCH | INFORMATI
Page 183 and 184: Produced a couple of ADRS training
Page 185 and 186: PROJECT GOALS JUSTICE WEB INTERFACE
Page 187 and 188: PROJECT GOALS LIMITED JURISDICTION
Page 189 and 190: The existing case management system
Page 191 and 192: Increase backlog collections by re-
Page 193 and 194: Courtesy notices Delinquency notic
Page 195: The Limited Jurisdiction Standardiz
Page 199 and 200: Began work on the core architectura
Page 201 and 202: PROJECT GOALS STATEWIDE E-WARRANT S
Page 203 and 204: PROJECT GOALS TECHNICAL TRAINING PR
Page 205 and 206: Various other products that are use
Page 207 and 208: APPENDIX - A. HARDWARE ENVIRONMENT
Page 209 and 210: APPENDIX - B. SOFTWARE ENVIRONMENT
Page 211 and 212: SOFTWARE APPLICATION Child Support
Page 213 and 214: Software Application Vendor/Interna
Page 215 and 216: APPENDIX - C
Page 217 and 218: ARS Arizona Revised Statutes AS/400
Page 219 and 220: E-COURT An ad hoc subcommittee of t
Page 221 and 222: JPIJ Judicial Project Investment Ju
Page 223 and 224: SSIA SQL Server Integration Service
show all

Print Version - Arizona Judicial Department

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?