Innocent people can be arrested

This is happening more and more because of ETP. We believe that putting a fatal error in the ETP that forces users to go into JIS to make the changes (if appropriate) would help prevent this error.

In addition to preventing these changes to be made in ETP there needs to be education to courts that this is happening and the severe ramifications of such actions.

This request seeks to provide a notification to all courts with cases related to a person record when critical identifiers on the person record in the Judicial Information System Person Record (JIS PER) are changed in violation of the person business rules. The original requestor as well as the endorsing body both state that this issue has become more frequent due to the use of Electronic Ticketing Process (ETP).

This enhancement would require court staff to select which person data they will use on the eTicket/DOL versus JIS PER screen in ETP (Figure 1) in specific situations. The system would also require an additional confirmation if specified JIS PER data will be changed.

The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) proposes to enhance ETP to require additional actions if specified data in JIS PER is to be changed. The changes include removing the default selection on specified data as well as asking for confirmation from the user before specified JIS PER fields are modified.

The proposed solution attempts to prevent or reduce the number of times that JIS PER is changed in violation of the Person Business Rules. AOC conducted a preliminary review of a reporting solution as requested, but initial analysis indicated that this may be a significantly more time consuming. If the endorsing group does not believe the solution proposed in this analysis will meet the business needs, AOC will conduct an analysis of the alternate solution.

AOC proposes to modify ETP screens to make the consequences of certain actions more explicit.

1. When the comparison screen is shown and specified fields are different, ETP will not present with either data option radio button selected. Instead, both buttons will be unmarked. This will require the user to select the appropriate data source rather than just hitting "enter". This should happen for either comparison screen: (1) eTicket versus DOL or (2) eTicket/DOL versus JIS PER.

2. If the person selects the eTicket data as the source and this will result in a change on the JIS PER for specified fields, the application will provide a pop-up warning indicating the impact of the change and asking the user to verify that they wish to use the data from ETP to overwrite the JIS PER data. The user would be required to confirm the change.

Comments from Cynthia Marr and agreed upon by the group:

I am conflicted on this solution. Finding a balance between the integrity of the person database and mitigating the impacts on slowing data entry is a difficult task.

I understand this is a critical problem and would like to see a remedy implemented for those who violate the person business rules on a consistent or frequent basis. Aimee's endorsement includes education to courts and increasing awareness of the severe ramifications of these actions. Is it possible to add an education component to the solution?

I do support the solution that ETP will not present the user with either data option radio button selected - perhaps only on the name and DOB.

I endorse the ETP changes and request notification and education to the court making these errors.

Comments from Aimee Vance and agreed upon by the group:

In addition to education being a component of the solution, I also think that "required to confirm the change" in step #2 should be more than just hitting enter. They should have to hit F10 or yes/no.

This request seeks to provide a notification to all courts with cases related to a person record when critical identifiers on the person record in the Judicial Information System Person Record (JIS PER) are changed in violation of the person business rules. The original requestor as well as the endorsing body both state that this issue has become more frequent due to the use of Electronic Ticketing Process (ETP).

This enhancement would require court staff to select which person data they will use on the eTicket/DOL versus JIS PER screen in ETP (Figure 1) in specific situations. The system would also require an additional confirmation if specified JIS PER data will be changed.

The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) proposes to enhance ETP to require additional actions if specified data in JIS PER is to be changed. The changes include removing the default selection on specified data as well as asking for confirmation from the user before specified JIS PER fields are modified.

The proposed solution attempts to prevent or reduce the number of times that JIS PER is changed in violation of the Person Business Rules. AOC conducted a preliminary review of a reporting solution as requested, but initial analysis indicated that this may be a significantly more time consuming. If the endorsing group does not believe the solution proposed in this analysis will meet the business needs, AOC will conduct an analysis of the alternate solution.

AOC proposes to modify ETP screens to make the consequences of certain actions more explicit.

1. When the comparison screen is shown and specified fields are different, ETP will not present with either data option radio button selected. Instead, both buttons will be unmarked. This will require the user to select the appropriate data source rather than just hitting "enter". This should happen for either comparison screen: (1) eTicket versus DOL or (2) eTicket/DOL versus JIS PER.

2. If the person selects the eTicket data as the source and this will result in a change on the JIS PER for specified fields, the application will provide a pop-up warning indicating the impact of the change and asking the user to verify that they wish to use the data from ETP to overwrite the JIS PER data. The user would be required to confirm the change.

We do not want to delay this request any longer, but feel that an exception report or docket entry is necessary to notify courts of changes made to all names that are updated.

Project is scheduled to begin September 3, 2013.