NEIGHBORHOOD JUSTICE CENTERS

• NCJ Number: 69075
• Author(s): D MCGILLIS
• Date Published: 1980
• Length: 20 pages
• Contract Number(s): J-LEAA-013-78
• Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ); US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
• Corporate Author: Abt Associates, Inc
• Sale Source: Superintendent of Documents, GPO; National Institute of Justice/
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: POLICY BRIEFS 2D EDITION

Annotation

THIS POLICY BRIEF DESCRIBES PROGRAMS FOR RESOLVING MINOR DISPUTES WITHOUT ARREST OR FORMAL COURT ACTION USING CONCILIATION, MEDIATION, OR ARBITRATION TECHNIQUES TO DEAL WITH INTERPERSONAL CONFLICTS.

Abstract

EFFECTIVE ADJUDICATION IN MANY CIVIL AND CRIMINAL CASES IS HAMPERED BY EXTENSIVE DELAYS, LIMITED ACCESS, HIGH DISMISSAL RATES, AND INEFFECTIVE PROCEDURES. SUPPORT, THEREFORE, HAS GROWN FOR ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION MECHANISMS SUCH AS NEIGHBORHOOD JUSTICE CENTERS. SUCH CENTERS OR SIMILAR PROJECTS TEND TO FOCUS ON DISPUTES AMONG INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE AN ONGOING RELATIONSHIP, SUCH AS LANDLORDS AND TENANTS. CENTERS RECEIVE REFERRALS FROM MANY SOURCES, VARY IN ACTIVE PURSUIT OF CLIENTS, AND MAY ATTEMPT TO SETTLE DISPUTES THROUGH CONCILIATION BEFORE SCHEDULING A FORMAL MEDIATION OR ARBITRATION SESSION. IN ADDITION, STAFF OFTEN HAVE VARIED BACKGROUNDS, MOST COMMONLY IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES, AND MEDIATORS AND ARBITRATORS UNDERGO RIGOROUS TRAINING PROGRAMS. PLANNERS INTERESTED IN STARTING SUCH CENTERS SHOULD BEGIN BY DEFINING LOCAL NEEDS. CURRENT COURT CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING MINOR DISPUTES CAN BE DETERMINED BY REVIEWING DATA ON COURT CASELOAD SIZE, BACKLOGS, AVERAGE PROCESSING DELAYS, ETC.; ASSESSING THE AVAILABILITY OF LOCAL FORUMS FOR ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE PROCESSING (BETTER BUSINESS BUREAUS, HOUSING AUTHORITIES, AND SO ON); AND ESTABLISHING A PLANNING BOARD. SEVERAL TYPES OF SPONSORS HAVE BEEN USED FOR CENTERS, INCLUDING PUBLIC SPONSORSHIP (E.G., THE MIAMI CITIZEN DISPUTE SETTLEMENT PROGRAM), PRIVATE SPONSORSHIP (E.G., THE ROCHESTER COMMUNITY DISPUTE SERVICES PROJECT), AND PRIVATE SPONSORSHIP WITH A COMMUNITY RATHER THAN JUSTICE SYSTEM ORIENTATION. FUNDING SOURCES HAVE INCLUDED CITY, COUNTY, AND STATE GOVERNMENTS, THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION, LEAA, AND THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR. LEGISLATIVE SUPPORT CAN PROMOTE AND GUIDE THE DEVELOPMENT OF APPROPRIATE DISPUTE RESOLUTION ALTERNATIVES. STATES CONSIDERING ASSISTING JUSTICE CENTER DEVELOPMENT HAVE NUMEROUS OPTIONS, INCLUDING FINANCIAL SUPPORT, CONFIDENTIALITY SAFEGUARDS, AND LIMITATIONS ON STAFF CIVIL LIABILITY. POLICYMAKERS IN THE EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL BRANCHES CAN ALSO PROVIDE VALUED SUPPORT. SOURCES FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ARE GIVEN. AN APPENDIX PROVIDES SAMPLE LEGISLATION SUPPORTING JUSTICE CENTERS.