text:
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
|Annual report of the Family Divisions and Family Law Services Programs. 2006
|Annual report of the family divisions and family services programs -- 2006 Report
Domestic relations--Maryland.
Family services--Maryland--Finance.
Domestic relations courts--Maryland.
|Annual; 1999-; Harvested from the web on 6/14/07
|Administrative Office of the Courts, Family Division and Family Law Services
|Maryland. Administrative Office of the Courts. Family Division and Family Law Services.
|v. : ill. ; 28 cm.
|This work may be copyrighted or have other restrictions on use. Please contact your librarian if you have questions on the uses of this material.
|Fiscal Year 2006 MARYLAND JUDICIARY Administrative Office of the Courts Department of Family Administration annual report of the Maryland Circuit Court Family Divisions and Family Services Programs ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS DEPT. OF FAMILY ADMINISTRATION Family Divisions & Family Services Programs ANNUAL REPORT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY ADMINISTRATION 580 Taylor Avenue, 2nd floor Annapolis, Maryland 21401 410- 260- 1580 FAX: 410- 974- 5577 www. mdcourts. gov/ family ROBERT M. BELL, Chief Judge FRANK BROCCOLINA, State Court Administrator PAMELA CARDULLO ORTIZ, Executive Director Submitted: January 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS A LEGACY OF SERVICE TO MARYLAND FAMILIES.............................................................................. 1 THE MARYLAND FAMILY JUSTICE SYSTEM...................................................................................... 5 ACCESS TO JUSTICE.................................................................................................................. 14 Standard 1.1 Equal Access......................................................................................................................... ......... 14 Standard 1.2 Cost of Access......................................................................................................................... ...... 15 Standard 1.3 Safety, Accessibility and Convenience........................................................................................... 16 EXPEDITION AND TIMELINESS..................................................................................................... 18 Standard 2.1 Case Management System............................................................................................................. 16 Standard 2.2 Protection of Victims of Domestic Violence..................................................................................... 21 Standard 2.3 Processing Child Dependency Matters........................................................................................... 24 Standard 2.4 Resolution of Juvenile Delinquency Cases..................................................................................... 28 Standard 2.5 Coordination of Family Legal Issues............................................................................................... 30 EQUALITY, FAIRNESS AND INTEGRITY.......................................................................................... 31 Standard 3.1 Integration of Related Family Matters............................................................................................. 31 Standard 3.2 Fairness and Equality for Court Staff.............................................................................................. 32 Standard 3.3 Responsiveness to Child Support Issues........................................................................................ 33 Standard 3.4 Treatment of Unrepresented Parties............................................................................................... 35 INDEPENDENCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY......................................................................................... 39 Standard 4.1 Performance Issues........................................................................................................................ 39 Standard 4.2 Information Sharing........................................................................................................................ 41 Standard 4.3 Fair and Efficient Forum for Dispute Resolution............................................................................. 42 Standard 4.4 Safety and Security....................................................................................................................... . 43 Standard 4.5 Uniform Qualifications................................................................................................................. ... 44 PUBLIC TRUST AND CONFIDENCE................................................................................................ 45 Standard 5.1 A Therapeutic, Holistic, Ecological Approach to Family Law Decision- Making.............................. 45 Standard 5.2 Fairness, Courtesy and Civility........................................................................................................ 46 Standard 5.3 Visible Presence in the Community................................................................................................ 46 KEEPING FAMILY COURT REFORM IN THE FOREFRONT.................................................................... 47 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. New and Reopened Cases – Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County..................................................... 6 Table 2. Total Family Cases Filed or Reopened in Fiscal Year 2006.................................................................. 20 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. No. of Maryland Jurisdictions Offering Specific Family Support Services, Fiscal Year 2006................. 8 Figure 2. Juvenile and Family/ Dependency Drug Courts in Maryland................................................................... 5 Figure 3. Referrals to Child Access Mediation....................................................................................................... 9 Figure 4. Percentage of Custody, Visitation and Support Cases Involving Never Married Parents – Baltimore City........................................................................................................................... .............. 9 Figure 5. Percentageof Custody, Visitation and Support Cases Involving 3rd Party Custodians – Baltimore City........................................................................................................................... .............. 9 Figure 6. Referrals to Co- Parenting Education...................................................................................................... 9 Figure 7. Household Income of Co- Parenting Participants – FY06..................................................................... 10 Figure 8. Self- Identified Ethnicity of Co- Parenting Participants – FY06.............................................................. 10 Figure 9. Primary Language of Co- Parenting Participants – FY06...................................................................... 10 Figure 10. Gender of Co- Parenting Participants – FY06..................................................................................... 10 Figure 11. Relationship to Co- Parent - Co- Parenting Participants – FY06......................................................... 10 Figure 12. Individuals Assisted by Family Law Self- Help Centers....................................................................... 11 Figure 13. Legal Forms Helpline Intakes............................................................................................................. 11 Figure 14. Legal Forms Helpline – Case Types – FY06...................................................................................... 11 Figure 15. Cases Referred for Custody Evaluations........................................................................................... 12 Figure 16. Cases Referred for Mental Health Evaluations................................................................................. 12 Figure 17. Substance Abuse Screenings, Evaluations and Treatment............................................................... 12 Figure 18. Cases Referred for Visitation Services............................................................................................... 13 Figure 19. Cases Including a Referral to Children's Psycho- educational Program............................................. 13 Figure 20. Family Caseload as a Percentage of Overall Circuit Court Caseload – FY06................................... 18 Figure 21. Family Case Types Heard by Maryland Circuit Courts – FY06.......................................................... 19 Figure 22. Relative Family Caseload by Jurisdiction – FY06.............................................................................. 19 Figure 23. SPG Grantees Serving Victims of Domestic Violence – Type of Services Provided – FY06............. 21 Figure 24. SPG Grantees Serving Victims of Domestic Violence – Major Benefit Achieved – FY06.................. 22 Figure 25. SPG Grantees Serving Victims of Domestic Violence – Cases Opened – FY06............................... 22 Figure 26. SPG Grantees Serving Victims of Domestic Violence........................................................................ 23 Figure 27. Family Law Self- Help Centers – Assistance Provided by Case Type – FY06................................... 35 Figure 28. Family Law Self- Help Centers – Referrals and Recommendations Made – FY06............................ 35 Figure 29. Pro Se Appearances in Domestic Litigation - FY06.......................................................................... 37 Figure 30. Self- Help Center Demographics – Highest Education Level Attained – FY06................................... 37 Figure 31. Self- Help Center Demographics – Household Income – FY06.......................................................... 38 Figure 32. Self- Help Center Demographics – Primary Language – FY06........................................................... 38 Figure 33. Self- Help Center Demographics – Race/ Ethnicity – FY06................................................................. 38 1 A Legacy of Service to Maryland Families Eight years of family court reform efforts have yielded significant improvements for families and children in transition. Families in conflict now have access to a broad range of educational, therapeutic, evaluative, legal and dispute resolution services, regardless of where they live in the State. New problem- solving courts, inspired by the success of Maryland family divisions and family services programs, have begun tackling key family issues that can benefit from more intense judicial supervision and monitoring. Generic services are becoming more specialized as courts develop a more sophisticated, nuanced approach to co- parenting education, alternative dispute resolution and evaluative services. Energized by the challenge of serving families more effectively, the Judiciary continues to evaluate and refine its efforts. New in Fiscal Year 2006 The Maryland Judiciary continued its work on many fronts to institutionalize family court reform and improve the quality of programs that support the family justice system. New Resources The Department of Family Administration at the Administrative Office of the Courts guided the Judiciary in the development of several new resources and initiatives that will enhance the quality of services provided to Maryland families. These included: Uniform delinquency orders to promote compliance with the Adoption and Safe Families Act and Title IV- E of the Social Security Act; Revised adoption rules currently pending before the Court of Appeals Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure ( Rules Committee); The Judges Domestic Violence Resource Manual, to be released in early 2007; The Maryland Guidelines of Practice for Court- Appointed Lawyers Representing Children in Cases Involving Child Custody or Child Access currently pending before the Rules Committee; CINA/ TPR Best Practices which will be published during Fiscal Year 2006 as part of the revised Child Welfare Benchbook; Six previously published child support brochures newly translated into Spanish. Attracting Outside Funding for Maryland Innovations The Maryland Judiciary was successful this year in obtaining some outside funding to permit the development of key innovations that will have real benefit for Maryland families. 2 The Administrative Office of the Courts was awarded approximately $ 1.4 million dollars under the federal Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies ( GTAP) program to complete development of the statewide domestic violence database. This first- of- its- kind database will coordinate access to domestic violence case information for court users, advocates and law enforcement. It will be not merely a registry of protective orders, but will include the orders themselves, to permit quick and accurate access to protective order information for courts, as well as eventually officers in the field. The wealth of data will also permit analysis of these cases and guide the Judiciary in making policy decisions that enhance protection. Two new federal grants were awarded the Foster Care Court Improvement Project. These new grants were made possible by the Deficit Reduction Act and will fund data collection and training to enhance the handling of child welfare cases. Finally, Spanish- speaking victims will benefit from the Hispanic Outreach initiatives of the Protective Order Advocacy and Representation Projects ( POARP) funded under a Violence Against Women Act ( VAWA) STOP grant. Administrative Innovations and Quality Assurance To improve its ability to work with courts and other grantees, the Department of Family Administration extensively revised its grant guidelines and reporting requirements. As a result, new data will become available at the end of Fiscal Year 2007 which will aid the Judiciary in understanding the impact of its programs and investments in serving families, and will guide us for future decision- making. The Foster Care Court Improvement Project launched a series of extensive site visits to each jurisdiction, pulling cases to examine court compliance with the federal regulations governing the management of child welfare cases. The data gleaned from these efforts will help us guide our courts to make appropriate and necessary findings which promote child permanency and hold child welfare agencies in the state accountable for their care of children. Court Innovation and Improvement Key programs were expanded and new innovations adopted to improve court responsiveness to families. The 1st Circuit Truancy Reduction Pilot Program, originally implemented in Wicomico County, was expanded as Somerset County came on board during Fall, 2005, and Dorchester County in Spring, 2006. Worcester County heard its first truancy cases in January, 2007, bringing the pilot to the full 1st Circuit. The Judiciary plans a full evaluation of the pilot once all four jurisdictions are operational and enough truancy cases have concluded. The pilot permits schools and courts to collaborate in addressing the underlying needs of children who are not regularly attending school. Child welfare case innovations are being tested in two Model Court Initiatives underway in the Circuit Courts for Baltimore City and Charles County. In those courts, judges, court professionals and FCCIP staff work with consultants from the National Center for State Courts to test and evaluate improvements and best practices in the handling of CINA, TPR and adoption cases. Additional services for Spanish- speaking victims of domestic violence are now available in the Montgomery County Protective Order Advocacy and Representation Project ( POARP). The addition of a bilingual advocate was made possible by the Department of Family Administration through a Violence Against Women Act ( VAWA) STOP Grant. The program, operated by the House of Ruth, provides safety- planning, assistance in petitioning for protection, and legal representation. The Hispanic Outreach component of the program will expand during Fiscal Year 2007 through a collaborative venture with the Women's Law Center of Maryland, through which POARP attorneys across the state will receive training and technical assistance on the immigration provisions and protections of VAWA, courtesy of the Women's Law Centers' Multi- Ethnic Domestic Violence ( MEDOVI) project. Legislative Highlights The fiscal year was marked by the implementation and/ or passage of key legislation that will have a significant positive effect on Maryland families and children. Faster, Non- Adversarial Child Support. During the 2006 Legislative Session the General Assembly passed new legislation to permit the use of an Affidavit of Support. Modeled after the successful affidavit of parentage, which permits biological fathers to acknowledge paternity in the hospital, the affidavit of support provides for an adminstrative procedure local child support offices can use to establish or modify child support without a court hearing. House Bill 272 permits the local child support office to have the parties execute the affidavit of support if they agree upon a new or revised child support amount. The affidavit is filed with the court after a 60- day period passes during which either party may rescind their consent. The affidavit becomes fully enforceable upon execution. This is intended to permit the local support office to issue an immediate earnings withholding notice and expedite initial payments – speeding help to custodial parents and their children and reducing the build- up of arrears for payors. The bill takes effect January 1, 2007, and the Judiciary is collaborating with the Child Support Enforcement Administration to pilot the program. 3 Understanding Juvenile Competency. Another bill passed during the session provides the services component necessary to complete the juvenile competency procedures adopted by the General Assembly the year prior. House Bill 1275 authorizes the court, after holding a competency hearing, to order serivces to youth when found incompetent, as well as establishes specific procedures to be followed when a court makes a finding of incompetency. These procedures enhance the due process rights of youth determined incompetent and provides the court with additional tools to make good decisions on behalf of these youth. More Flexibility for Property Transfer in Divorce. Effective October 1, 2006, Maryland courts in an annulment or absolute divorce case may now transfer ownership of an interest in real property between the parties, subject to the consent of lienholders. This coupled with prior legislation that authorized the transfer of family use personal property gives courts in divorce cases the full range of authority necessary to address the equities of property distribution. Authorization to Appoint Best Interest Attorneys. Finally, the General Assembly addressed an issue raised earlier in the year by the Court of Appeals by authorizing courts to appoint an attorney for a child in an action involving custody, visitation rights, or the amount of support of a minor child. Attorneys may be appointed as either a child advocate attorney or as a best interest attorney. The statute tracks the language of the Maryland Guidelines of Practice for Court- Appointed Lawyers Representing Children in Cases Involving Child Custody or Child Access currently pending before the Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure, which state more succinctly the roles and expectations for court- appointed child counsel. Earlier case law had negated the practice of appointment of guardians ad litem, noting that the prior statute had authorized courts to appoint " attorneys" for children, but not guardians or attorneys designed to fulfill a " best interest" role. Education Highlights The Maryland Administrative of the Courts, Department of Family Administration, continued its efforts to enhance the work of the family divisions and family services programs through education. During Fiscal Year 2006, the Department hosted and/ or funded the following events: The Child Abuse and Delinquency Options ( CAN DO) Conference for Maryland judges, masters, and agency professionals was held at Rocky Gap Resort & Conference Center in Flintstone, Maryland during October, 2005. A simultaneous attorney track was held in Columbia, Maryland. A Family Disease: The Impact of Addiction and Substance Abuse on Children, Families, Family Courts and Communities was funded by the Department of Family Aministration, and planned for the Judiciary by the University of Baltimore, School of Law, Center on Families, Children and the Courts. The event took place during September, 2005 at the Loyola Graduate Conference Center in Timonium, Maryland. The Eastern Shore Circuit Courts and family services coordinators collaborated to plan and host a regional conference in October, 2005, aimed at improving representation for children, Court Appointed Lawyers for Children: Delineating the Roles & Responsibilities. Six Regional Trainings were held around the state for court personnel, self- help providers and mediators on the publication, Screening Cases for Family Violence Issues to Determine Suitability for Mediation and Other Forms of ADR: Screening Protocols and Tools for Maryland Circuit Courts. Maryland Executive Director for Family Administration, Pamela Ortiz, participated in planning and presenting at Access to Justice for the Self- Represented: Court and Community- Based Strategies and Solutions, an Eastern Regional Conference held in White Plains, New York. Key Maryland stakeholders participated in the conference as well. The Foster Care Court Improvement Project continues to plan regular courses on child welfare topics for the Judicial Institute. In March, 2005, FCCIP hosted a full- day beginner's dependency training program. The September, 2006, course was an intensive full- day session on the new TPR/ adoption statute. The Department of Family Administration continued its commitment to offering 40- hour Basic Mediation and 20- Hour Child Access Mediation Courses to Maryland judges, masters and court professionals. This year's course was deferred to Fall, 2006, and was held in November and December. Plans are underway to add a second basic mediation course in 2007 as these courses are regularly over- subscribed. Asking the Hard Question – How Did We Do? Efforts continued during Fiscal Year 2006 to examine court performance in serving families. Key evaluative projects included: Distribution and initial analysis of four major survey instruments including a litigant satisfaction survey, and attorney satisfaction survey and two program exit surveys for co- parenting courses and self- help centers. An electronically distributed survey of Family Matters readers to evaluate how well the Department of Family Administration's newsletter is servings its customers. 4 The final phases of an in- depth case file review being conducted for the Judiciary by the Women's Law Center to examine custody and financial decision- making in divorce and child access cases, the results of which are expected in early 2007. A complete round of in- depth site visits conducted by the FCCIP to evaluate court compliance with federal law governing the management of child welfare cases. Looking Forward To 2007 A number of key initiatives launched during the fiscal year, will begin to bear fruit during Fiscal Year 2007. The Department of Family Administration has begun working with the Maryland CASA ( Court Appointed Special Advocates) Association and CASA directors statewide to develop a performance- based funding model for CASA organizations. The Department of Family Administration administers state grant funds that support CASA organizations serving children in foster care. The Custody Subcommittee of the Maryland Judicial Conference Committee on Family Law, under its chairperson, Court of Special Appeals judge, the Honorable Deborah Eyler, has begun to examine standards and possible legislation to guide the use of parenting coordinators in high conflict child access cases. The subcommittee has also begun exploring standards for custody and mental health evaluations. A new Judiciary- wide Work Group on Self- Represented Litigants in the Maryland Courts, chaired by Court of Appeals judge, the Honorable Clayton Greene, Jr., has begun examining ways in which the Judiciary as a whole can effectively address the needs of the self- represented. Pamela Ortiz, Executive Director of the Department of Family Administration, staffs the work group which grew out of recommendations for Maryland which were part of a national study evaluating self- help centers in numerous states. The work group's efforts will inform how courts in Maryland respond to the self- represented who figure prominently in family litigation. The Foster Care Court Improvement Project of the Department of Family Administration is busy planning its third biennial CINA/ TPR Alternative Dispute Resolution Conference, to be held during April, 2007, in Columbia, Maryland. Through this conference, and grant funds provided through FCCIP, the Maryland Judiciary has promoted the use of mediation and other forms of ADR in dependency cases. Maryland will be the site of a national Unified Family Court Summit being planned by the American Bar Association in conjunction with the University of Baltimore Center for Families, Children & the Courts. The summit scheduled for May, 2007, in Baltimore, will convene state chief justices and state family court teams from around the country to examine ongoing efforts at family court reform. The Maryland Judiciary has participated in planning and co- sponsoring the event, which will highlight the Maryland family divisions. Finally, after many years of collaborative work across the state with mediators, courts, citizens and others, the Maryland Mediation and Conflict Resolution Office ( MACRO) has begun rolling out the Maryland Program for Mediator Excellence ( MPME). This quality assurance program for Maryland mediators features a variety of branches, each of which is designed to leverage the quality of mediation being conducted in Maryland. The program includes a range of components including mentoring programs, grievance procedures, training standards, and eventually will include a performance- based certification process. The Department of Family Administration has participated extensively in helping MACRO develop and vet the program. MPME and its many branches will be the primary quality assurance mechanism for court- based mediation programs across the state. MISSION OF MARYLAND'S FAMILY DIVISIONS The mission of Maryland's Family Divisions is to provide a fair and efficient forum to resolve family legal matters in a problem- solving manner, with the goal of improving the lives of families and children who appear before the court. To that end, the court shall make appropriate services available for families who need them. The court shall also provide an environment that supports judges, court staff, and attorneys so that they can respond effectively to the many legal and non- legal issues of families in the justice system. 5 The Maryland Family Justice System Maryland's family justice system affects the lives of thousands of Maryland families and children each year. Maryland courts serve families and children though the Circuit Court Family Divisions and Family Services Programs which open about 130,000 cases per year. Cases include those involving divorce, child access issues, child support, domestic violence, child welfare, truancy and delinquency. These families come into contact with the the family justice system at crucial times – times at which they are vulnerable and their many needs evident. By providing critical services, evaluating family and individual needs with compassion, and paying attention to the manner in which cases involving these families are managed, Maryland courts seek to enhance the lives of families and children whose lives are in transition. Comprehensive Jurisdiction The Maryland Circuit Courts have comprehensive jurisdiction over all civil legal matters that affect families. The Circuit Courts are the state's general jurisdiction trial courts. They are the highest trial court level in the state. To enhance victim safety, Circuit Courts do share concurrent jurisdiction with the District Court, the state's limited jurisdiction trial court, over domestic violence matters. District Courts have the ability to hear new domestic violence petitions after regular court hours, as they have commissioners who are available 24- hours per day and who are empowered by the state constititution to issue interim protective orders. Maryland court rules permit courts to transfer domestic violence cases between District and Circuit Courts, when appropriate, to permit the consolidation of cross- filed cases, or to permit a judge hearing a related divorce or custody case to also hear the domestic violence case. Because of this comprehensive jurisdiction, Maryland Circuit Courts can consolidate related matters, when appropriate, and judges, masters and service professionals can develop and maintain their knowledge of the needs of each individual family. Case Management Maryland courts have developed case management practices designed to enhance the family justice system. Case management techniques are designed to: Ensure expeditious handling of critical family matters; Promote parents as primary decisionmakers for the family by using a range of conflict resolution techniques; Educate families so they become effective decisionmakers; Provide timely and critical information to judges and masters; and Make effective use of court resources. Most courts have developed specialized family case management plans that incorporate a range of techniques which may include: Case types within the jurisdiction of family divisions Scheduling conferences; Mediation; Education programs and/ or orientation workshops to enhance parental decisionmaking and to address the needs of the self- represented; A doption C hild support Focus on the order of events, for example, scheduling co- parenting education before mediation; Child in need of assistance ( CINA) C hild in need of supervision ( CINS) The use of specialty courts or specialty dockets to provide ongoing judicial oversight to bear on key family issues including substance abuse ( juvenile and dependency drug courts) and truancy ( truancy courts). C ustody Divorce Settlement conferences; D omestic violence Guardianship Status conferences; Pre- trial conferences. As an example, the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County has successfully used case management techniques to reduce the number of reopened family cases, even while the number of new family cases has increased. Courts generally cannot control the number of new cases brought, but innovative case management and problem- solving approaches can reduce the number of cases that are relitigated for one reason or another. The Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County set out to do just that by: i) providing additional time for scheduling and settlement conferences to permit the parties a better opportunity to resolve disputes on the day of the conference; ii) scheduling more non- adversarial court events including scheduling and settlement conferences; and iii) continued promotion of alternate dispute resolution programs. I nvoluntary admissions J uvenile delinquency Juvenile peace orders Name change Paternity T ermination of parental rights Truancy Visitation Table 1. New and Reopened Cases – Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County Case Type FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 NEW 4,387 4,388 4,458 REOPENED 3,883 3,205 2,941 Total 8,270 7,593 7,399 Thus while the number of new filings increased 1.6%, the number of reopened cases declined dramatically by 24.2% resulting in an overall caseload drop of 10.5%. 1 New services can also impact case management. The Circuit Court for Baltimore County developed two new programs to address increasing numbers of filings for contempt. The court now holds Pre- Hearing Contempt Conferences, staffed by volunteer facilitators, to aid the parties in resolving issues that would normally result in a contempt proceeding. A new Family Employment 6 1 Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County, Family Division Annual Report 2006. October 15, 2006, p. 4. Support Program works with child support payors to aid them in seeking employment so they can make regular support payments. These efforts have resulted in a 29.8% decrease from 2005 to 2006 in the number of contempt proceedings heard by the court. A Continuum of Services Each of Maryland's twenty- four Circuit Court jurisdictions has developed a spectrum of core services to assist families and children involved with the legal system. Some services are provided directly by the court. Others are made available through contract or referral. 7 Types of Services ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION These services encourage parties to settle their dispute in a manner other than by going to trial. Child Access Mediation Marital Property Mediation Volunteer Settlement Panels Facilitation Dependency Mediation Parent- Teen Mediation Pre- trial Conferences Parent Coordination EVALUATIVE SERVICES These programs provide the court with information it needs to make a decision that is in a child's best interest, or that is best for that family. Home Studies Custody Evaluations Mental Health and Psychological Evaluations Substance Abuse Assessments Visitation Reports EDUCATIONAL AND THERAPEUTIC SERVICES These programs educate the parties, help parents remain child- focused, and ease the family's transition. Co- parenting Education Psycho- educational Programs for Children Individual, Group and Family Therapy Abuser Intervention Programs Substance Abuse Treatment Drug Courts Truancy Court SAFETY AND PROTECTION SERVICES These resources are designed to ensure the safety of adults and children. Emergency Mediation and Crisis Intervention Domestic Violence Safety Planning and Coordination Visitation Services LEGAL SERVICES These programs ensure access to the justice system for those of limited means, and those at risk. Family Law Self- Help Centers Domestic Relations Forms Domestic Violence Advocacy CASA Programs Web Sites, Publications, Videos Figure 1. No. of Maryland Jurisdictions Offering Specific Family Support Services, Fiscal Year 2006 8 F igure 2. Juvenile and Family/ Dependency Drug Courts in Maryland Promoting Parents as Primary Decision- makers Child Access Mediation Courts promote parents as primary decision- makers by providing them the opportunity to resolve cases without litigation. Mediation permits parents the chance to recognize and place their child's needs first. When a custody or visitation case goes to trial, the relationship between former spouses is further eroded, positions are polarized, and it becomes less likely that those parents will be able to cooperate in the future to make child- rearing decisions. Neighbors and extended family are called in to testify against the opposing party, further destroying the parties' support networks. Alternative dispute resolution helps preserve relationships where possible and promotes child- focused decision- making 9 Figure 3. Referrals to Child Access Mediation Helping Parents Remain Child- Focused in Their Decision- Making Co- Parenting Education All Maryland jurisdictions offer some form of co- parenting education. Maryland Rule 9- 204 prescribes the content and length of the course, which can be up to two sessions for a total of six hours of instruction. Several courts now offer additional, specialized co- parenting courses targeted to address the needs of specific populations. In Baltimore City, where many child access cases involve parents who have never been married and who never resided together, the court offers a program called " SHAPE" or " Shared Parenting Education" specifically to help parents who have never had a close relationship develop the skills to work together as parents. Of 987 custody, visitation and child support cases reviewed by the Family Division Administrator in Baltimore City during Fiscal Year 2006, 68% involved parents who had never been married. 2 The Circuit Court for Baltimore City also now offers a specialized parenting course for relative caregivers and other third- party custodians. Parenting for Third Parties ( PATH) is offered six times per year. Thirty- nine individuals were referred to the class during the past year. During that year, 17% of custody cases in that jurisdiction involved parties other than the parents of the child. 3 The Circuit Court for St. Mary's County expanded its Family Advocacy Program to include a Communication Skills Building Program to teach the communication skills necessary to effective co- parenting. Figure 4. Percentage of Custody, Visitation and Support Cases Involving Never Married Parents, Baltimore City Figure 5. Percentage of Custody, Visitation and Support Cases Involving 3rd Party Custodians, Baltimore City Figure 6. Referrals to Co- Parenting Education 2 Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Annual Report of the Family Division ( Fiscal Year 2006). October 24, 2006, p. 6 3 Id., p. 7. 10 Who Benefits from Co- Parenting Education? When parents participate in co- parenting education, they are asked to complete a demographic questionnaire. This data provides some picture of the individuals involved in contested child access cases. This information is used to assist the courts in designing co- parenting curricula and in targeting written materials and other resources to ensure they meet the needs of the court's customers. Successful co- parenting education includes a unit explaining the role and benefits of mediation, and preparing parents to participate effectively in alternative dispute resolution sessions. In some courses, local attorneys, judges, mediators or other court professionals visit the class to explain more about the process. Figure 7. Household Income of Co- Parenting Participants - FY06 Figure 8. Self- Identified Ethnicity of Co- Parenting Participants - FY06 Figure 9. Primary Language of Co- Parenting Participants - FY06 Figure 10. Gender of Co- parenting Participants - FY06 Figure 11. Relationship to Co- Parent - Co- Parenting Participants - FY06 Access to the Family Justice System Help for the Self- Represented No system of justice is effective unless the persons it was designed to benefit can have effective access to that system. Maryland Circuit Court Family Divisions and Family Services Programs have made a strong commitment to serve all Maryland residents without regard to representational status. Many individuals find it difficult or impossible to afford counsel in family cases. When a marriage dissolves, the family is compelled to support two households on the same income that once supported one. The Maryland Judiciary provides a broad spectrum of resources to aid those who must proceed without benefit of counsel. Figure 12. Individuals Assisted by Family Law Self- Help Centers 11 Family Law Self- Help Centers. These free walk- in legal clinics provide forms, information and procedural assistance to self- represented persons. Every Circuit Court in Maryland operates a family law self- help center. Attorneys interview litigants to determine whether their case is appropriate for self- representation, assist them in completing forms, and in planning for the next steps of their litigation. Referrals for more in- depth legal assistance are made where the party is in need of full representation. These programs are in extremely high demand. In Fiscal Year 2006, family law self- help centers served 39,362 individuals. The Judicary has addressed quality assurance for these programs by adopting and promoting Best Practices for Programs to Assist Self- Represented Litigants in Family Law Matters. The document, developed by Maryland, adopted during Fiscal Year 2005, paints a picture of what a good self- help program looks like and recommends promising practices for Maryland courts. During the Fall of 2005, self- help providers were also offered training on how to screen cases for family violence issues. Self- help providers can play a critical role in helping victims let the court know when family violence is an issue and when, as a result, mediation or other forms of ADR may be inappropriate. Domestic Relations Forms. The Maryland Judiciary maintains a large body of forms for use by self- represented litigants in domestic cases. Forms are available in fillable- field PDF format through the Judiciary's website for use in divorce, custody, visitation, child support, name changes and domestic violence cases. The forms are also available online in a bilingual Spanish- English format. Spanish speakers can complete the bilingual form and submit it directly to the court. Complete instructions are available in Spanish. Legal Forms Helpline. The Department of Family Administration supports a statewide legal forms hotline to aid individuals in completing and filing the domestic relations forms. The Legal Forms Helpline is operated by the Women's Law Center of Maryland under a Special Project Grant from the Department of Family Administration. The Helpline also offers services in Spanish one half- day per week. Figure 13. Legal Forms Helpline Intakes Figure 14. Legal Forms Helpline – Case Types – FY06 Understanding Families to Enhance Decision- making Custody Evaluations All Maryland Circuit Courts have a mechanism for providing home studies or custody evaluations. In some instances the court maintains social workers on staff to provide this service. In some jurisdictions the service is provided for a fee by the local department of social services, or another private provider. 12 Evaluations can range from simple home visits with a report on the conditions in the home, to an in- depth assessment of the parents' relative parenting abilities based on interviews with the parties, observations of the child with each parent in the home, interviews with collateral witnesses, and a review of pertinent education, medical and other records. The Department of Family Administration provides occasional opportunities for the court's custody and mental health evaluators to enhance their skills and obtain continuing education credits necessary to maintain their professional licensing. Several jurisdictions, notably Montgomery, Prince George's and Carroll Counties, noted significant increases in the number of custody evaluations required. Figure 15. Cases Referred for Custody Evaluations Mental Health Evaluations When serious mental health issues have been identified, a court may need an evaluation of an individual or family members before making child access decisions. All Maryland Circuit Courts have some mechanism for requesting an in- depth assessment of the mental health of a party or child. In some jurisdictions, this services is provided by contractual psychiatrists or psychologists retained by the court. In most jurisdictions, however, this service is provided by making a referral to one of several private providers identified by the court. These types of evaluations are costly to provide. While not needed in all cases, they provide critical information to the court and the parties in those cases where mental health issues are raised. The parties are normally required to pay for these services, although the court makes fee waivers available to income eligible litigants. Figure 16. Cases Referred for Mental Health Evaluations Substance Abuse Assessments Many courts have devised ways to arrange for drug and alcohol testing where substance abuse has been alleged. In some jurisdictions, onsite, same- day urine testing can be done. This can improve the accuracy of reports and the speed with which they can be made available. Figure 17. Substance Abuse Screenings, Evaluations and Treatment Promoting Healthy Parent- Child Relationships Visitation Services Visitation services promote family relationships and parent- child access while preserving the safety and security of family members. These services can become especially critical when there have been allegations of family violence or substance abuse. Without access to supervised visitation or monitored exchange, some parent- child relationships would be completely disrupted or limited unnecessarily. Monitored Exchange Services provide a neutral setting for parents to drop off and exchange children before and after visits. By using a staffed, neutral site, parents can avoid contact, thereby minimizing the possibility of a hostile or violent confrontation. These services promote parent- child relationships and minimize the trauma to which children are sometimes exposed. Supervised Visitation Centers provide a neutral setting where non- custodial parents can spend time with their children. Trained professionals, many of whom have a mental health background, staff these centers. A structured activity may be offered. In many cases, the visitation center will report to the court on whether the parties are participating and/ or how the visits went. Supervised visitation services protect children while promoting their relationship with their parent. Figure 18. Cases Referred for Visitation Services 13 Programs to Support Non- Custodial Parents Courts can support families and reduce post- judgment activity by facilitating stable relationships between non- custodial parents and their children. The Circuit Court for Worcester County has engaged in a fruitful partnership with that county's Health Department to establish a countywide Nurturing Fathers program. Nurturing Fathers is a 10- week parent education program for non- custodial fathers who are not engaged in ongoing, consistent relationships with their children. The program provides fathers with experiences that allow new ways of thinking to change parenting attitudes and behaviors, and to aid them in establishing more nurturing, rewarding relationships with their children and co- parents. The program is supported by the court's Family Services Program as well as a Special Project Grant made available through the Maryland Judiciary. During Fiscal Year 2006, 73 fathers participated in and successfully completed the Nurturing Fathers program. Caroline County Department of Social Services operates a program, also funded by the Judiciary under a Special Project Grant, entitled Fatherhood for Now. The program, which accepts referrals from the courts and other agencies, provides employment development, parenting skills development, life counseling and assistance with child support related issues to non- custodial fathers. Participants also attend monthly DADS ( Dads All Deserve Support) meetings and are referred to a range of additional community- based resources. The program served 49 fathers during Fiscal Year 2006, 29 of which were new cases and 20 continued from the year prior. Other jurisdictions have begun to focus on providing employment support programs for non- custodial parents to support them in their efforts to support their children. Helping Children Adjust to Changes in Their Family Psycho- educational Programs for Children A number of Circuit Court Family Divisions and Family Services Programs offer programs to aid children in coping with changes that are happening in their divorcing or separating families. These " psycho- educational" programs range from classes, which provide information, to more in- depth therapeutic groups which meet for several weeks and which provide children an opportunity to express and process what is going on in their lives. Figure 19. Cases Including a Referral to Children's Psycho- educational Program One unique program benefits children who have been exposed to domestic violence. The Carroll County Family Services Program is one of three agencies that can refer families with a history of domestic violence to the Violent Acts Pilot Program operated by the Carroll County Youth Services Bureau. There children are assessed and families offered brief strategic family therapy to address the needs of children considered at risk because of exposure to adult violence or because the child has exhibited violent behavior. 14 Access to Justice Access to Justice remains essential to the success of the State's family justice system, especially as so many family litigants appear without benefit of counsel. The Judiciary maintains key resources that benefit those of limited means, those of varying backgrounds and abilities, and those without counsel. The Judiciary has formed key partnerships with the legal services delivery community to enhance access to pro bono representation and to promote greater access to representation in family cases. Standard 1.1 Equal Access Maryland's family divisions ensure that court services are accessible equally to all litigants, regardless of race, ethnic background, religious affiliation or socio- economic status. A Network of Statewide Resources The Maryland Judiciary promotes equal access to the family justice system in a variety of ways. Maryland Circuit Courts operate a statewide network of family law self- help centers. These free walk- in legal clinics offer forms, advice and information to self- represented persons. Family law self- help centers served over 39,000 individuals in Fiscal Year 2006. The Maryland Judiciary provides a large volume of Domestic Relations Forms to assist self- represented litigants in divorce, custody, visitation, child support, domestic violence and name change cases. The forms are provided through the Internet in fillable PDF. This permits users to download and print completed forms for filing. A simple, online interface assists users in identifying which forms they need. The entire body of forms and instructions are also available in a bilingual Spanish/ English format. Similarly, the entire family section of the Maryland Judiciary website has been translated into Spanish, providing Spanish- speakers with the same depth of information available to English speakers. Through its Special Projects Grant program, the Department of Family Administration funds a statewide Legal Forms Helpline. The Helpline, operated by the Women's Law Center of Maryland, provides assistance with forms in English and Spanish. Attorneys answer the helpline and provide basic assistance with the forms and family law procedures upon request. Overcoming Linguistic and Cultural Barriers Maryland courts have adopted a number of strategies to assist non- English speakers and others who may need assistance in navigating the family justice system. Spoken word and sign language interpreters are available for court appearances. The costs of the interpreter are provided by the court. Courts have experimented with a variety of ways to make court services and educational programs available to non- English speakers or those needing an accommodation due to a disability. The Circuit Court for Montgomery County, for example, offers simultaneous translation for participants in its co- parenting education classes. In Fiscal Year 2006 simultaneous translation was used in 143 sessions of the course in 16 different languages. 15 Several small Mid- Shore counties on the Eastern Shore collaborated to offer a co- parenting course in Spanish. The Circuit Court for Prince George's County has an Hispanic Community Liaison. That employee serves as a visible presence in the Family Division and, along with several bilingual employees provides direct, one- on- one assistance to the members of the Latino community. The liason assists self- represented litigants and works with the community to identify the needs of Latinos to enhance access to the court and the family justice system. The Frederick County Circuit Court is another example of a court that has adapted to the specific needs of its community. That jurisdiction has a large deaf population due to the presence in that county of the Maryland School for the Deaf. As a result there is a higher demand for sign language interpretation. To ensure deaf residents can utilize the Family Law Clinic, that court's self- help center, the clinic has a sign language interpreter one day per week during its regular operations. Standard 1.2 Cost of Access Maryland's Family Divisions must ensure that court services are accessible equally to all litigants, regardless of their ability to pay for the services, and supply certain core services. Leveling the Playing Field Throughout the State As a condition of accepting Family Division / Family Services Program grant funds, each jurisdiction agrees to provide a fee waiver for individuals that meet certain income- eligibility criteria. The income guidelines that have been adopted are those devised each year by the Maryland Legal Services Corporation. The guidelines are based on household size and household income and are tied to the Maryland median income and the federal poverty guidelines. Some jurisdictions have extended the reach of this initiative by offering partial fee waivers on a sliding scale to individuals that would not qualify for a full fee waiver under the Judiciary- wide guidelines. The use of a uniform fee waiver standard can have a disparate impact on the varying jurisdictions. Jurisdictions where the rate of individuals living in poverty is higher will have to use a higher percentage of grant funds to provide services for indigents. For example, in Baltimore City, 23% of divorce, custody, visitation and/ or child support filings were accompanied by an order waiving the filing fee. 4 The Department of Family Administration continues to be responsible for managing the State's pro bono reporting process. Maryland's 31,000 attorneys are required to report on their pro bono activities each calendar year. The Administrative Office of the Courts works with the Standing Committee on Pro Bono Legal Services to promote pro bono activity among the Maryland Bar, to increase access to justice for Maryland's poor. Finally, the Department of Family Administration makes Special Project Grants available to a number of legal 4 Id., p. 4. services programs to enhance access to representation and a range of legal services for litigants in family case types. Eliminating Costs Where Possible Depending on how the service is provided and funded, courts have worked to reduce or eliminate the financial burden on litigants where possible. Some jurisdictions are able to offer certain services free- of- charge. For example, the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County offers its co- parenting education course entitled Family Law Orientation Workshop, or FLOW, free- of- charge to court- ordered participants. They also offer the children's program, Kids Count, free as well. Agency Collaboration Reduces Costs The same court is able to offer substance abuse testing and analysis, including urinalysis testing on site, because of the presence of two court substance abuse assessors assigned by the local Health Department to serve the court's Family Division and drug court. The Circuit Court for Baltimore City is able to provide best interest attorneys for children in cases where needed, regardless of the ability of parent's to pay, by taking advantage of a program operated by the Maryland Volunteer Lawyers Service. That agency trains volunteer attorneys and coordinates assignment with the court when a judge or master deem that representation for a chlid is appropriate. Through a grant from the Maryland Mediation and Conflict Resolution Office, the Circuit Court for Cecil County was able to offer no cost mediation for self- represented litigants in that jurisdiction. 16 Standard 1.3 Safety, Accessibility and Convenience Maryland's Family Divisions aspire to ensure that court facilities are safe, accessible, and convenient to use, and they aspire to develop a strategic plan to implement this standard by working with domestic violence advocacy groups and local governments, among others. Providing Services in a Convenient Setting Maryland courts continue to offer key services during evening and weekend hours to make it easier and convenient to take advantage of court- based services. Most courts offer their co- parenting education and psycho- educational programs for children after hours and on weekends. Some programs are offered at community sites convenient for families. For example, to enhance access to two key programs for children, the Circuit Court for Dorchester County now offers its 8- week programs, Children in the Middle and Teens in the Middle, immediately after school at two public schools as a part of school Wellness Programs. In addition to the court, guidance counselors and teachers are also able to refer children to the program. Rural courts often have to work hard to ensure the full range of resources are available locally. Transportation and time barriers can be just as difficult to overcome at times as financial ones. The Circuit Court for Dorchester County sent a family attorney and mental health professional to mediation training offered by the Department of Family Administration during Fiscal Year 2006. For the first time, the court now has local mediators to whom it can refer cases. In the past all mediators came from outside the county. Incarcerated parents are an important but difficult to reach constituency. A number of Maryland courts make special efforts to reach this population. In Kent County, the court has collaborated with the local detention center to offer co- parenting courses at the facility. In Somerset County, which has a large incarcerated population due the presence of the Eastern Correction Institute ( ECI), the court coordinates with Alternative Directions, Inc. Their staff visit ECI monthly to assist with forms, filing, service and the summons process. Finding Creative Ways to Expand Resources Courts have experimented with a variety of collaborations and new funding sources to find ways to expand existing services. In January, 2006, the Circuit Court for Baltimore County was able to open a new Progressive Visitation Center for parents in Child in Need of Assistance ( CINA) and Termination of Parental Rights ( TPR) cases. The center, funded by the Baltimore County Department of Social Services, offers direct assistance, education and support to visiting parents and children, while providing a safe environment for parent- child contact. Carroll County was also able to expand visitation center hours with a grant from the Maryland Department of Human Resources. Hours were expanded to include Saturday mornings. The Carroll County Commissioners also contributed to the program by providing the center with an exclusive lease for a two- story building recently purchased by the County. Walking the Walk – Making the Courts Family Friendly As courts seek to make the legal process enhance the strength and well- being of Maryland families, courts must " walk the walk" and strive to ensure facilities are family friendly. Many courts provide specialized child waiting rooms. The Circuit Court for Baltimore City continues to offer a staffed child waiting area at Courthouse East where parents can leave their children while they are participating in a case. Non- staffed waiting areas are outfitted at the court's Juvenile Justice Center a few blocks away. During Fiscal Year 2006, the Circuit Court for Prince George's County was given a local grant to enhance the child waiting area with child- friendly storage, shelving, furnishings, multi- ethnic and child- centered rugs, puzzles and books. Some courts, for example, the Circuit Court for Kent County, have installed diaper changing areas in all restrooms. Enhancing Access to Justice for Victims of Violence and the Under- represented The Department of Family Administration continues to enhance access to the family justice system through Special Projects Grants. These funds are awarded for a broad range of projects that enhance access to the family justice system. A large number of these grants are given to organizations providing safety planning and legal representation to victims of domestic violence. A list of projects receiving Special Project Grant funds in Fiscal Year 2006 is provided. 17 Special Project Grants The following Special Project Grants were awarded in Fiscal Year 2006 to support Maryland's family justice system. GRANTEE/ project CAROLINE CO. DSS / fatherhood for now CIRCUIT COURT FOR BALTIMORE CITY/ child- centered mediation project DVSARC( DOVE CENTER)/ legal advocacy initiative FOR ALL SEASONS/ family visitation center HEARTLY HOUSE/ courthouse outreach and victim advocacy HEARTLY HOUSE/ legal services program relocation HOUSE OF RUTH / protective order advocacy representation project – baltimore city district court HOUSE OF RUTH / protective order advocacy representation project – prince george's circuit and district courts HOUSE OF RUTH / protective order advocacy representation project – montgomery county circuit court LAW FOUNDATION OF PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY / latino legal access project LEGAL AID BUREAU / child custody representation project LIFE CRISIS CENTER / all about children LIFE CRISIS CENTER / domestic violence legal services program MARYLAND VOLUNTEER LAWYERS SERVICE / safenet MARYLAND VOLUNTEER LAWYERS SERVICE / washington county domestic violence legal services MARYLAND VOLUNTEER LAWYERS SERVICE / domestic violence expansion project SOUTHERN MD CTR FOR FAMILY ADOVOCACY / domestic violence legal services program WOMEN'S LAW CTR / protective order advocacy representation project – baltimore city circuit court WOMEN'S LAW CTR / protective order advocacy representation project – baltimore county circuit court WOMEN'S LAW CTR / protective order advocacy representation project – carroll county circuit and district court WOMEN'S LAW CTR / legal forms helpline WORCESETER CO. HEALTH DEPARTMENT / nurturing fathers program YWCA OF ANNAPOLIS AND ANNE ARUNDEL CO. / domestic violence legal services program – anne arundel circuit and district courts Expedition and Timeliness Family case types often contain an element of urgency. Delay can mean uncertainty, anxiety and suffering for all family members in custody cases. It can mean additional harm for children in child abuse and neglect cases. In child access cases delay can result in missed schooling or missed visits. In short, it is imperative that courts handle family matters effectively and efficiently. Maryland courts monitor their performance in light of statewide time standards. By conducting early scheduling conferences, front- loading services and ensuring cases are heard when scheduled they help ensure families are benefited by their experience with the court. Standard 2.1 Case Management System In order to provide for the fair, reasonable and expeditious resolution of all issues arising in family legal matters, Maryland's Family Divisions manage and operate a case management system that compels timely discovery and fruitful settlement negotiations with a view toward limiting the issues requiring trial. Family Matters Comprise Nearly One- Half the Circuit Court Caseload Nearly one- half of all cases filed in the Maryland Circuit Courts are within the jurisdiction of the Family Divisions. The bulk of cases occupying the time of judges, masters and court staff are those with the most complex issues – child access, family violence, delinquency, child abuse and neglect 18 It is essential that the State of Maryland dedicate sufficient resources to ensure that the court can manage these complex cases effectively, and reach decisions that promote family health and stability. The Maryland Judiciary has requested 8 ½ new masters positions in the upcoming budget cycle to aid the court in more promptly and effectively addressing domestic and juvenile cases. During the one- year period from July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2006, Maryland Circuit Courts initiated or opened 127,974 family cases. This represented 65% of all civil legal matters and 46% of the total Circuit Court caseload. Figure 20. Family Caseload as a Percentage of Overall Circuit Court Caseload - FY06 Figure 21. Family Case Types Heard by Maryland Circuit Courts – FY06 19 Figure 22. Relative Family Caseload by Jurisdiction - FY06 Keeping an Eye on the Time During Fiscal Year 2006, Circuit Courts continued to monitor their compliance with time- to- disposition standards for a variety of case types. Annual time standards assessments are conducted and individual courts required to develop plans to improve their success rate in meeting standards for individual case types. Courts continued to refine family case management practices to improve their ability to comply with those standards and to enhance the timeliness with which family matters are resolved. For example, the Circuit Court for Cecil County established a committee to develop a new family law differentiated case management ( DCM) plan. Many jurisdictions set a scheduling conference early in the pendency of the case, to initiate critical services and evaluations, and to ensure the matter proceeds quickly towards resolution. The Circuit Court for Dorchester County uses regular status conferences to keep cases involving the self- represented moving forward. Another example of proactive case management occurs in Harford County where the Circuit Court clerk's office reviews cases that are eligible for a possible Rule 2- 507 dismissal for lack of prosecution. The court sends a notice to litigants advising them that if they do not take further action the case will be dismissed. This has permitted many to take action necessary to advance their case, and has helped the court eliminate unnecessary backlogs. Many courts now make this a regular part of their case management routine. Permanency planning liaisons regularly review CINA, TPR and adoption cases to ensure those cases are processed in a timely fashion, and in accordance with state and federal timelines. Finally, a number of Circuit Courts convene local juvenile task forces. These committees provide an opportunity for a wide range of stakeholders to coordinate their efforts in better managing and serving youth alleged to have committed a delinquent act. Child- Related Cases – Hearing and Resource Intensive Cases involving children are often the most critical and require the most resources. The Circuit Court for Baltimore City reports that during Fiscal Year 2006, eighty- four percent ( 84%) of family division cases involved children. 5 In the last several years, courts have been required to hold increasing numbers of hearings as federal and state statutes have been modified to require six- month reviews and more frequent court events to improve the monitoring of children in delinquency and child abuse cases. In addition the growth of problem- solving courts including juvenile and dependency drug courts, as well has truancy courts, has meant that courts hold more frequent hearings in cases where their oversight can make a difference. Improving Discovery At least one Maryland court has attempted to reduce the impact of discovery problems on case management and the timeliness of cases. The Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County developed a set of discovery guidelines and has trained local attorneys on the guidelines to aid counsel in the timely completion of discovery. 5 Id., p. 5. 20 Table 2. Total Family Cases Filed or Reopened in Fiscal Year 2006 Jurisdiction Divorce/ Annul Other Domestic Adopt/ Guard Paternity DV Juv- Del Juv- CINS Juv- CINA Juv- Guard Juv- Adopt Juv- Peace Juv- Other Total Allegany 623 859 26 378 26 256 11 57 4 4 2244 Anne Arundel 3691 2204 341 848 315 1984 104 39 15 14 1 9556 Baltimore 4211 3233 280 951 509 4150 2 537 57 47 91 1 14069 Baltimore City 3234 1858 176 6269 220 7132 161 1652 260 280 217 14 21473 Calvert 872 808 31 1156 77 500 20 6 5 18 3493 Caroline 271 372 5 298 110 201 2 37 11 3 2 1312 Carroll 859 634 53 107 331 799 30 28 11 34 4 2890 Cecil 635 1262 37 477 172 311 87 8 8 3 3000 Charles 1051 926 39 721 276 884 32 30 17 1 3977 Dorchester 250 365 3 323 51 186 22 5 3 1208 Frederick 1316 1316 52 536 100 763 16 50 35 17 12 4213 Garrett 222 239 17 87 18 55 23 7 3 3 674 Harford 1577 1605 57 1109 304 701 159 27 20 22 5581 Howard 1212 645 49 306 118 769 40 10 5 8 3162 Kent 165 184 5 132 34 89 5 3 617 Montgomery 6234 1362 1763 1404 680 3877 266 31 15 89 15721 Prince George's 7146 3125 98 3198 654 4184 242 25 36 18708 Queen Anne's 287 248 10 137 12 197 14 3 2 1 911 Somerset 172 493 7 451 58 97 29 5 3 1315 St. Mary's 667 713 26 611 112 351 47 12 2 2 2543 Talbot 291 269 5 150 34 141 10 3 5 908 Washington 1115 2257 33 1181 44 728 2 247 13 25 12 5657 Wicomico 646 667 35 658 63 588 87 11 7 23 18 2803 Worcester 344 586 10 691 17 222 65 3 1 1939 Total 37091 26230 3158 22179 4335 29165 224 3860 616 522 549 45 127974 Standard 2.2 Protection of Victims of Domestic Violence The practices and procedures of Maryland's Family Divisions maximize protection efforts for victims of domestic violence by ensuring access to the courts, coordination of other family matters with domestic violence proceedings, and by securing a comprehensive understanding of individual and family history relative to violent conduct. The Family Divisions conduct adequate, independent screening and identify important family needs via an established domestic violence protocol. Maryland's family divisions endeavor to hear all ex parte petitions for relief from domestic violence as soon as possible after the alleged victim's entry into the court facility. Access to the Protection the Law Provides Protective Order Advocacy and Representation Projects ( POARP) and Related Programs To enhance the safety of victims of family violence, Maryland's Circuit Court Family Divisions and Family Services Programs take extraordinary measures to ensure those victims can access the legal system to obtain protection. All Maryland Circuit Courts refer victims to programs where they can receive assistance in developing a safety plan, legal advice, information and representation in a protective order hearing. All Circuit Courts also make referrals for abuser intervention programs and other treatment alternatives to address violent behavior. 21 There can be many obstacles impeding a victim's ability to seek protection – the victim may be subject to the control of the abuser, forbidden to leave the house or watched constantly. Phone calls or access to a family vehicle may be restricted. To eliminate as many obstacles as possible, a number of Circuit Courts provide on- site legal services programs for victims in the courthouse. Through Special Project Grants, the Department of Family Administration has extended the network of these Protective Order Advocacy and Representation Projects and projects operated under different names which provide a similar service. Operated by local domestic violence advocacy organizations, those programs have become a cornerstone of the safety net provided for victims through the Maryland Circuit Courts. Victims can meet with a paralegal or attorney, discuss the steps necessary to ensure their safety, obtain assistance in applying for a temporary protective order, and obtain representation at a subsequent protective order hearing – all without leaving the courthouse. The Administrative Office of the Courts applied for and was awarded a VAWA STOP Grant commencing October 1, 2005, to fund an Hispanic Outreach component for the Prince George's county POARP project. Through that program a bilingual attorney enhances the program's ability to serve Spanish- speaking and immigrant victims of domestic violence. Quality of Service for Victims of Family Violence The Department of Family Administration collects data from Special Project Grantees serving victims of family violence to ensure that these programs are adequately serving the persons for whom they are intended. Figure 23. SPG Grantees Serving Victims of DV - Type of Services Provided - FY06 24. SPG Grantees Serving Victims of Domestic Violence - Major Benefit Achieved - FY06 Figure 25. SPG Grantees Serving Victims of Domestic Violence - Cases Opened - FY06 In follow- up interviews with POARP clients, the Women's Law Center found that: 99% would return to court if they needed protection from domestic violnece. 86% said it was easier to use POARP services because they were located in the courthouse. 22 84% would have have had a lawyer but for the program. 100% would use POARP legal services again. 99% felt safer. 33% report violations of the protective order ( 67% report no violations). 14% report subsenquent threats or violence ( 86% report no subsequent threats or violence Figure 26. SPG Grantees Serving Victims of Domestic Violence DVSARC – Dove Center POARP – House of Ruth/ Women's Law Center Southern MD Ctr for Family Advocacy Heartly House Life Crisis Center YWCA of Annapolis & Anne Arundel Co. Safenet – MVLS Washington Co. DVLS – MVLS Family Violence and Mediation The Administrative Office of the Courts, with a variety of stakeholders including domestic violence advocates and Maryland's Mediation and Conflict Resolution Office ( MACRO), has developed a set of screening protocols and tools to aid courts in making more appropriate referrals for mediation. The document, entitled Screening Cases for Family Violence Issues to Determine Suitability for Mediation and Other Forms of ADR: A Screening Protocol and Tools for Maryland Circuit Courts, has been distributed to judges, masters, clerks, coordinators, court professionals, self- help providers and mediators, and is available on the Judiciary's website. A series of regional trainings were held during 2005 and 2006. Follow- up is planned to determine the extent to which the tools are being used by courts. In addition to the protocols and tools, the Department of Family Administration worked with a variety of advocates to identify and promote clear policies about when mediation may not be appropriate. The Maryland Network Against Domestic Violence honored Chief Judge Bell in October, 2005, when he was given an award for his efforts to promote victim safety because of these initiatives. The members of the Domestic Violence Mediation Work Group were likewise honored with certificates of recognition. Access to Orders and Case Information $ 1.4 Million Grant Awarded to Advance Statewide Domestic Violence Database A new grant will permit the Administrative Office of the Courts ( AOC) to complete the Statewide Domestic Violence Database, a project designed to have a broad range of benefits for victims. The Department of Family Administration was awarded $ 1,439,736 under the federal Office of Violence Against Women's Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies Program. The award will permit the AOC's Judicial Information Systems ( JIS) Department to complete a comprehensive database of protective orders, peace orders and related case information. Grant funds will be used to bring on additional staff at JIS to advance the project. A portion of the funds will be provided to the Maryland Network Against Domestic Violence to convene an advisory group including representatives from victim advocacy groups to ensure the project is developed in a manner that will benefit domestic violence victims. The interactive database will house all protective and peace orders issued in the state. The Judiciary anticipates that its web- enabled interface will eventually permit law enforcement officers to access protective orders from the field. The system is being designed to interface with the Maryland Interagency Law Enforcement System ( MILES) and the FBI's National Crime Information Center ( NCIC) to enhance sharing of critical information and improve victim safety. 23 24 Standard 2.3 Processing Child Dependency Matters The Family Division has jurisdiction over child abuse and neglect procedures so the court will manage and operate a system of case management standards and procedures that is reflective of the Foster Care Court Improvement Project ( FCCIP) recommendations published in 1997. The Judiciary's efforts in serving the needs of child victims of abuse and neglect continues to be driven by the work of the Foster Care Court Improvement Project ( FCCIP) Implementation Committee and its various subcommittees. During Fiscal Year 2006, the FCCIP continued to meet and work on a variety of fronts towards reform efforts to improve the Judiciary's ability to respond to the needs of Children in Need of Assistance. Key Child Welfare Innovations Model Court Programs Under the leadership of the FCCIP, the Judiciary has contracted with the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges ( NCJFCJ) to create two Model Courts – in Baltimore City and Charles County. Lead judges in both jurisdictions have been identified and a preliminary site visit by NCJFCJ staff occurred in May 2005. FCCIP staff and representatives from both jurisdictions participated in the NCJFCJ annual all- sites conference in October, 2005. Since that time, both jurisdictions have been actively planning and implementing initiatives for their respective courts. Dependency Mediation and Drug Court Programs Small state grants to start and sustain dependency mediation programs have been awarded to 14 Maryland jurisdictions. Juvenile courts have also been awarded grants to assist in newly developed dependency drug court programs. There are now four Family Dependency Treatment Courts in various stages of operation or planning. Capturing Additional Resources – New Federal Funding to Enhance Training, Data Collection The FCCIP applied for and was awarded additional funds under the federal Deficit Reduction Act. These funds will focus on enhancing the collection and analysis of child welfare data and improving training efforts. Currently, the FCCIP is making plans as to how the awarded funds will be used. Improving Consistency and Performanc FCCIP Jurisdictional Site Visits As a follow up to regional multi- disciplinary training meetings, the FCCIP has begun conducting jurisdictional site visits. The site visits are an opportunity for the Foster Care Court Improvement Project to assist courts with implementing child welfare best practices as well as other initiatives. The goals of the site visit are to collect additional statistical data, to substantiate preliminary results of the workload assessment, and to provide technical assistance in those areas identified. During the visits, FCCIP staff met with administrative judges, juvenile judges, masters, attorneys, clerks and DSS representatives to obtain their assessment of the juvenile court practice. Additional information was collected by observing court proceedings, reviewing court files and comparing data reports. After the visits, courts will be provided with a summary of what strengths/ needs have been identified, as well as a list of recommendations. FCCIP began the site visits in March, 2006, and completed the visits in December, 2006. Implementation Committee The Implementation Committee is the oversight committee of the FCCIP. The Honorable Patrick L. Woodward, Court of Special Appeals, continues to chair this committee. The Honorable David W. Young, Circuit Court for Baltimore City, was recently appointed to the position of Vice- Chair. Recently, the Implementation Committee has expanded its membership to enhance collaborative relationships among key stakeholders. This action was taken as a direct response to the National Judicial Leadership Summit's Child Welfare Action Plan. The Implementation Committee continues to oversee and approve the work of the various subcommittees. It is responsible for oversight of grant expenditures and setting the vision for the FCCIP. The Implementation Committee is also responsible for overseeing the implementation of the Title IV- E and Child and Family Services Review ( CFSR) court- related program improvement plan items, as well as the Maryland Child Welfare Action Plan developed as a result of the National Judicial Leadership Summit for the Protection of 25 Children, sponsored by the National Center for State Courts ( NCSC) and the National Council for Juvenile and Family Court Judges ( NCJFCJ). Additionally, the committee continues to support new initiatives that further the goal of improving the court's processing of CINA cases. Reassessment The American Bar Association ( ABA) completed an evauation of the state's Court Improvement Project in July, 2004. Although most of the recommendations of the evaluation/ assessment have been incorporated into its Strategic Plan, the FCCIP continues to monitor progress to ensure all recommendations are addressed. Measuring Judicial Workload FCCIP continued its efforts to understand child welfare caseloads in the court to ensure sufficent judicial resources. The FCCIP staff worked with the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges ( NCJFCJ) Permanency Planning Department to modify the Court Performance and Workload Assessment Worksheets developed by the American Bar Association Center, the National Center for State Courts and the NCJFC. The worksheets, as well as the formula were derived using the specifications in the publication, BUILDING A BETTER COURT: Measuring and Improving Court Performance and Judicial Workload in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases. The worksheets were completed by judges, masters, attorneys and clerks throughout the State. The University of Maryland School of Social Work completed an analysis and provided a final report in September, 2005. The report identified the need for additional judicial resources in the state. With the help of the University of Maryland, FCCIP is now implementing Phase II of the assessment which includes site visits, court observation, file reviews and focus groups. Judiciary Involvement with the CFSR and Title IV- E Process Title IV- E Review From June 27, 2005 to July 1, 2005 the Administration for Children and Families ( ACF) conducted the secondary eligibility review of the State's Title IV- E foster care maintenance program for the period of April 1, 2004 to September 30, 2004. Fortunately, Maryland was found to be in substantial conformity after the secondary review. Mr. Lett, ACF Regional Administrator, indicated " dramatic improvement when compared with the results of the initial primary review." 6 Improvement was 6 Lett, D., Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, REgional Administrator. Letter to Secretary Christopher McCabe, especially noted in the courts' orders. The report indicated that " specifically as it relates to judicial determinations regarding the State agency's reasonable efforts to finalize the permanency plan, many high quality orders were seen..." Also, " some very fine examples of court- approved permanency plans for older children were noted, particularly in the Baltimore City sample cases." 7 FCCIP efforts to assist the State, and more specifically the court, with accomplishing the aforementioned strengths were: Sponsored a second round of regional multi- disciplinary trainings throughout the State to inform and educate all stakeholders about the requirements as well as to address practice issues that affect compliance; Disseminated updated and revised uniform court orders with requisite language and instructions to meet State and Federal laws; Resumed clerk and other court personnel training on uniform terminology, hearing outcomes, and new State statutory requirements; Provided technical assistance to individual jurisdictions upon request as a follow up to regional multi- disciplinary training meetings and on- site visits; Worked with internal information systems staff to implement uniform court orders into the automated system and on the Judiciary website; Presented both the initial and secondary review findings to the Maryland Conference of Circuit Judges to enlist their support in implementing change throughout the State; Currently conducting jurisdictional site visits of local juvenile courts; and Facilitated the implementation of Model Courts in two jurisdictions. As a result of this significant improvement, Maryland will not have to submit to another review until Federal Fiscal Year 2008. CFSR Review and Subsequent Program Improvement Plan ( PIP) Maryland completed its on- site Child and Family Services Review( CFSR) in November, 2003, and the final report was issued in June, 2004. Since that time, Maryland has entered into a two- year period during which it is required to implement a Program Improvement Plan ( PIP). That period ends March, 2007. The FCCIP has been actively involved in the on- site review and the development and implementation of the PIP in the following ways: Maryland Department of Human Resources. September 29, 2005, page 1. 7 Lett, D. Maryland Title IV- E Foster Care SEcondary Eligibility Review Period Under Review: April 10 to September 30, 2004, p. 7. 26 Sponsored two series of regional multi- disciplinary training meetings to address practice issues that affect compliance. Worked closely with the Baltimore City DSS preparation team by sitting on the case review system subcommittee, and arranging interviews for the judge, master, and attorneys during the on- site review; Worked with the lead judges and masters in the three site areas to educate them about the CFSR process. This included arranging a training program for them given by a DSS manager; Provided a session on the CFSR at the annual judicial conference; Participated with the on- site review; Participated on the State review team; Participated on the PIP Executive Committee and various subcommittees; Requested and received input from the courts on the development of the CFSR PIP; Participate on the PIP Steering Committee; Co- chair the Legal and Court Practice Subcommittee; Incorporated priority areas into existing FCCIP committee structure; Participated at the Program Improvement Plan Annual Federal and Regional Site Visit.; Submitted revisions to be included in the Maryland PIP that more accurately reflect the FCCIP and the Legal and Court Practice Committee initiatives. Developed the Maryland's Best Practices Manual as a primary initiative to address many of the issues outlined in the court related portions of the PIP. The CFSR PIP initiatives have been incorporated into the FCCIP strategic plan and will be an ongoing initiative of the FCCIP. The FCCIP staff continues to work closely with the agency through monthly meetings, conference calls, report submissions, etc. and informs the courts and other stakeholders of its initiatives and progress through various memorandums, reports, summaries and Department of Family Administration newsletters. This includes updates on the Title IV- E and CFSR initiatives. Legislative Subcommittee In the Fall of 2005, the FCCIP Implementation Committee renamed the CINA Subcommittee the Legislative Subcommittee. The new title more accurately reflects the scope of the work of the subcommittee which focuses not just on CINA but on TPR, adoption and guardianship issues as well. The Legislative Subcommittee was chaired by the Honorable Pamela L. North, Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County. The subcommittee currently consists of judges, masters, attorneys, representatives of social services agencies, a representative of the Citizen's Review Board and other experts in the child welfare field in Maryland. In 2005, the Legislative Subcommittee orchestrated the submission of legislation that revised Maryland's TPR/ adoption statute. The bill was signed by the Governor on May 26, 2005, and became effective January 1, 2006. The separation of the statute into three ( 3) subtitles, DSS- Related TPR and Adoption Proceedings, Private Child Placement Agency Guardianship and Adoption Proceedings, and Independent Adoptions Proceedings, affords judges, masters, practitioners, and others the ability to look in one section and chronologically follow the legal process for the type of proceeding in which they are involved. A workgroup from the Legislative Subcommittee developed training materials for all stakeholders on the new law. Judges, masters and attorneys were trained on the new statute during the annual conference that was held in October, 2005. Additionally, juvenile clerks were trained on the new statute in December, 2005, and January, 2006. The Legislative Subcommittee also completed some revisions of the TPR/ adoption statute in 2006. The purpose of the revisions were to clarify additions to the statute, restore provisions of the law omitted inadvertently through the bill drafting process or enactment, to clarify language in the statue making it consistent and clear to practitioners, to make adequate provisions parallel throughout the statute and to restore a section specific definition. These amendments were signed by the Governor on May 9, 2006, and became effective June 1, 2006. A workgroup from the Legislative Subcommittee has revised and updated the Maryland Rules to coincide with the new TPR/ adoption statute. This process included creating consent forms which are easy to understand by practitioners and litigants, including children. They will promote consistency and afford the courts and practitioners with the guidance in this very complicated area of the law to ensure sound judicial outcomes. The Judicial Conference Rules Committee approved the new rules in May, 2006. The revised rules are currently pending before the Court of Appeals. Currently, the Legislative Subcommittee is working on revisions to the CINA Statute. The subcommittee will continue its comprehensive review of the current statute and plan to present more extensive revisions in future legislative sessions. Representation, Practice and Procedure Subcommittee In Fall, 2005, the FCCIP Implementation Committee changed the Representation Subcommittee's name to the Representation, Practice and Procedure Subcommittee in order to be more reflective of the activities of the subcommittee in its efforts to ensure that all parties are adequately represented. The Representation, Practice and 27 Procedure Subcommittee continues to be chaired by the Honorable Katherine P. Savage, Circuit Court for Montgomery County. Training Programs for Counsel This year a central focus of the Representation, Practice and Procedure Subcommittee was on ensuring that all counsel are adequately educated and trained. The 3rd annual attorney training was held in October, 2005, for all attorneys. The attorney training concentrated on the State's new adoption and guardianship law, Permanency for Families and Children Act of 2005. Additionally, all attorneys were invited to the Multidisciplinary Day of the 8th Annual Child Abuse and Neglect Judicial Conference in October, 2005. The subcommittee planned and implemented the 4th Annual Attorney Training in October, 2006. This was a full day training held for attorneys geared towards CINA and TPR practitioners, and included sessions on Trial Skills, the Appellate Process, and Permanency Issues. The subcommittee also continues to promote and encourage private attorneys to represent parents. In June 2006, the FCCIP sponsored in conjunction with the Office of the Public Defender another full day training program for attorneys interested in representing parents in Termination of Parental Rights Matters. In exchange for attending this free training program, attorneys agreed to sign up to handle at least one case. Appellate Issues The subcommittee continues to work on ensuring a better appellate process for the child welfare cases. The Subcommittee has been meeting with the Clerk of the Court of Special Appeals ( CSA) to work out some administrative barriers that may be occurring. The FCCIP hired a legal intern to gather information tracking CINA and TPR cases through the appellate process to better ascertain potential barriers to a timely appeals process in these cases. Additionally, the subcommittee redrafted the Notice of Appeal Form to assist in ensuring that CINA and TPR matters are properly directed through the State's expedited appeals process. Standards of Representation Standards of Representation for agency counsel and parents counsel are being drafted by the Representation, Practice and Procedure Subcommittee. The subcommittee is working with agency attorneys to draft guidelines of representation for agency attorneys. Statistics Subcommittee Judge Woodward continues to chair the Statistics Oversight Subcommittee. Master Peter Tabatsko, Circuit Court in Carroll County, continues as the Vice Chair. The Statistics Oversight Subcommittee continues efforts in conjunction with the MAJIC contractor to collaborate with each of the four system operators to monitor the integration of dependency data in Maryland. The most significant initiative involves gaining access to the Judicial Information System ( JIS) server to receive and house all data. The overall goal is to produce reliable statewide child welfare data, however, the Statistics Oversight Subcommittee has also begun encouraging individual courts to monitor their own performance in the area. In 2001, the Judiciary began implementation of Case Time Standards in certain case types for the Circuit and District Courts. The child welfare cases had not initially been included. In 2004, the Judiciary expanded the Case Time Standards initiative to include the child welfare cases. Data definitions have been developed and the first assessment of child welfare data occurred September, 2005, through November, 2005. A final report was produced in December, 2005. The report has provided the necessary impetus for courts to begin to utilize their individual MIS system reporting capabilities and learn what specific statutory time standards the court is not meeting. FCCIP is also working more closely with courts through the site visits to promote implementation of data quality assurance initiatives and to provide technical assistance when needed. Data Entry Training Programs Training programs for clerks and other court personnel have continued during this reporting period. The 2005 training series was divided up into a beginner's training and a more advanced clerk's training. The Fall, 2006, course addressed gaps in the training of court personnel on specific issues identified through FCCIP site visits as impacting data quality and addressed the level of compliance with statutory time standards, the number of families experiencing dependency cases, and the amount of time children are spending in the foster care system. Uniform Court Orders The Statistics Oversight Subcommittee completed the revision of the Uniform Court Orders in February, 2006. The revised court orders include language to alert the users about the ASFA exceptions. The revised orders have been disseminated on diskette and published on the Judiciary website. Automated court orders were developed for use by courts on the UCS system and a pilot training and implementation initiative began in Fall, 2006. 28 Quality Assurance An on- site review committee and protocol was developed by the Statistics Oversight Subcommittee. The on- site review is assisting the FCCIP in determining whether accurate information is being recorded and also is providing the FCCIP and JIS staff useful information as to whether technical assistance to the end users of the database systems is needed. New Case Management System Efforts are also underway with JIS to develop a technical document for dependency cases which will be used by JIS to develop the request for proposal for a new statewide information system. The technical document will include CINA, TPR and adoption case flow diagrams, a data definition dictionary and functional requirements such as how the interface will look and function. The case flow diagrams and data definition dictionary are currently in the review stage. Training Subcommittee Conferences The Training Subcommittee sponsored its 9th Annual Child Abuse and Neglect Judicial Conference on October 16- 18, 2006, at the Harbourtowne Conference Center and Resort in St. Michael's, Maryland. The focus of this year's conference continued to be on the results of Maryland's CFSR and ways to improve in the areas identified as needing improvement. A great deal of focus was placed on establishing permanency for youth. Juvenile judges, masters, attorneys, state and local agency staff, CASA representatives, representatives from the Citizens' Review Board for Children, education, and mental health advocates were be invited to the first day of the conference. Some of the featured topics included APPLA, Concurrent Planning, Aging Out, Gender Specific Issues, Barriers to Adoption, Dually Adjudicated Youth, and other nuts and bolts sessions. Judicial Institute Courses The FCCIP continued to sponsor training programs through Maryland's Judicial Institute during this reporting period. In March, 2005, a full day beginner's dependency training program was held. In September, 2006, an intensive full day session on the new TPR/ Adoptions Statute was offered. Maryland Child Welfare Bench Book Revision The FCCIP Training Subcommittee in collaboration with the National Council on Juvenile and Family Court Judges ( NCJFCJ) has begun working on making revisions to the existing Maryland Child Welfare Bench Book originally produced in 2000. Standard 2.4 Resolution of Juvenile Delinquency Cases All juvenile delinquency cases are resolved in a prompt and thorough manner within the Family Division, according to the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Maryland, statutory law, and precedent in order to protect society while applying the means necessary to adequately address the developmental needs of the child before the court. Juvenile Law Subcommittee The Juvenile Law Subcommittee of the Judicial Conference Committee on Family Law remains active, tracking and reviewing legislation that affects Maryland's juvenile justice system, proving policy guidance on juvenile issues and planning and hosting the " delinquency day" at Maryland's Child Abuse, Neglect & Delinquency Options ( CANDO) Conference. The 3nd annual " delinquency day" was held in October, 2005, which featured key speakers from the Department of Juvenile Services, including Secretary Kenneth Montague, as well as a researcher from the National Institutes of Health who provided a keynote address on adolescent brain development. The Juvenile Law Subcommittee has also continued collaborating with the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene to implement the new juvenile competency bill passed during the 2005 legislative session. Judges and masters attended a training session during Fall, 2005, on the new competency bill and worked during 2006 on the implement of the second bill passed during the 2006 session which provides more details on how the competency evaluations and additional services are to be implemented. ASFA Compliance in Delinquency Matters The Department of Family Administration continues its efforts to improve the courts' ability to comply with the 29 Adoption and Safe Families Act ( ASFA) in handling delinquency matters. ASFA, enacted in 1997, amended federal foster care laws to emphasize child safety, permanency, and well- being. States who comply with these provisions are eligible for federal foster care matching funds. There are many children involved in the juvenile justice system who have been or will be placed in foster care at some time, or who will at some point receive services through the child welfare system. States are eligible for federal foster care matching funds for delinquent youth in the foster care system. Because a child who has been removed from the home in a delinquency case may someday end up in a foster home or child care institution, and because many of the findings required by ASFA must be made the first time a child is removed from the home, those findings must be made in a detention order or other court order as a part of the delinquency case. This ensures that the state can at some point receive federal foster care funds. To aid the Department of Juvenile Services in accessing those funds, the Maryland Judiciary has developed a set of form orders for statewide use. The uniform delinquency orders will help ensure that courts are making appropriate findings required under ASFA. The Judiciary also used the 2005 CAN DO conference as an opportunity to train judges and masters in how to ensure they are following ASFA in handling delinquency matters. An additional seminar is scheduled for February, 2007, to train court staff to ensure orders are properly prepared. Local Efforts to Improve the Court's Response to Juvenile Justice Issues Juvenile Drug Courts With the help of the Maryland Drug Treatment Court Commission, a number of Maryland Circuit Courts continued to plan for and launch juvenile drug courts. There are fourteen juvenile drug courts currently in operation. The Circuit Court for Baltimore County, which operates its juvenile drug court in two locations, graduated 20 youth from the program in Fiscal Year 2006. That program served a total of 54 individuals during the year, providing the following services: 732 individual counseling sessions 1,595 face- to- face contacts between a juvenile drug court team member and a youth 352 parent to team members contacts 225 family counseling sessions 399 adolescent group meetings 805 individual review hearings with a 98% attendantce rate 2,465 urinalysis speciments collected with only 15% testing positive for drugs. 8 Some juvenile drug court participants have to overcome a range of barriers to attend the frequent review hearings that make the drug court experience unique. In St. Mary's County, the Circuit Court provides transportation to youth involved in the drug court to ensure their regular participation. Truancy Courts The 1st Circuit continued to refine is Truancy Reduction Pilot Program throughout Fiscal Year 2006. In addition to Wicomico County Circuit Court, which began hearing cases in January, 2006, Dorchester came on board in Spring, 2006 and Somerset in Fall, 2006. The Circuit Court for Worcester began in January, 2007. The court provides a problem- solving forum for addressing the underlying issues that prevent children from regularly attending school. The specialized problem- solving court is empowered to hear civil status offenses brought against truant children and criminal misdemeanors brought against parents. The court has a range of dispositions it can impose. Those measures, along with incentives, sanctions and monthly court appearances are designed to improve the child's attendance, achievement and attachment to school. Other courts have experimented with less formal approaches to truancy. In the Circuit Court for Prince George's County, Judge Melanie Shaw- Geter launched an educational program for parents, to reinforce the benefits of sending their children to school. Addressing Unique Geographic Needs – Ocean City Worcestr County faces some unique challenges in managing its caseload. For most the year, it is a relatively rural community with a population of approximately 43,000. During the Summer months, however, the population of Ocean City swells to 250,000- 300,000, and with it the demands on the court. Each Summer the court sees a spike in juvenile crime, domestic violence, runaway youth, homelessness and temporary workforce issues. 9 To address the increase in juvenile issues, the court launched two new programs in Fiscal Year 2006. With assistance from the Maryland Drug Treatment Court Commission, the court began both a juvenile drug court 8 Circuit Court for Baltimore County, Family Division Annual Report – Fiscal Year 2006, October 25, 2006, p. 15. 9 Anne C. Turner, Annual Report on Family Support Services for the Circuit Court for Worcester County. October 15, 2006, p. 1. 30 and an adult drug court. A regional drug court coordinator serves this program as well as other drug courts in the 1st Circuit. That court has also been planning to implement its own truancy court as a part of the 1st Circuit Truancy Reduction Pilot Program. After months of planning during Fiscal Year 2006 and 2007, the program heard its first cases in January, 2007. Worcester County Circuit Court also collaborates with the local Health Department and Core Service Agency to fund the " Alternative Directions" program at the Department of Juvenile Services, through which youth are provided a complete psycho- social evaluation, including mental health and substance abuse diagnoses. This program has enhanced access to evaluations for youth. Stakeholder Collaboration Many courts continue to convene and / or participate in local juvenile justice coordinating councils. These local stakeholder groups have often been the impetus for new case management and specialty court innovations. In August, 2005, the Circuit Court for Kent County joined the ranks of those courts involved in such groups by launching the Juvenile Coordinating Council ( JCC) for Kent County. The group began by examining what role alternative dispute resolution might play in delinquecy matters. JCC members explored and were trained in techniques of community conferencing by Dr. Lauren Abrams of the Community Conferencing Center in Baltimore. Standard 2.5 Coordination of Family Legal Issues The Family Divisions assess and identify all court matters relating to the same family in a timely and expeditious manner. In doing so, the Family Divisions apply uniform criteria for determining the need to coordinate or consolidate those matters in order to refer all matters involving the same family to the same judge or to the same case management personnel or team. A Team Approach Each jurisdiction has assembled a team of professionals to serve the needs of families and children. Those individuals may include family support services coordinators, parent educators, mediators, mental health professionals, custody evaluators, juvenile court coordinators, permanency planning liaisons, domestic violence coordinators, masters and judges. Typically, each administrative judge appoints a Family Division Judge- in- Charge who provides guidance and direction for the court's Family Division. Most Family Divisions hold regular meetings where information can be exchanged and policies developed. Casesearch The Judiciary has launched a new application which makes it much easier for court staff as well as members of the public to access information about related cases. The Casesearch feature, available through the Judiciary's website, provides basic information on all Maryland cases. A single data warehouse collates data from the various information systems operated by the Maryland courts. District and Circuit Court information alike is available. Court employees will soon have access to data in greater depth than members of the public once security issues are effectively addressed. Improving Communication in Family Violence Cases When the safety of family members is an issue, the coordination of information about those cases is especially important. To improve the ability of varying courts to communicate and coordinate their efforts in managing family violence cases, the Judiciary has undertaken an important information technology project. Judicial Information Systems ( JIS) has continued working towards the development of a single, integrated, web- enabled centralized database of all domestic violence cases. The Administrative Office of the Courts was awarded a $ 1.4 million grant under the Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies Program of the federal government, to advance the project. The two year grant should permit the project to accomplish most if not all of its goals. A stakeholder advisory group will be convened to consult on the project to ensure it benefits victims. 31 Equality, Fairness and Integrity A judicial system derives its power from the consent of the people it serves. It can only win that consent if it dispenses justice in a manner that is, and that is perceived to be, equitable, fair and imbued with integrity. Maryland courts guard that trust by managing processes where all litigants, regardless of their position or representational status, can have a fair hearing. The courts also work with agency partners to improve the effectiveness and enforceability of court orders. Finally, Maryland Family Divisions work to ensure equitable treatment for those working within the justice system, including court professionals. Standard 3.1 Integration of Related Family Matters Family Division litigants have enhanced ability to comply when there is integration of related matters so that changes or conflicting orders are minimized. Moreover, pro se litigants are afforded a uniform intake process that includes a uniform mechanism for case reception and establishment. Promoting Consistency of Practice Uniform Orders Maryland's Family Divisions promote consistency of practice by making available several bodies of uniform forms – for use by litigants, agency professionals and courts alike. The Domestic Relations Forms are uniform pleadings used by thousands of self- represented litigants each year. This large body of forms is distributed through a network of Family Law Self- Help Centers, where the self- represented can obtain assistance. Pleadings and other key forms are available for most family law case types. To aid courts and agency partners in complying with various federal and state laws, the Department of Family Administration and its Foster Care Court Improvement Project have developed uniform orders for use in CINA and delinquency matters. These orders have been distributed to all judges and masters, and are available on the Judiciary's website. The CINA orders have been incorporated into the state's case information system, UCS, so that orders can be automatically generated in the courtroom or in chambers. A Joint Forms Committee of the Administrative Office of the Courts and the District Court, has developed and maintains a set of uniform orders and forms for use in protective order cases. These forms are likewise available online for use by litigants and their attorneys. Uniform orders are prepared through the District and Circuit Court case management systems and can be generated automatically in the courtroom in nearly all jurisdictions. Sample case management orders, are also available for court use in the Judiciary's website. 32 Best Practices and Technical Assistance Publications The Department of Family Administration has worked over the last several years to develop standards, guidelines and best practices for the various services offered through the courts. Working with large groups of internal and external stakeholders the department distributes and educates court staff on the following: Best Practices for Family Court ADR Programs Best Practices for Programs to Assist Self- Represented Litigants in Family Law Matters Screening Cases for Family Violence Issues to Determine Suitability for Mediation and Other Forms of ADR: A Screening Protocol and Tools for Maryland Circuit Courts Maryland Judge's Domestic Violence Resource Manual Guidelines of Advocacy for Attorneys Representing Children in CINA and Related TPR and Adoption Proceedings ( published as an Appendix to the Maryland Rules). Other best practices documents and guides are under development including: Maryland Guidelines of Practice for Court- Appointed Lawyers Representing Children in Cases Involving Child Custody or Child Access ( currently pending before the Court of Appeals for possible inclusion in the Maryland Rules). CINA/ TPR Best Practices – to be published with the revised Child Welfare Benchbook Standards for Child Custody Evaluations – which are being developed by the Custody Subcommittee of the Committee on Family Law Standards and/ or authorization legislation for Parenting Coordination, also a project of the Custody Subcommittee Standard 3.2 Fairness and Equality for Court Staff The Family Division observes standards of fairness and equality for all staff of the court, including those who provide services to litigants in the Family Divisions. Promoting Uniformity in a Decentralized System While the Circuit Courts remain substantially locally funded, a number of significant segments of the family justice system have come under state control and responsibility. This has permitted the Judiciary to develop uniform positions, grades and salaries. Judges, elected clerks and their staff have long been State employees. Within the last five years, masters and law clerk positions have been assumed by the State. Uniform position descriptions, grade structures and salaries have been developed for those positions. While some masters remain county employees, the county is compensated at the standard rate for those positions and when those positions become vacant they become State positions. Even when positions remain under local government control, Family Division/ Family Services funding is leveraged to promote consistency. For example, a recommended job description and qualifications have been provided for family support services coordinators and permanency planning liaisons. Through site visits, orientations and regular statewide meetings the Department of Family Administration promotes uniformity of practice and works with the wide range of individuals who work in family divisions. Improved Policies for State Employees of the Judiciary The management of the Judiciary's Human Resources Department has been regularized over the last several years. Employee committees guide that department in the development of policies and practices to benefit employees and retain committed staff within the courts. Providing An Even Chance Fair Processes for Potential Contractual Providers As a condition of accepting Family Division/ Family Services Program grants, individual jurisdictions must agree to comply with local procurement practices to ensure that all contracts are bid fairly and equitably. Because most local governments have minority business enterprise ( MBE) programs, this should mean that contracts are being awarded in a way that promotes the minority- owned businesses in the State. In reviewing grant reporting Family Administration staff often raise these issues with the courts to ensure compliance with the requirement. Grantees are also subject to periodic audits and management reviews to ensure their compliance with all grant requirements. 33 The Department of Family Administration follows the AOC's procurement practices that include an active MBE program. Fair Practices in Awarding Grant Fund The Department of Family Administration publishes Notices of Funding Availability for Special Project Grants in the Maryland Register, and distributes copies widely to a broad range of potential grantees. An internal committee reviews grant proposals. The Department of Family Administration is regularly subjected to internal as well as legislative audits. During the fiscal year, the Administrative Office of the Courts hired a grants administrator who is providing consulting assistance to the Department of Family Administration to aid us in improving our grant- making policies and practices. Standard 3.3 Responsiveness to Child Support Issues The Family Division responds to any court- focused child support initiatives from the Maryland legislature in a manner that facilitates an equal and fair response to all parties in child support issues. Legislative Initiatives Establishing Support without LItigation – A New Administrative Process for Support and Modifications The Judiciary has been collaborating with the Child Support Enforcement Administraiton ( CSEA) on implementation of a new bill which took effect January 1, 2007. The bill permits local child support offices to use an administrative process for establishing child support by consent. While the agency hopes to eventually take full advantage of the law, the new procedures will be rolled out slowly with an initial pilot commencing in early 2007. The law, which passed during the 2006 legislative session as House Bill 272, permits the local child support office to have parties execute an " affidavit of support" if they agree upon a child support amount. The affidavit is filed with the court after a 60- day period passes during which either party may rescind their consent. No petition is filed and no hearings are held. The affidavit becomes effective and is fully enforceable upon execution, i. e., when the parties sign it, even before it has been filed with the court. This is intended to permit the local support office to issue an immediate earnings withholding notice and expedite initial payments. This will help prevent new payors from building up arrearages due to delays in getting earnings withholding initiated. The new administrative process can only be used where paternity has already been established and where both parties have agreed upon the terms of support. The non- adversarial process is intended to eliminate unnecessary litigation between family members, promote parent- child relationships, and reduce family conflict. Deviations from the Guidelines. The local support office may negotiate a support amount that deviates from the child support guidelines if they determine application of the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate in that case. The administration must make a " written finding on the record" stating the reasons for departure from the guidelines. That finding must take a specific form as detailed in Md. Code, Fam. L. § 10- 1A- 02( A)( 2). Modifying Prior Court Orders. An affidavit of support process may also be used to modify a prior court order governing child support. A properly executed affidavit of support will supercede the prior court order unless and until overruled by a tribunal. Forms and Filing. The Child Support Enforcement Administration has developed a standardized form for use by local offices in drafting affidavits of support. Child Support Subcommittee The Child Support Subcommittee of the Judicial Conference Committee on Family Law reviews pending legislation and considers legislative reform and policies that will improve the Judiciary's ability to ensure that children receive the financial support they need. In Fiscal Year 2006, the Honorable Julia Weatherly, Circuit Court for Prince George's County, chaired this subcommittee. During Fiscal Year 2006, the subcommittee met with Secretary of the Department of Human Resources( DHR), Chrisopher McCabe, and key DHR and Judiciary staff to review and support the promotion of family employment support programs. These programs aid payors in expanding job skills, finding employment and enhancing their ability to pay child support. Maintaining Court Expertise The Judiciary has a number of mechanisms to ensure that judges, masters and court professionals maintain their knowledge of child support matters and recent legislative changes. A summary of new bills that became law and case law updates are included regularly in Family 34 Matters, the newsletter of the Department of Family Administration. The Judiciary also uses child support incentive funds, received under its Title IV- D contract to send approximately 60 clerk's office employees, masters and judges to the annual Maryland Joint Child Support Conference held each year in Ocean City. The Judiciary's Child Support Incentive Funds Committee each year has planned training modules at the conference for clerks and masters. During Fiscal Year 2006, that committee also awarded a grant to the Maryland Joint Child Support Conference Committee to provide the keynote speaker for the event. Securing Resources and Funding Innovation Title IV- D Contract Each year the Maryland Judiciary negotiates a contract with the Child Support Enforcement Administration to receive federal funding, under Title IV- D of the Social Security Act, which pays, in part for the handling of child support establishment, enforcement and modification. The Department of Family Administration continues to administer this contract on behalf of the Judiciary. Child Support Incentive Fund Committee The Maryland Judiciary receives some " incentive funds" in addition to the federal dollars provided under the Judiciary's Title IV- D contract. The Child Support Incentive Fund Committee of the Conference of Circuit Court Clerks issues notices of funding availability and solicits applications from within the Judiciary to determine how those dollars will be spent to enhance the child support enforcement system. In addition to sending court staff to the annual child support conference, funds have also been provided for programs that enhance a number of child support innovations. Supporting Non- Custodial Parents and Their Families Employment Services for Payors The Circuit Court for Baltimore County continues to operate its Family Employment and Support Project ( FESP). The program combines court oversight, case management, employment referral and employment training to get non- custodial parents who have been delinquent with child support payments back on track, financially contributing to the well- being of their children. Participants are required to meet weekly with a court employment coordinator, actively seek employment, retain employment and pay child support. An employment coordinator determines each individual's employment skills and training needs, and makes appropriate referrals for job training. Court employment coordinators also recruit local employers as referral sources. Participants remain under the supervision of the court for one year. The goal of the program is to increase accountability and employment opportunities for non- custodial parents to help them improve their relationships with their children, and to increase the emotional and financial support available to those children. The court made 145 referrals to the program during Fiscal Year 2006. Employment coordinators held 460 in- person conferences and another 1200 phone contacts with clients during that period. A total of 113 clients were employed as a result of the program. The program helps collect an average of $ 30,000 in child support per month. 10 Nurturing Fathers A Special Project Grant now supports one program originally initiated with Incentive Funds, the Nurturing Fathers program in Worcester County. This 10- week curriculum cultivates and supports male nurturance in an effort to benefit men, women and children in family relationships. The program was begun as a partnership of the Circuit Court and the Worcester County Health Department. The program is designed to re- engage fathers in the lives of their children. The court refers non- custodial fathers with pending child support or child access cases, although the program is open to all. Program services are offered in Berlin, Snow Hill, Pocomoke and the Worcester County jail on a rotating basis. Brochures The Judiciary has developed a series of six ( 6) brochures on key child support topics. The brochures have been printed and distributed to courts and agency partners, and are available from the Department of Family Administration. During Fall, 2006, those brochures were translated into Spanish, printed and distributed on the website as well. 10 Circuit Court for Baltimore County, id., p. 27. 35 Standard 3.4 Treatment of Unrepresented Parties The Family Divisions endeavor to provide for each person within their jurisdiction equal care and fair treatment, without regard to representational status. To this end, should a party who is not represented wish legal representation, Family Divisions refer them to potential legal representation resources. A Coordinated Statewide Approach to Assisting the Self- Represented Family Law Self- Help Centers Maryland is one of the few states that has adopted a statewide approach to assisting the self- represented. Maryland citizens have universal access to Family Law Self- Help Centers. These free, walk- in legal clinics are available in every Circuit Court and are in high demand. During Fiscal Year 2006, these programs served 39,362 individuals. Family Law Self- Help Centers provide assistance in a variety of case types. They also perform an important function by discussing with litigants whether their case is appropriate for self- representation. Litigants with high conflict custody issues, complex financial issues, or litigants who themselves appear unable to represent themselves effectively are advised to seek the assistance of counsel. Family Law Self- Help Centers make thousands of referrals each year to local lawyer referral programs, and to legal services providers. Figure 27. Family Law Self- Help Centers - Assistance by Case Type - FY06 Figure 28. Family Law Self- Help Centers - Referrals and Recommendations Made - FY06 Promoting Quality Self- Help Programs To aid courts in managing effective self- hel
|Date created
|Date modified
|OCLC number