PRIA, Government Policy, Made Personal

Summary

The Institute can give grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts to help state and local courts. It can pay for research, demonstrations, and training. It can give technical help, run an information center about state courts, work with other agencies, check how well court programs are working, encourage judicial education, advise court systems, and approve national programs that help state courts. Priority goes to state and local courts, national nonprofit groups that work with state courts, and nonprofits that train judges and court staff. If needed to reach its goals, the Institute can also fund other nonprofits, colleges, private groups or people, and even units of state or local government that are not courts. It may also contract with federal agencies. Any grant request from a state or local court must be approved, under state law, by the state’s supreme court or its chosen agency, which will receive, run, and account for the money. Money from these awards can be used for many court improvements: helping set rules for picking and paying judges and staff; training; testing new ways to use court and noncourt workers; improving court organization, budgeting, records, data, and juror use; studying and cutting case delays; measuring court and judge performance; testing rules and procedures; studying case outcomes and fairness; making courts more user-friendly; and increasing public access to justice. The Institute may run up to 5 projects, totaling no more than $600,000, on child custody cases involving domestic violence for research, training, and sharing results. When a state or local court or government gets money, it must provide at least 50% of the project cost from other sources unless the state’s chief justice and a majority of the Board of Directors agree to waive that rule. The Institute must monitor and evaluate funded programs and arrange an independent study of its financial and technical help.

Title 42, §10705

The Public Health and Welfare, Source: USLM XML via OLRC

(a)Authority of Institute; purposes of grants

The Institute is authorized to award grants and enter into cooperative agreements or contracts, in a manner consistent with subsection (b), in order to—

(1)conduct research, demonstrations, or special projects pertaining to the purposes described in this chapter, and provide technical assistance and training in support of tests, demonstrations, and special projects;

(2)serve as a clearinghouse and information center, where not otherwise adequately provided, for the preparation, publication, and dissemination of information regarding State judicial systems;

(3)participate in joint projects with other agencies, including the Federal Judicial Center, with respect to the purposes of this chapter;

(4)evaluate, when appropriate, the programs and projects carried out under this chapter to determine their impact upon the quality of criminal, civil, and juvenile justice and the extent to which they have met or failed to meet the purposes and policies of this chapter;

(5)encourage and assist in the furtherance of judicial education;

(6)encourage, assist, and serve in a consulting capacity to State and local justice system agencies in the development, maintenance, and coordination of criminal, civil, and juvenile justice programs and services; and

(7)be responsible for the certification of national programs that are intended to aid and improve State judicial systems.

(b)Priority in making awards; alternative recipients; approval of applications; receipt and administration of funds; accountability

The Institute is empowered to award grants and enter into cooperative agreements or contracts as follows:

(1)The Institute may award grants to or enter into cooperative agreements or contracts with—

(A)State and local courts and their agencies;

(B)national nonprofit organizations controlled by, operating in conjunction with, and serving the judicial branches of State governments; and

(C)national nonprofit organizations for the education and training of judges and support personnel of the judicial branch of State governments.

(2)The Institute may, if the objective can better be served thereby, award grants to or enter into cooperative agreements or contracts with—

(A)other nonprofit organizations with expertise in judicial administration;

(B)institutions of higher education;

(C)individuals, partnerships, firms, or corporations; and

(D)private agencies with expertise in judicial administration.

(3)Upon application by an appropriate State or local agency or institution and if the arrangements to be made by such agency or institution will provide services which could not be provided adequately through nongovernmental arrangements, the Institute may award a grant or enter into a cooperative agreement or contract with a unit of State or local government other than a court.

(4)The Institute may enter into contracts with Federal agencies to carry out the purposes of this chapter.

(5)Each application for funding by a State or local court shall be approved, consistent with State law, by the State’s supreme court, or its designated agency or council, which shall receive, administer, and be accountable for all funds awarded by the Institute to such courts.

(c)Permissible uses of funds

Funds available pursuant to grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts awarded under this section may be used—

(1)to assist State and local court systems in establishing appropriate procedures for the selection and removal of judges and other court personnel and in determining appropriate levels of compensation;

(2)to support education and training programs for judges and other court personnel, for the performance of their general duties and for specialized functions, and to support national and regional conferences and seminars for the dissemination of information on new developments and innovative techniques;

(3)to conduct research on alternative means for using judicial and nonjudicial personnel in court decisionmaking activities, to implement demonstration programs to test innovative approaches, and to conduct evaluations of their effectiveness;

(4)to support studies of the appropriateness of efficacy of court organization and financing structures in particular States, and to enable States to implement plans for improved court organization and finance;

(5)to support State court planning and budgeting staffs and to provide technical assistance in resource allocation and service forecasting techniques;

(6)to support studies of the adequacy of court management systems in State and local courts and to implement and evaluate innovative responses to problems of record management, data processing, court personnel management, reporting and transcription of court proceedings, and juror utilization and management;

(7)to collect and compile statistical data and other information on the work of the courts and on the work of other agencies which relate to and affect the work of courts;

(8)to conduct studies of the causes of trial and appellate court delay in resolving cases, and to establish and evaluate experimental programs for reducing case processing time;

(9)to develop and test methods for measuring the performance of judges and courts and to conduct experiments in the use of such measures to improve the functioning of such judges and courts;

(10)to support studies of court rules and procedures, discovery devices, and evidentiary standards, to identify problems with the operation of such rules, procedures, devices, and standards, to devise alternative approaches to better reconcile the requirements of due process with the need for swift and certain justice, and to test the utility of those alternative approaches;

(11)to support studies of the outcomes of cases in selected subject matter areas to identify instances in which the substance of justice meted out by the courts diverges from public expectations of fairness, consistency, or equity, to propose alternative approaches to the resolving of cases in problem areas, and to test and evaluate those alternatives;

(12)to support programs to increase court responsiveness to the needs of citizens through citizen education, improvement of court treatment of witnesses, victims, and jurors, and development of procedures for obtaining and using measures of public satisfaction with court processes to improve court performance;

(13)to test and evaluate experimental approaches to providing increased citizen access to justice, including processes which reduce the cost of litigating common grievances and alternative techniques and mechanisms for resolving disputes between citizens;

(14)conduct not more than 5 projects at an aggregate cost of not to exceed $600,000—

(A)to investigate, and carry out research regarding State judicial decisions relating to child custody litigation involving domestic violence;

(B)to develop training curricula to assist State courts to develop an understanding of, and appropriate responses to, child custody litigation involving domestic violence; and

(C)to disseminate the results of the investigation and research carried out under subparagraph (A), and the curricula developed under subparagraph (B), to State courts; and

(15)to carry out such other programs, consistent with the purposes of this chapter, as may be deemed appropriate by the Institute.

(d)Matching fund requirements

The Institute shall incorporate in any grant, cooperative agreement, or contract awarded under this section in which a State or local court (or other unit of State or local government) is the recipient, the requirement that the recipient provide a match, from private or public sources, not less than 50 per centum of the total cost of such grant, cooperative agreement, or contract, except that such requirement may be waived in exceptionally rare circumstances upon the approval of the chief justice of the highest court of the State and a majority of the Board of Directors.

(e)Compliance monitoring and evaluation by Institute

The Institute shall monitor and evaluate, or provide for independent evaluations of, programs supported in whole or in part under this chapter to ensure that the provisions of this chapter, the bylaws of the Institute, and the applicable rules, regulations, and guidelines promulgated pursuant to this chapter, are carried out.

(f)Independent study of financial and technical assistance programs

The Institute shall provide for an independent study of the financial and technical assistance programs under this chapter.

Notes & Related Subsidiaries

Editorial Notes

References in Text

This chapter, referred to in subsecs. (a)(1), (3), (4), (b)(4), (c)(15), (e), and (f), was in the original “this title”, meaning title II of Pub. L. 98–620, Nov. 8, 1984, 98 Stat. 3336, known as the State Justice Institute Act of 1984, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of title II to the Code, see

Short Title

note set out under section 10701 of this title and Tables.

Amendments

1992—Subsec. (b)(1). Pub. L. 102–572, § 802(1), substituted “may award grants to or enter into cooperative agreements or contracts” for “shall give priority to grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts” in introductory provisions and substituted semicolon for comma in subpar. (A). Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 102–572, § 802(2), inserted “to” after “award grants”. Subsec. (b)(3). Pub. L. 102–572, § 802(3), added par. (3) and struck out former par. (3) which read as follows: “Upon application by an appropriate Federal, State, or local agency or institution and if the arrangements to be made by such agency or institution will provide services which could not be provided adequately through nongovernmental arrangements, the Institute may award a grant or enter into a cooperative agreement or contract with a unit of Federal, State, or local government other than a court.” Subsec. (b)(4), (5). Pub. L. 102–572, § 802(4), (5), added par. (4) and redesignated former par. (4) as (5). Subsec. (c)(3). Pub. L. 102–528, § 3(2), struck out “judicial and” before “nonjudicial” the second place appearing. Subsec. (c)(4) to (6). Pub. L. 102–528, § 3(2)(B), (C), added par. (4) and redesignated former pars. (4) and (5) as (5) and (6), respectively. Former par. (6) redesignated (7). Subsec. (c)(7). Pub. L. 102–572, § 803(b), substituted “affect” for “effect”. Pub. L. 102–528, § 3(2)(B), redesignated par. (6) as (7). Former par. (7) redesignated (8). Subsec. (c)(8) to (12). Pub. L. 102–528, § 3(2)(B), redesignated pars. (7) to (11) as (8) to (12), respectively. Former par. (12) redesignated (13). Subsec. (c)(13). Pub. L. 102–528, § 3(2)(B), redesignated par. (12) as (13). Former par. (13) redesignated (14). Pub. L. 102–528, § 2, added par. (13) and redesignated former par. (13) as (14). Subsec. (c)(14). Pub. L. 102–528, § 3(2)(B), redesignated par. (13) as (14). Former par. (14) redesignated (15). Pub. L. 102–528, § 2, redesignated par. (13) as (14). Subsec. (c)(15). Pub. L. 102–528, § 3(2)(B), redesignated par. (14) as (15). 1988—Subsec. (c)(3). Pub. L. 100–702, § 603(1), inserted “judicial and” before “nonjudicial”. Pub. L. 100–690, § 7321(b)(3)(A), inserted “judicial and” before “nonjudicial”. Subsec. (c)(4) to (15). Pub. L. 100–702, § 603(2), (3), which directed the striking out of par. (4) and redesignation of pars. (5) to (15) as (4) to (14), respectively, was executed by striking out par. (4) and redesignating pars. (5) to (14) as (4) to (13), respectively, in view of the intervening redesignation of pars. (5) to (15) as (4) to (14), respectively, by Pub. L. 100–690, § 7321(b)(3)(C). See below. Prior to amendment, par. (4) read as follows: “to support studies of the appropriateness and efficacy of court organizations and financing structures in particular States, and to enable States to implement plans for improved court organization and finance;”. Pub. L. 100–690, § 7321(b)(3)(B), (C), redesignated pars. (5) to (15) as (4) to (14), respectively, and struck out former par. (4) which read as follows: “to assist State and local courts in meeting requirements of Federal law applicable to recipients of Federal funds;”. Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 100–702, § 604, which directed the substitution of “court (or other unit of State or local government)” for “judicial system”, could not be executed due to prior amendment by Pub. L. 100–690, § 7321(b)(4). See below. Pub. L. 100–690, § 7321(b)(4), substituted “court (or other unit of State or local government)” for “judicial system”.

Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries

Effective Date

Section effective Oct. 1, 1985, see section 216 of Pub. L. 98–620, set out as a note under section 10701 of this title.

§10705 Grants and Contracts