Workload Assessment Advisory Committee

Purpose:
Provides guidance to the Judicial Council on performance measures and modifications to the Judicial Workload Assessment and the Resource Assessment Study Model.

Date Established: December 2013

September 5, 2014 Meeting (Teleconference)
12:15 to 1:15pm
Call in number: 1-877-820-7831, Passcode: 5197241 (Listen Only)


The 16-member advisory committee—comprised of superior court judges, court executives, and advisory staff from the Administrative Office of the Courts—reports directly to the Judicial Council. Members are appointed by the Chief Justice for three year terms.


Superior Court Judges

  • Hon. Lorna A. Alksne (Chair), County of San Diego
  • Hon. Irma Poole Asberry, County of Riverside
  • Hon. Lee Smalley Edmon, County of Los Angeles
  • Hon. Joyce Hinrichs, County of Humboldt
  • Hon. Suzanne N. Kingsbury, County of El Dorado
  • Hon. John D. Kirihara, County of Merced
  • Hon. Richard C. Martin, County of Lake
  • Vacancy


Superior Court Executive Officers:

  • Ms. Sheran Morton, County of Fresno
  • Ms. Sherri Carter, County of Los Angeles
  • Mr. Jake Chatters, County of Placer
  • Mr. Stephen Nash, County of Contra Costa
  • Mr. Darrel E. Parker, County of Santa Barbara
  • Mr. Brian Taylor, County of Solano
  • Ms. Mary Beth Todd, County of Sutter
  • Ms. Kim Turner, County of Marin
Background
The Judicial Council established the Judicial Branch Resource Needs Assessment Advisory Committee (JBRNAAC) as a standing Judicial Council advisory committee on December 13, 2013. The JBRNAAC succeeded the Senate Bill (SB) 56 Working Group, previously established by the Administrative Director of the Courts in 2009. In April 2014, the JBRNAAC was renamed the Workload Assessment Advisory Committee (WAAC).


Charge of SB 56 Working Group*

*WAAC Rule of Court is in development, but will be substantively similar to that of the SB 56 Working Group, shown below:

The AOC Office of Court Research (OCR) is responsible for developing a comprehensive model for a discreet number of performance measures for court systems and developing an implementation plan for performance measurement in a timely, efficient manner. OCR is also responsible for preparing amendments to the Judicial Workload Assessment and the Resource Assessment Study models as they relate to standards and measures of court administration. The SB 56 Working Group is responsible for responding to proposed performance measures and implementation plans and modifications to the Judicial Workload Assessment and the Resource Assessment Study Model by providing advice and suggestions to improve and to effectively implement the plans and models. Specifically, the SB 56 Working Group will review and provide advice to the OCR on proposals for instituting performance measures and implementation plans in areas such as:

  • Processes, study design, and methodologies that should be used to measure and

report on court administration; and

  • Amendments to the Judicial Workload Assessment and the Resource Assessment Study models as they relate to standards and measures of court administration.

Members will also advise the AOC on studies and analyses undertaken to update and amend case weights through time studies, focus groups, or other methods.

In addition to the working group, OCR and the SB 56 members may employ other means of gathering information, analyses, and perspectives through interviews with national or state experts on relevant topics or roundtables of judges, lawyers, and court staff with experience in specific subject matters, as needed.
After review and approval by the SB 56 Working group, OCR will present final proposals in these areas to the Judicial Council.


Contact Information

Court Operations Services
Operations & Services
waac@jud.ca.gov

Site Map | Careers | Contact Us | Accessibility | Public Access to Records | Terms of Use | Privacy