U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Court-Community Collaboration: New Partnerships for Court Improvement

NCJ Number
173019
Journal
Judicature Volume: 80 Issue: 5 Dated: March-April 1997 Pages: 213-218
Author(s)
S E Jones; G Berman; N C Dodson; H H Hodos
Date Published
1997
Length
6 pages
Annotation
This edited transcript of a panel discussion at the American Judicature Society's 1997 midyear meeting in Austin, Tex., explores court-community collaborative efforts in Illinois, Massachusetts, New York City, and Oklahoma.
Abstract
The moderator of the panel first explains the advantages of a partnership between the courts and the community, noting that it fosters support for the courts and creates public awareness of its responsibility for making the system work. She further describes two successful examples of court-community partnerships in Chicago: The Chicago Crime Commission, which has worked closely with the chief judge of the Circuit Court of Cook County and the presiding judge of the criminal division to bring about improved management and to help the division deal with its caseloads; and the Citizens Committee on the Juvenile Court, which works with the chief judge of the Circuit Court of Cook County to improve juvenile court services. Other panelists describe New York City's Midtown Community Court, which administers community-based justice for quality-of-life misdemeanors; the work of the League of Women Voters in Oklahoma to educate the public about the State's court system; and an effort in Franklin County, Mass., that involved citizens in devising and implementing plans to develop court programs that reflect citizen concerns and perspectives. Some of the issues discussed by the panel are what signalled the need for the various programs, the hurdles that the courts and communities faced and how they were overcome, the court personnel and community groups involved, funding, and the results of the collaborative efforts. The latter encompasses the goals reached and the impact of the programs on public attitudes toward the courts and courts' attitudes toward the public.

Downloads

No download available

Availability