criminal justice process audit

8/11/2019 Criminal Justice Process Audit

1/17


2/17

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYCriminal Justice Process Audit

CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROCESS AUDITAugust 15, 2014

Final Audit ReportKnox County Internal Audit

File Number 02-2014-01


3/17

Knox County Internal Audit

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

BACKGROUND 1OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGY 1

IDENTIFIED GOOD OPERATING PRACTICES 2

DEFINED USER ROLES IN THE JUSTICE INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JIMS) 2

DOCUMENT PREPARATION FOR DAILY COURT PROCEEDINGS 3

FINDINGS 3

QUALITY ASSURANCE CONTROLS IN THE CRIMINAL COURT CLERK AND GENERAL

SESSIONS COURT CLERK OFFICES SHOULD BE STRENGTHENED 3

ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS IN GENERAL SESSIONS COURTS SHOULD BE

BETTER PROTECTED 4

INTERNAL PROCESSES SHOULD BE DOCUMENTED 4

JIMS TRAINING PROGRAM AND MATERIALS SHOULD BE DOCUMENTED 5

TRAINING PROGRAMS AND MATERIALS IN CRIMINAL COURT CLERK

AND GENERAL SESSIONS COURT CLERK OFFICES SHOULD BE DOCUMENTED 5

OBSERVATIONS 5

IMPROVED SYSTEM INTEGRATION 6REAL-TIME DATA ENTRY 6

RECOMMENDATIONS 7

MANAGEMENT RESPONSE 7

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A CRIMINAL COURT / GENERAL SESSIONS COURT CLERK MANAGEMENT RESPONSE

APPENDIX B CRIMINAL COURT MANAGEMENT RESPONSE

APPENDIX C GENERAL SESSIONS MANAGEMENT RESPONSE

APPENDIX D INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT RESPONSE

APPENDIX E ATTORNEY GENERAL MANAGEMENT RESPONSE

File Number 02-2014-01


4/17

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYCriminal Justice Process Audit

WHY WE DID THIS AUDIT

The audit was conducted as a result of a request from the Knox County

Commission through Resolution R-14-1-905.

WHAT WE FOUND

We found the criminal justice process could be improved to operate more

efficiently and effectively, with one significant issue identified and four other

areas where improvement is needed. Specifically, we found neededimprovements related to:

Quality assurance controls in the General Sessions Court Clerk-Criminal Division (General Session Court Clerk) and Criminal Court

Clerk offices.

Protection of original documents in General Sessions Courtproceedings.

Documentation of departmental internal criminal justice processes.

Training programs and materials for JIMS training.

Training programs and materials for General Sessions Court Clerk

and Criminal Court Clerk offices.

We also identified two areas we consider good operating practices related todefined JIMS user roles and daily document preparation. We also observed

two areas for management to consider for improving the process related to

better system integration with JIMS and entering data in real time.

WHAT WE RECOMMEND

We recommend all departments involved in the process (1) implementstronger document management to better protect original documents in the

General Sessions Courts, (2) document internal criminal justice processes,

and (3) work with Information Technology to develop a better defined systemtraining program and manual.

We recommend the Criminal Court Clerk and General Sessions Court Clerk

offices (1) identify critical points in their process where quality controls would

improve the accuracy and timeliness of information entered into JIMS, (2)implement quality assurance controls for the identified areas, and (3) better

define training requirements and programs for all employees.

ACKGROUND

The criminal justice system serveshe approximately 430,000 KnoxCounty citizens by handling tens ofhousands of criminal cases eachear. Recently, problems in theriminal justice system haveeceived increased mediaoverage.

The process in Knox Countyncludes multiple Countyepartments including the General

Sessions Courts, Criminal Courts,Attorney Generals Office, GeneralSessions Court Clerk CriminalDivision, and Criminal Court Clerk.The Information TechnologyDepartment assists the processhrough the design and support ofn in-house system, the Justicenformation Management SystemJIMS), to manage criminal justice

nformation.

The objective of the audit was tovaluate the efficiency andffectiveness of the current criminalustice process. The scope of theudit was limited to the process inlace at the initiation of the auditMarch 13, 2014) to handle aefendants case from the time the

warrant is officially issued until the

ase is completed. The auditmethodology included obtainingnd reviewing applicableocumentation, conducting

nterviews with key personnel,erforming process walkthroughs,nd observing court proceedings.

File Number 02-2014-01 Page i


5/17


BACKGROUND

The criminal justice system serves the approximately 430,0001Knox County citizens by handling criminalcases in seven courts, including four criminal divisions of General Sessions Court and three divisions ofCriminal Court. According to the General Sessions Court Clerk Criminal Division (General Sessions Court

Clerk) office, in 2013 dispositions were entered for more than 36,000 cases passing through the KnoxCounty criminal justice system. Due to recent increased media scrutiny regarding potential problems in thecriminal justice system, this audit was conducted at the request of the Knox County Commission throughResolution R-14-1-905.

The process in Knox County includes multiple County departments including the General Sessions Courts,Criminal Courts, Attorney Generals Office, General Sessions Court Clerk, and Criminal Court Clerk. TheInformation Technology Department assists the process through the design and support of an in-housesystem, the Justice Information Management System (JIMS), to manage criminal justice information.

JIMS is the official information management software of the Knox County criminal justice process andshould contain all information decided for each case during court proceedings. The information decided

during court proceedings is recorded on paper warrants for General Sessions Courts and in case files forCriminal Courts. The information is entered into JIMS by General Sessions Court Clerk or Criminal CourtClerk employees, depending on in which court the case was heard. The General Sessions Court Clerk andCriminal Court Clerk offices also have bookkeeping systems to record costs assigned and collected.

OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGY

The objective of the audit was to evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of the current criminal justiceprocess. To achieve our objective, we:

Obtained and reviewed applicable procedural documents describing the criminal justice processand other documents as needed.

Conducted interviews and process walkthroughs with key personnel to establish the currentpractices within the criminal justice process.

Observed various court proceedings to gain an understanding of the environment in which thecriminal justice system operates.

To evaluate the significance of audit findings we used both quantitative and qualitative factors. Thequalitative factors used in evaluating the significance of a finding were whether the identified issue (1)

poses a systematic operational or controls risk in Knox Countys ability to accurately or timely processdefendants within the criminal justice system, (2) exposes Knox County to multiple (more than 10) lawsuitsor class action, or (3) would result in a high level of reputational damage or inquiry from a state or federalagency. The quantitative factor considered was whether a finding exceeded 3 percent ($369,721) of thefiscal year (FY) 2014 budgets for the five departments included in the audit. A finding only has to meet oneof the above four factors to be considered significant.

1Based on the 2010 census data for Knox County as reported on Knox County Governments website.

File Number 02-2014-01 Page 1


6/17


The scope of the audit was the criminal justice process in place as of March 13, 2014, limited to thehandling of a defendants case from the time the warrant is issued until the case is completed2. Thisperformance audit was conducted in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standardsexcept for requirement 3.96 related to an external peer review of the Internal Audit Department being

conducted every three years. The last peer review was performed in December 2009 and covered internalaudit work performed from January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2008. According to the three-year peerreview rule, the Internal Audit Department should have had a peer review performed in calendar year 2012to review audit work performed from January 1, 2009, through December 31, 2011, with an additional peerscheduled for calendar year 2015 to cover audit work performed from January 1, 2012, through December31, 2014. The audit department changed Directors in December 2013 and it is not known by the currentDirector why the peer review was not performed in calendar year 2012 in cadence with a three-year reviewcycle. A peer review is planned either late in calendar year 2014 or early in calendar year 2015 dependingon the amount of audit work available to review under revised procedures put in place in February 2013,the schedule of the peer review team, and approval by the Knox County Audit Committee. We do notbelieve the audit or assurance provided by the audit have been affected by the lack of a current peer

review. The Internal Audit Department revised audit procedures used to conduct this review are directlytied through reference to the generally accepted government auditing standards. In addition, each audit issubject to a quality control process that ensures that generally accepted government auditing standardswere met within the audit prior to issuing a draft report.

The standards also require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence toprovide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe thatthe evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our observations and conclusions based on ouraudit objectives.

IDENTIFIED GOOD OPERATING PRACTICESDuring the course of the audit, we identified two areas considered good operating practices that promoteefficiency and effectiveness in the criminal justice process. These identified good operating practices are(1) defined user roles in JIMS, and (2) document preparation for daily court proceedings.

DEFINED USER ROLES IN JIMS

We found JIMS is restricted through defined user roles which limit the information each user has access toview or update. Defining user roles ensures that each user only enters and has access to the informationneeded to perform their individual part of the criminal justice process. For example, certain GeneralSessions Court Clerk and Criminal Court Clerk office employees have the ability to enter sentencing

information for a case while other roles in JIMS do not have this ability. Roles are set-up by the InformationTechnology Department when a user requests to gain access to the system. The request must be madeusing the proper form and signed by the users supervisor. This security feature provides proper protectionover the vast amount of information contained in JIMS and how information can be altered and used.

2Completion for purposes of this audit can be sentence fully served, probation requirements met, or case diverted / dismissed.All costs must be collected for the case to be considered completed.



7/17


DOCUMENT PREPARATION FOR DAILY COURT PROCEEDINGS

The Knox County criminal justice system handles tens of thousands of cases each year and it is theresponsibility of General Sessions Court Clerk and Criminal Court Clerk employees to ensure all warrants,case files, and other relevant documentation are ready for use in court each day. Applicable court recordsand documents are pulled using the daily scheduled docket available in JIMS and brought to the propercourt by the Clerk office employees. Having all required documentation readily available in the courtproceedings promotes efficiency in the process rather than having to wait for files to be retrieved duringproceedings.

FINDINGS

We found the criminal justice process could be improved to operate in a more efficient and effectivemanner. While the criminal justice process included (1) departmental understanding of their role in thecriminal justice process and their internal practices in place to perform the activities for which they areresponsible, and (2) reliance on JIMS as the information management system to make case informationmore readily available and prepare the daily docket for court each day, we identified one significant issueand four other areas where the process could be improved.

QUALITY ASSURANCE CONTROLS IN THE CRIMINAL COURT CLERK AND GENERAL SESSION COURT

CLERK OFFICES SHOULD BE STRENGTHENED

We found stronger quality assurance controls should be implemented in the General Sessions Clerk andCriminal Court Clerk offices. The General Session Clerk and Criminal Court Clerk offices have apredominately manual process for entering information determined during court proceedings. In addition,the majority of this information is entered after the court date using notes on warrants, daily dockets, andcase files. The General Sessions Clerk and the Criminal Court Clerk offices handle the bulk of data entry

and file processing in the criminal justice process. Most of the information entered is not reviewed orquality assurance controls are not performed to prevent errors. There is an inherent risk in a predominatelymanual process that information could not entered accurately or timely. As a result, predominately manualprocesses should include strong quality assurance controls to minimize entry errors during the process andreduce time delays to enact judicial orders.

Examples identified during the audit of areas where quality assurance controls could be strengthenedinclude missing criminal histories, incorrect sentences / dispositions, incorrect scheduling of a case, anddelays in processing information. Although we identified some limited automated and manual qualityassurance controls in the process including inability to post-date information in JIMS, checks for existingidentification number in JIMS, manual review of cases to be expunged cases in the General Sessions Clerk

office, and independent comparison of data entered into JIMS to case file notes in the Criminal Court Clerkoffice, additional quality assurance controls are needed to ensure the criminal justice data is processedaccurately and timely. Gaps in quality assurance controls may not necessarily lead to errors in defendantcases; however, there is a systematic risk that lack of quality assurance controls could result in errors tocriminal cases. Such errors could include incorrect information included on criminal histories, incorrectcourt costs assigned, incorrect attachment issued, or delays in releasing defendants.



8/17


Stronger quality control processes (1) shift focus from correcting errors when identified to preventing /minimizing errors in the process and (2) provide a way to evaluate performance. Examples of qualityassurance controls include logic checks in systems, required supervisory approval for critical activities, spotchecking notes to data entered, monitoring system generated reports for defined areas, well documentedand defined internal processes and training programs, validating that practices match the defined process,

and real-time data entry. Since it is not efficient or practical to review 100 percent of the data entered,quality assurance controls would provide points in the process deemed critical or high risk to undergoadditional scrutiny for accuracy and timeliness.

This issue is considered significant due to (1) the systematic operational risk the lack of strong qualityassurance controls poses to each criminal case in the criminal justice system, (2) exposure of Knox Countyto potentially multiple lawsuits due to data entered without strong quality assurance controls in place tocatch or prevent errors, and (3) exposure to reputation damage or additional inquiry from state or federalagencies.

ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS IN GENERAL SESSIONS COURTS SHOULD BE BETTER PROTECTED

We found warrants and other original documents should be better protected. Warrants serve as the officialcourt record for each case in General Sessions Courts. Original warrants and attachments are brought intothe courtrooms each day for use with the daily docket of cases. All information pertaining to the case isdocumented on the warrant to be later entered into JIMS. Information such as charges, new appearancedates, sentencing, disposition, penalties, and probation requirements are documented on the warrants. TheGeneral Sessions Court Clerk is the official custodian of court records including warrants. We observedwarrants bundled with other original case documentation removed from the General Sessions Court Clerkscustody during court proceedings by defending and prosecuting attorneys. At times, this documentationwas observed being taken out of the courtroom by attorneys. If warrants were lost or altered, the officialcourt record of the case would be lost or altered. Removing original documents from the General SessionsCourt Clerks custody poses a risk that information related to a case may not be processed accurately and /

or timely.

INTERNAL PROCESSES SHOULD BE DOCUMENTED

We found procedures should be documented detailing each departments role and practices for performingduties in the criminal justice system or referencing how each process interacted with other organizations.While the departments involved in the criminal justice process understood and explained their role andpractices within the criminal justice process, no department had written procedures to document thepractices in place. Each department should document procedures governing how work is to be performed,the roles and responsibilities of the department and department employees, and where the processintersects with or relies upon other departments. Documented procedures provide employees and

departments clear expectations of performance, strengthen consistency of internal operations, assist intraining new employees, and provide a way to hold those involved in the process accountable for theirresponsibilities. Documenting internal processes reduces the risk that the criminal justice process withineach department will not be carried out as the department intends or will be performed inconsistently.



9/17


JIMS TRAINING PROGRAM AND MATERIALS SHOULD BE DOCUMENTED

We found JIMS training programs and materials should be documented. The development andimplementation of JIMS training is currently the user departments responsibility and varies fromdepartment to department. There are currently neither a documented and defined user guide nor trainingprograms developed in conjunction with the Information Technology Department to ensure JIMS is beingused consistently and in the manner intended. Having designed the JIMS program, the InformationTechnology Department is in the unique position of having intimate knowledge not only of the systemcapabilities but how the system was intended to be used in the process. A better defined training programand user guide should be built in conjunction with the expertise offered by the Information Technologydepartment. A consistent and universal IT developed help guide and training package would ensure thatthe system is being used as designed, all capabilities of the system are known to users, and all users areoperating within the system consistently. Lack of consistent training could lead to information being placedincorrectly in the system and the system not being utilized as designed.

TRAINING PROGRAMS AND MATERIALS IN THE CRIMINAL COURT CLERK AND GENERAL

SESSIONS COURT CLERK OFFICES SHOULD BE DOCUMENTED

We found training programs and materials in the Criminal Court Clerk and General Sessions Court Clerkoffices should be documented for all positions. Both Clerk offices include a variety of positions such asbench clerks, computer clerks, docket clerks, bookkeepers, and customer service personnel. Noformalized and documented training programs exist within the Criminal Court Clerk or General SessionsCourt Clerk offices for any of the positions. Most training is done on-the job through job shadowing or byworking through the ranks of the offices. Without a formalized, documented training manual and program,the training provided may be inconsistent or incomplete which could lead to errors in performing duties.Consistent training and knowledge is especially important in the performance of bench clerk and computerclerk duties that require a thorough knowledge of the criminal justice system in order to understandinformation decided during court proceedings, make the appropriate notes, and enter the information into

JIMS. A formalized, documented training program and manual ensures all employees are required to havethe same level of base knowledge before assuming sole responsibility for job duties and sets expectationsfor performance.

OBSERVATIONS

During the course of this audit, we identified two areas the departments involved in the criminal justiceprocess should consider to further improve and strengthen the current process. Observations are notconsidered findings but are simply areas identified by us during the audit for consideration by management.These areas relate to (1) improved system integration and (2) real-time data entry.



10/17


IMPROVED SYSTEM INTEGRATION

We observed JIMS could be improved through (1) better integration of bookkeeping or accounting systems

and (2) the addition or integration of a document management system. Currently the General SessionsCourt Clerk and Criminal Court Clerk offices operate bookkeeping and accounting systems outside of JIMS

to record assignment and collection of costs3

on cases. Some, but not all, of the cost information for casesis entered into JIMS through automated and manual processes. As a result, not all cost information

associated with a case is always readily available in JIMS to departments involved in the criminal justiceprocess other than General Sessions Court Clerk and Criminal Court Clerk offices. In addition, a document

management system that allows electronic viewing of scanned documentation pertinent to cases is not

currently available in JIMS or as a separate system. The General Sessions Court Clerk and Criminal CourtClerk offices have considered the addition of such a system. Fully integrated systems with JIMS would (1)provide instant access to information for all parties involved in a criminal case, (2) place more reliance on

one system for information rather than multiple systems, (3) protect original documents by offering anelectronic view of information, and (4) reduce the amount of cost information and documentation requested

from the General Sessions Court Clerk and Criminal Court Clerk offices. Fully integrated systems are

needed in order to move toward the real-time data entry environment suggested below.

We suggest the departments involved in the criminal justice process consider (1) completely integratingcost information pertaining to criminal cases into JIMS to provide a more complete picture of case

information without having to obtain information from a separate bookkeeping or accounting system and (2)

use a document management system within JIMS or integrated with JIMS to handle all documents relevantto criminal cases.

REAL-TIME DATA ENTRY

We observed real-time data entry would improve the efficiency and accuracy of the current criminal justiceprocess. As described in the report previously, much of the information for criminal cases is entered intoJIMS after court proceedings have concluded based on notes written on warrants, dockets, or case files.Entering information after court proceedings may affect timeliness and accuracy of information entered. Areal-time data entry system would allow information to be processed as it happens in the courtroom,provide instant information to all involved in the process, improve quality assurance through immediatereview of information, remove delays in enacting judicial orders, and expedite processing of the case. Areal time data entry system would require the criminal justice process to be examined from a real-time dataentry perspective in order to be successfully implemented.

We suggest the departments involved in the criminal justice process consider entering all information

determined during court proceedings in a real-time manner.

3The term costs include litigation tax, fines, court costs, and restitution.



11/17


RECOMMENDATIONS

We recommend the General Sessions Clerk and Criminal Court Clerk offices:

1. Identify critical or high-risk activities or points within their internal processes where quality assurancecontrols are needed to improve and / or promote accuracy and timeliness.

2.

For those areas identified in recommendation 1, develop and implement quality assurance controls.

3.

Develop a well-defined training manual and formalized training program for each position.

We recommend the General Sessions Court Clerk, Criminal Court Clerk, Information Technology, AttorneyGenerals Office, Criminal Courts, and General Sessions Courts:

4.

Develop and implement a process to manage original documents to ensure the information containedwithin is adequately protected.

5.

Document unwritten internal practices for performing criminal justice process activities for which theyare responsible to include duties and responsibilities of employees within the department and wherethe process relies on or intersects with another department.

6. Work with Information Technology to develop a JIMS user guide and training program to promoteconsistent and correct use of the system.

MANAGEMENT RESPONSE

Management of the departments involved generally agreed with the recommendations of this audit report.See responses in Appendices A through E at the end of this report.



12/17


APPENDIX A CRIMINAL COURT / GENERAL SESSIONS COURT CLERK

MANAGEMENT RESPONSE

File Number 02-2014-01 Appendix A


13/17


APPENDIX B CRIMINAL COURT MANAGEMENT RESPONSE

File Number 02-2014-01 Appendix B


14/17


APPENDIX C GENERAL SESSIONS COURT MANAGEMENT RESPONSE

File Number 02-2014-01 Appendix C


15/17


File Number 02-2014-01 Appendix C


16/17


APPENDIX D INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT RESPONSE

File Number 02-2014-01 Appendix D


17/17


APPENDIX E ATTORNEY GENERAL MANAGEMENT RESPONSE

File Number 02-2014-01 Appendix E

criminal justice process audit

Documents