Judicial Council Approves Updated Workload Model that Determines Court Staffing Needs

SAN FRANCISCO—The Judicial Council at its April 25 business meeting approved an update to its model for measuring court workload and assessing trial court staffing needs based on findings from a 2024 time study conducted in 19 courts across the state.

The updated Resource Assessment Study (RAS) model factors in the number and types of cases filed to estimate the time and amount of staff courts require to process cases. For instance, felony and family law matters require the largest share of court resources relative to other case types, whereas traffic infractions are often resolved as administrative matters, resulting in fewer court appearances and less court workload.

The model highlights that the number of case filings alone does not equal court workload.

“For example, criminal felony matters have increased complexity for our trial courts and staff related to post-judgement sentencing and the Racial Justice Act,” said Joyce Hinrichs, chair of the council’s Data Analytics Advisory Committee. “Adjusting racial disparities pursuant to the act is important, but we have to recognize it increases the workload of staff in a number of ways that can include court and evidentiary hearings.”

This year’s RAS model incorporates 22 different case types and includes two new ones related to mental health certification and the CARE Act.

This nationally known and accepted methodology has been employed in more than 30 states to measure the work activities of court staff, judicial officers, and other entities connected with the court system.

Improvements to Jury Instructions and Jury Service
The council also heard a presentation on how the court system has improved jury service, including information about the state’s civil and criminal plain-language jury instructions. The presentation explained how the council created jury instructions that are more easily understood but still legally accurate.

“If we’re going to be asking members of the community to come in and serve, we owe it to them to make sure that the process is accessible and understandable,” said Justice Adrienne M. Grover, chair of the council’s Advisory Committee on Civil Jury Instructions. “That starts with the juror summons and goes all the way through to the jury instructions and verdict forms. These efforts benefit jurors, but they also benefit litigants by ensuring a fair and just application of the law to their case.”

Presenters also noted additional improvements to the jury system, which include a model juror summons, online jury portals, staggered reporting times, a pilot program to increase juror pay and travel reimbursements, electronic payment options, and an updated juror orientation video that explains how the jury system works.

An additional orientation video shown to prospective jurors explains how implicit bias can affect the process and reminds them about biases that can influence their assessment of the evidence or their decisions. The judge also reminds jurors about implicit bias at the beginning and end of the trial.

Other Items on Council Meeting Agenda:

Addressing Racial Inequities: The council approved recommended steps to support collaborative court and diversion programs, which combine judicial supervision with rehabilitation services focused on recovery to reduce recidivism and improve offender outcomes. Strategies include improved data collection on the race and ethnicity of participants, an assessment tool to help identify and correct areas where racial disparities may exist, and sharing information and best practices among courts and justice system partners.

Plan for Court Technology: The council approved an update to its Tactical Plan for Technology, which provides a roadmap for increasing access to justice and services to court customers. This includes concrete actions to enhance operational efficiencies, strengthen disaster recovery capabilities, and meet minimum technology standards for remote proceedings. The plan also recommends the careful and responsible exploration of emerging technologies in alignment with branch standards and policies.

New Court Rules and Forms: The council approved 20 new rules of court, 28 court forms, and one standard of judicial administration. For example, the council approved a new rule of court for developing branchwide guidelines on technology and data security, as well as a new rule related to notice requirements in probate and conservatorship cases. Nearly 50 comments were considered on these proposed new rules and forms during the public comment process.

Legal Services Trust Fund Commission: The council received information about the work of the commission, which administers grant programs to fund local and statewide civil legal aid organizations that serve low-income and underserved populations. The grants provide funding to assist more than 32,000 litigants and hold 1,800 workshops per year.

Appointment to the California Council for Interstate Adult Offender Supervision: The Judicial Council reappointed San Bernardino County Judge R. Glenn Yabuno to the California Council for Interstate Adult Offender Supervision, which governs state administration of the transfer across state lines of the supervision of adult parolees and probationers.

Preview of Public Service Recognition Week Videos: The council received a preview of videos that will be promoted online May 4-10 during Public Service Recognition Week. The videos will highlight occupations and personal stories from employees in public service within the state judicial branch. At the conclusion of the video preview, Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero thanked “all of you throughout our entire court family for your integrity, dedication, and work you do on behalf of the public.”

The complete meeting agenda and council reports are posted to the California Courts Meeting Information Center—an archived webcast of today’s meeting will be posted to the center as soon as it is available.