Memo to OMB on Misdemeanor Court Study

MEMORANDUM
TO:

Robert Sivinski
Office of Statistical and Science Policy
Office of Management and Budget

THROUGH:

Jeffrey H. Anderson
Director
Bureau of Justice Statistics
Allen Beck
Senior Statistical Advisor
Bureau of Justice Statistics
Jinney Smith
Deputy Director
Bureau of Justice Statistics

FROM:

Kevin Scott
Chief, Prosecution and Judicial Statistics Unit
Bureau of Justice Statistics

DATE:

October 30, 2020

SUBJECT:

BJS request for Generic Clearance to conduct data capacity
interviews and pilot data collection from misdemeanor courts,
under the generic clearance agreement OMB Number 1121-0339

In its report accompanying the FY 2020 appropriation for the Department of Justice, the House
Appropriations Committee indicated that they were “concerned with the lack of reliable data
from States and local jurisdictions on the processing of misdemeanor arrests. As the largest
aspect of our criminal system, it is vitally important to ensure justice is being administered in a
fair and equitable manner. In recognition of limited resources, the Committee therefore urges the
BJS to collect demographic data from a select number of large metropolitan jurisdictions that
includes information on the race, ethnicity, and gender, as well as key socioeconomic factors, of
1

each misdemeanor defendant, the type of offense charged, and the sentence imposed. The
Committee also urges the Bureau to report on its progress within 180 days of enactment of this
Act.” 1
The effort requested here aims to fulfill this request. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) is
exploring the establishment of a new data collection to gain an understanding of the processing
of misdemeanors in the criminal justice system. While BJS has active data collections devoted to
the adjudication of those accused of felony offenses, little is known about the adjudication of
misdemeanor offenses, and how the various court systems that process those offenses compare to
those that process felony offenses. By all accounts, the number of misdemeanor offenses is much
larger than the number of felony offenses. In the 33 states (and the District of Columbia) for
which the National Center for State Courts has both felony and misdemeanor case counts, 9.7
million misdemeanor cases and 2.9 million felonies were filed in 2018. 2
Before committing to a national data collection, BJS must first determine the feasibility of
collecting data on the disposition of misdemeanor offenses. BJS requests clearance under its
generic clearance (OMB Number 1121-0339) to conduct a series of data-availability interviews
with court leaders and data analysts in courts that adjudicate misdemeanor offenses in a select
number of large jurisdictions. Recognizing that most courts report at least some data to their state
administrative office of the courts, BJS also requests clearance to conduct interviews with
leaders at the state court administrative offices. Based on those interviews, BJS plans to select a
subset of 10 jurisdictions from which to request data extracts. These extracts would include data
on case attributes, including charging offense(s), disposition charge and type, key caseprocessing dates, and demographic characteristics of defendants (including age, race, ethnicity,
and sex). Accordingly, BJS further seeks clearance to collect and analyze the quality,
completeness, and comparability of data from these 10 jurisdictions.
This data collection is being designed to complement other collections of state court data BJS
has recently launched, or re-launched. BJS is currently collecting data from general jurisdiction
courts as part of its Criminal Cases in State Courts (CCSC, OMB Control Number 1121-0371).
BJS will also re-launch its National Pretrial Reporting Program in 2021, known most recently as
State Court Processing Statistics (SCPS, OMB Control Number 1121-0306). SCPS was
conducted biennially from 1988 to 2006, with a final collection in 2009. SCPS collected data
from 40 of the 75 largest county courts of general jurisdiction regarding felony case filings, and
followed those cases from the date of filing for 2 years (homicides) or one year (all other cases),
typically to disposition or sentencing.
BJS’s intent is to identify, collect, standardize, and analyze easily extracted, publicly-available
data from courts that process misdemeanors. Key to this effort is developing a definition of a
misdemeanor offense that is consistent across jurisdictions. BJS will ask respondents how their
jurisdictions distinguish misdemeanors from felonies, and will refine the definition based on
those answers.

1
2

https://www.congress.gov/116/crpt/hrpt101/CRPT-116hrpt101.pdf, p. 68. Accessed October 5, 2020.
http://www.courtstatistics.org/, accessed September 23, 2020.

2

State laws and local court rules affect not only what types of courts process misdemeanor
offenses, but also access to court data – and there is no compendium of the rules governing
access to court records in each state. BJS has some expertise on this topic based on interviews
conducted as part of the development of the CCSC project, but that data collection did not
include municipal courts, which are the primary source of misdemeanor case data for many
jurisdictions.
BJS seeks OMB approval to contact court leaders in twenty-six large jurisdictions and conduct
data-availability interviews with those leaders, or with subject-matter experts identified by the
court. The twenty-six jurisdictions are from 21 different states. Twenty-two of the 26
jurisdictions have two-tiered court systems (e.g., a municipal court and a district court);
consequently, these jurisdictions have two sets of court leaders. The detailed interviews will
confirm basic characteristics of the misdemeanor system in each jurisdiction, identify what data
are collected and the ease of accessing and extracting the information, and discuss the
characteristics of the data, including data structure and data quality. See Attachment A for the
proposed interview script. The interview will also ask data experts to provide codebooks or
descriptions of any existing data extract(s).
If the court leader or data expert identifies another person to join in the conversation, staff of Abt
Associates, who are conducting the interviews on behalf of BJS, will attempt to schedule a
telephone interview with all relevant parties at one time. Because we do not know how often this
will occur, BJS is budgeting time for separate interviews with two persons at this stage.
In addition, BJS is budgeting time for at least two follow-up contacts in each jurisdiction to
address questions that may arise after the telephone interviews are completed. For example, if a
jurisdiction provides data codebooks or descriptions of existing data extracts, questions may
arise about the codebook or extract that would require a follow-up call with the data expert. Such
additional contacts may not be necessary for all jurisdictions; however, they cannot be scripted
ahead of time, as they are dependent upon information provided in the initial contact.
Summary of current request. BJS requests clearance under its generic clearance agreement
(OMB Control Number 1121-0339) to (1) contact court leaders in 26 jurisdictions in 21 states to
determine the availability, quality, and coverage of misdemeanor court data (e.g., what case
types are available, what case elements are available in each case type); (2) determine if a data
codebook exists, and whether other court staff will need to be interviewed about court data
structure and availability; and (3) collect and assess data from 10 of those jurisdictions. Multiple
contacts may be required in each jurisdiction. BJS is also requesting permission to follow-up
with court leaders if needed, about information collected in the interviews or through
documentation provided. This last contact is dependent on the interviews and the data codebooks
or descriptions of extracts provided by the interview subjects.
In identifying a sample, BJS focused on the 53 metropolitan areas with populations of more than
1,000,000 residents in 2019. BJS sought to identify the “center city” in each metropolitan area;
some (San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley MSA) arguably have two center cities, while other
MSAs (Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario) arguably have none. BJS identified 53 cities that met
the center city criterion. BJS then selected 26 cities for initial interviews by purposively
3

sampling on three criteria: city size, court complexity (using presence of municipal courts as a
proxy for court complexity), and changes in misdemeanor arrests (using data on arrests for
“other assaults” as a proxy). See Attachment B for a list of the sampled cities. If initial contact
is unsuccessful with a given city, BJS will replace that city with another city not initially
sampled. The goal is to conduct interviews in 26 cities, and, from the information collected,
identify 10 reasonably-representative sites from which data may be efficiently requested.
BJS estimates an initial contact with a court leader, up to two contacts with court data experts,
and up to two follow-up contacts for each jurisdiction. Twenty-two of the 26 jurisdictions have
two-tiered court systems, so there would be two sets of interviews in those 22 jurisdictions. In
addition, the 26 jurisdictions are in 21 different states, so there would be 21 sets of interviews
with leaders at state administrative court offices.
BJS further estimates that five of the 10 sites will have two courts. For each of the 10
jurisdictions from which data are requested, an average of 20 hours per court will be needed to
complete the following tasks: initiate contact, complete any memoranda of understanding or data
use agreements, assemble and transfer the data, and answer any follow-up questions about the
data. See Attachment C for a list of the data elements BJS will seek from each jurisdiction.
Burden Hours
The burden-hour estimates for the respondents are provided in Table 1. The project team expects
the initial contact, including attempts to arrange the interview, will take up to 20 minutes for a
court leader to answer the questions. The second contact (either a substantive interview with the
court leader or with an identified data expert) will require up to a 60-minute telephone interview.
The total burden time for all contacts under this request is 530 hours.
Table 1. Burden-Hour Estimates for Respondents
Task #
1
2
3
4

Task Description
Initial contact with court leader regarding
data access
Phone interview with court leader and/or
data expert (up to 2)
Additional follow-up to clarify any access
or data questions (up to 2)
Request data, complete paperwork, transfer
data, and ask follow-up questions about the
data
Total burden

Number of
respondents

Estimated
burden
(in minutes)

Total burden
(in hours)

69 3

20

23

138

60

138

138

30

69

15

1,200

300
530 hours

Twenty-two of the 26 cities have two-tiered court systems and the 26 jurisdictions are in 21 different states, so the
total number of respondents is 26 + 22 + 21 = 69.
3

4

Institutional Review Board
Abt Associates’ Institutional Review Board (IRB) has determined the interviewing and pilot
testing protocol to be compliant with informed consent and data confidentiality standards. See
Attachment D.
Contact Information
Questions regarding any aspect of this project can be directed to:
Kevin M. Scott, Ph.D.
Chief, Prosecution and Judicial Statistics Unit
Bureau of Justice Statistics
U.S. Department of Justice
810 7th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20531
Office Phone: (202) 616-3615
E-mail: [email protected]
Attachments
Attachment A
Attachment B
Attachment C
Attachment D

Interview Guide
Sampled Cities
Data Elements
IRB Approval

5