Reports on persons received for supervision are filed monthly by each probation office. The forms used were specially designed with the assistance of the National Archives and Records Service. The type of data recorded on these reports includes the district and office number, the docket or register number, the type of case, the date received, and certain demographic data as follows: sex, race, age, marital status and education. Also the prior criminal record, the type of presentence investigation made and the probation officer's recommendation are reported. At the time of the termination of the supervision period, the probation officer reports the conditions under which the person was removed from supervision. If a violation of the rules or conditions of probation or parole should be the reason for the removal, the type of violation is recorded. In the event a new crime has been committed, any new sentences or sanctions connected with these violations are shown on the reports. To insure accuracy the data are cross-checked with FBI identification records on all persons who have had a warrant issued for a violation, or have been arrested for a new offense. Chart 1, submitted with this statement, shows the flow of criminal and probation statistical reports with their final accumulation on magnetic tapes. The data compiled in the criminal and probation statistical reporting programs form the basis for two special annual reports, "Federal Offenders" and "Persons Under Supervision." Copies of the most recent issues are being furnished to your committee. THE APPLICATION OF THE COMPUTER Prior to 1963 unit record tabulating equipment was used for compiling statistical reports. In that year the tabulating equipment was replaced by an IBM 1401-G card processing computer which improved operating capability. Within the last year this card system was replaced with an up-to-date magnetic tape operating system, IBM system 360-20. The usual problems in converting from one system to another have briefly slowed down progress in the statistical reporting system. In addition priority was given to improving efficiency in the financial and budgetary operations of the Administrative Office. At this time about 50 percent of computer time is connected within fiscal recordkeeping and analysis. The new tape computer system, although limited in size, does provide the benefits of high speed magnetic tape operation. In addition to four magnetic tape drives the computer configuration includes a central processing unit with 16,000 units of core memory (the largest capacity for this model) and a high-speed printer for output. DESCRIPTION OF USES OF STATISTICAL DATA WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO CRIMINAL AND PROBATION DATA Judicial administration.—The statistics compiled in the Administrative Office have had many practical uses in judicial administration the most dramatic of which is the so-called weighted caseload per judgeship. This development is the outgrowth of the time studies mentioned above. The weighted caseload system provides a measure of workload in the courts as compared to an actual counting of cases per judgeship. It takes into account the difficulty of one case as compared to another. The proportion of time required for the disposition of both civil litigation and criminal cases is part of the determination of the weighted value given to each case. The results of the weighted caseload are published for each district in table XI of the annual report. These weighted caseloads were used in connection with hearings regarding the omnibus judgeship bill of 1965. 2 Another very practical use of the statistics occurs in connection with Sentencing Institutes for Judges which are provided for by law. At these sessions the judges consider problems of disparity of sentences which are pointed up in these statistics. As part of a continuing program statistics are furnished to standing committees of the judicial conference. For example, data are provided on a quarterly basis on the administration of the Criminal Justice Act of 1964. "Federal Courts and Judges," hearings before Subcommittee No. 5 of the Committee of the Judiciary, House of Representatives, 87th Cong., Serial No. 9, G.P.O., Washington, D.C. 1966. Information system for planning and budgeting.—Trends in the court's workload are reflected in planning and budgeting processes. The number of cases filed, terminated and pending in the courts together with the weighted caseload serve as indicators of the fiscal and management needs of the judicial system. Research uses.-Inquiries regarding procedural progress of cases, types of cases and time required to dispose of cases are numerous. The Administrative Office cooperates fully with other Government agencies, as well as private researchers, in providing data required for basic research. Recently, we provided information required for an indepth study of the 1964 Criminal Justice Act undertaken by Prof. Dallin H. Oaks for the Judicial Conference of the United States and the U.S. Department of Justice. The recent publicity on violations of the Selective Service Acts suggested the need for a summary statement showing the number of defendants disposed of by the U.S. district courts for the years 1945 to 1967 for this offense. A comprehensive table of convictions in Selective Service cases was included in the recent half-year report of the Director. Also for those convicted we provided figures on the number of persons imprisoned showing the average term of their sentences to imprisonment. Because of a rigid classification procedure and uniformity in compilations, the Administrative Office has a historical base, or statistical collection, which is available for many kinds of research. I previously mentioned the weighted caseload system. Recently some attempt has been made to predict future caseloads especially where the growth pattern appears consistent and regular. In connection with a survey made of the U.S. courts of appeals, which was incorporated in a publication of the Senate Judiciary Committee entitled "Crisis in the Courts," projections of statistics were provided to show what the caseload would be for the years 1967 to 1975. We were pleased to find that our overall estimate for 1967 was only 1.4 percent lower than the actual figures for that year. While the computer with its tremendous capacity for the storage and retrieval of information can make possible these kinds of projections, considerable preplanning, programing of the data to be studied, and finally, analysis by a professional staff is still essential. Types of reports.-The annual and quarterly reports of the Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, which began publication in 1940, provide a regular and useful series of statistical tables. The tables cover the major aspects of appellate, civil, criminal, and bankruptcy caseloads in the U.S. courts as well as data on persons supervised by the Federal probation system. In addition the reports contain special tables on various aspects of judicial administration. Each report includes a written analysis of the statistics and the trends which they show. In 1962 the Administrative Office began a special series of reports covering persons placed under the supervision of the Federal probation system. Begun as a pioneer effort, the series now encompasses statistical data on all persons placed under the supervision of Federal probation officers. One of the purposes of this series of reports is to show the outcome of supervision and thus provide a base for additional studies of the effectiveness of supervision techniques. The use of uniform and standardized definitions again facilitates comparisons. For example, where there has been a violation of the conditions and terms of supervision resulting in a removal, the cause of the removal is classified as technical, minor or major. In 1966 Report, "Persons Under Supervision," an examination was made for the first time of the reasons for removal by type of violation and offense. We expect to continue these indepth studies in our future reports. The second series of reports on criminal cases began in 1963. It deals entirely with criminal defendants disposed of in the U.S. district courts. The last published report summarized 4 years of data and established trend information useful not only to the courts, but also to researchers concerned with the administration of criminal justice. In this series we introduced two concepts-the comparative use of probation and the scale of the severity of sentence. Perhaps I should point out that the overall severity of sentence factor has generally remained constant. However, there has been some change in sentences imposed for different kinds of offenses. OTHER APPLICATIONS Cooperation with the States.-The statistical system developed by the Administrative Office has served as an example for many States. Some years ago, before the State Model Court Administrators Act was developed, State court administrators regularly sought the assistance of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts in setting up their systems. The forms, definitions, and classifications used in the Administrative Office have often served as models for State court statistical systems, although in most States the statistical systems are limited because of budgetary considerations. Requests for assistance continue to be received but with the passage of years the main cooperation has been in the exchange of reports. There is one difficulty in the comparison of Federal and State judicial statistics. The U.S. courts are courts of limited and therefore specialized jurisdiction. The classification of cases are frequently not comparable as between the two systems. On the other hand there are many common areas and the possibility of interfacing information between court systems is undoubtedly possible. For example, the "Pennsylvania Statistical Abstract," published by the Department of Internal Affairs for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, does show both State and Federal court activity in a general overview of judicial administration for all Pennsylvania courts. Undoubtedly, a similar type of summary reporting would be useful to other States. Cooperation with law enforcement.-The statistical data on criminal defendants brought before the U.S. courts shows the end result of Federal law enforcement and prosecution. Federal agencies with law enforcement responsibilities have their own information systems, but the Administrative Office is nevertheless frequently called upon to furnish information. An interface is indeed possible, but again methods of counting, classification, and the usual differences due to timelag between different reporting systems makes an across-the-board interface difficult. Limitations of the system. The statistical system of case reporting in the U.S. court system is the product of 28 years of development. Generally it has met the needs of the Federal judiciary, but increasingly we are aware of greater needs. With the use of the computer we will be able to provide more indepth information on the workload of the courts. As mentioned above, the specialized Federal criminal jurisdiction, makes comparisons with state jurisdiction rather difficult when the comparisons are based upon the type of crime. Violations of the laws affecting the collection of Federal income and other taxes, interstate commerce, immigration, special Federal regulations and national defense comprise most of the criminal caseload of the U.S. district courts. State type offenses such as homicide, robbery, assault, burglary and sex offenses, which represent as much as half of the defendants appearing before State courts, comprise only about 5 percent of Federal criminal prosecutions. However, the limited amount of objective data on criminal defendants and on persons placed under the supervision of the Federal probation system could probably be added to a national system of statistics on crime, and perhaps the methods of compilations which we use could serve as a model for a national system. Since it is an ongoing operation, the system would seem to merit study as a foundation for any new programs. (The following chart shows the flow of statistical records for completing the criminal and probation statistical reports, submitted monthly.) *Same form is furnished on each person placed on probation by the U.S. commissioner, on parole or mandatory release by the U.S. Board of Parole and for those placed under supervision under an arrangement with the U.S. attorney. U.S. DISTRICT COURTS DISPOSITION OF DEFENDANTS CHARGED WITH VIOLATION OF SELECTIVE SERVICE ACTS SHOWING TYPE OF SENTENCE FOR FISCAL YEARS 1945 THROUGH 1967 Dis- Court Jury tendere Court Jury Total 1 day 1 day years Average sen- of im- other and to 3 Over ment Note: Statistics reflect defendants charged with violations of the Selective Training and Service |