Evaluating The Manatee Model: The E-Courts Return on Investment

1. Evaluating The Manatee Model:The E-Courts Return on Investment The Honorable R.B. “Chips” Shore, Carole Pettijohn, Ph.D.

2. Overview – Return on Investment (ROI) Investments in E-Court technologies have been increasing for a variety of reasons: • Increasing Workload • Need for Staff Productivity Increases • Better Customer Service • Emerging Technologies • Economic Climate

3. CDOICost Displacement On Investments • Another way to say Return on Investment • Part of ROI is time savings and added efficiencies. • Cost displacement approach , Realities.

4. E-Courts Tools in Manatee County • Simple E-Filing • Case Maintenance System with an integrated Document Management System (CHIPS) • aiSmartBench • Public Access

5. Major Components of E-Courts

6. The 3 most important components of the e-courts slide • 1- the acceptance of docs electronically no matter the form. • 2 – the Judicial aspect • 3 – the Public Access Maximum ROI will not be achieved until these three are electronic.

7. Statewide E-Filing Portal

8. aiIndex

9. Clerk Case Maintenance System

10. aiSmartBench

11. Court Records Public Access

12. Florida Public Access to Court Records Governed By: • Florida Constitution • Supreme Court Rules • Florida Statutes • Supreme Court Administrative Orders • Local Court Administrative Orders

13. Florida Supreme Court Justice Pariente re electronic access: • Two competing principles: • Openness and transparency in court records • Individual Privacy • “Any viable policy must balance these two vital principles”

14. Manatee Public Access Access to images is determined by type of record: • Case Type • 2. Document Type • 3. Information in documents

15. Protection of Confidential Records • Case Type - examples: no public access to adoption or juvenile case types • Document Type – examples: no public access to birth certificates, psychological reports • Information contained in otherwise public documents – example: no access to SSN’s, etc.

16. Protection of Confidential Records Processes for protecting information in public documents • Redaction • Viewable on Request (VOR)

17. Redaction • Use of software to identify and remove Personal Identification Numbers from images of court records • SSN’s, Bank Account, Credit and Debit • Searches for clue words and clerk reviews • Numbers are blacked out on public record but not on original used by the Court

18. Viewable on Request (VOR) • Some documents require an additional examination by clerk to redact numbers or identity of sex/child abuse before public access. • Examples: Sexual Abuse Criminal Records, Depositions, Transcripts, Letters that may be handwritten. • When public subscriber selects the document from the case index, a request is sent to the clerk.

19. Viewable on Request (VOR) Examples of Documents with VOR Security: Depositions Exhibits Attachments Transcripts Letters Financial Affidavits Discovery Requests and Responses

20. E-Court - No Longer a Virtual Reality

21. Costs of paper based processes • AI Index productivity study • Cutting keystrokes results in 7.8 times productivity • Internal Audit of E-Courts Technologies • Initial Audit Completed October 2008 • Validated August 2011 • Added ROI of aiSmartBench September 2012

22. Estimated E-filing Savings Paper E-filed Per page Difference Intake .13 .01 .12 Scanning/QA .21 .00 .21 Printing for .00 .11 -.11 Hardcopy ____ ____ ____ Total $ .34 .12 .22 Total savings of $ 747,101* (*e-filing of all documents – 2,321,252 docs per year)

23. Eliminating Paper Files Savings Costs of maintaining paper files .57/page Costs of maintaining paper files that were e-filed (add’l .11 to print) .68/page Current pages scanned 2,263,944 x .57 $1,290,448 Current pages e-filed and 57,308 x .68 printed 38,969 Total “less paper” savings $1,329,417

24. aiSmartBench ROI • Eliminating paper copies saves $249,033 • Attaching courtesy copies from 27,300 attorneys after paper file sent for hearing • Savings from electronic orders 89,619 Total savings $365, 952

25. Public Access ROI • Annual number of pages viewed 4,015,000 • Annual number of users viewing 1,095,000 • Cost of staff needed to fulfill $136, 822 records requests prior to public access • Revenue from copies lost post -61,526 public access • Net ROI for public access $75,296

26. Intangible Savings • More information at time of decision • Consistency in decision-making • Faster access (signatures from anywhere) • Concurrent access by Clerk and Judiciary • Convenient access for Subscribers • Transparency to the Public

27. Manatee Model E-Courts Return on Investment • 50% of filings are e-filed $373,550 • Paper files savings $1,329,417 • aiSmartBench savings 365,952 • Public Access savings 75,296 Total annual savings $2,144,215 • First year On-Going • Initial purchase* $1,636,100 • Annual maintenance cost of components $190,000 ROI of Manatee Model $508,115 $1,954,215 * For all components based on 329k population county

28. Summary • Certain emerging technologies have the potential to provide significant cost savings • IT projects should be planned for ROI and viewed as investments instead of costs • Always a good practice to understand the cost of doing business so that you can compare post implementation of IT projects

29. Questions