By Jarrett B. Perlow (Fed. Cir.)
In today’s evolving judicial landscape, court administrators face increasing pressure to deliver efficient services while maintaining public trust. As the Circuit Executive and Clerk of Court for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, I’ve authored two recent scholarly articles that offer insights for appellate court clerks seeking to improve operations through quality management practices. I’m particularly pleased to share these articles with the NCACC community as I first had the opportunity to share my initial thoughts on these topics with the appellate clerk community during my presentation at the National Conference of Appellate Court Clerks 2022 annual conference in Williamsburg.
My Research on Court Quality Management
My research demonstrates that while quality management principles have long been standard in the private sector, their application in court systems remains inconsistent and underdeveloped. This represents a significant opportunity for appellate court clerks to enhance operational efficiency and effectiveness.
In my article “Driving Efficiency and Public Confidence: Integrating Quality Management Practices in the Federal Appellate Court System”, published in the Journal of Appellate Practice and Process (Vol. 25, No. 1, Winter 2025), I argue that by embracing quality management practices, court administrators can deliver improved performance on the front-line operations of courts while still protecting fundamental due process rights and a stable rule of law. This focus on operational performance can directly impact and increase public perception, trust, and confidence in the judiciary.
Current State of Federal Appellate Court Performance
My comprehensive analysis of five years of case management data from all thirteen federal appellate circuit courts revealed concerning patterns. Specifically, I found inconsistent and highly variable performance in their administrative case management practices, with significant variations in processing times both between and within courts.
The research showed that federal appellate courts generally lack consistent, predictable performance and suffer from a lack of regularity or control in practice. Most circuit courts had skewed performance distributions with median times exceeding mean times, suggesting that outliers significantly impacted overall performance metrics.
Quality Management Tools and Frameworks
In my companion article, “Courting Quality: A Survey of Quality Management Practices in American Courts”, published in Judicature (Vol. 108, No. 2, 2024), I provide an overview of existing quality management resources available to courts, which include the following:
• CourTools and Appellate CourTools – Developed by the National Center for State Courts (NCSC), these provide streamlined performance measurements focused on key aspects of court operations. While widely adopted, these are useful for providing a high-level overview of court performance, but often provide little value to most staff, supervisors, and line managers.
• High Performance Court Framework – Created in 2010, this framework moves beyond specific measurements to focus on broader indicators in four areas: effectiveness, procedural satisfaction, efficiency, and productivity.
• International Framework for Court Excellence – This international standard uses a self-assessment approach across seven areas of court excellence, including court leadership, strategic management, infrastructure, and public engagement.
• ASQ/ANSI G1:2021 – A newer quality standard specifically designed for government operations. Unlike other standards, ASQ/ANSI G1 focuses on the evaluation and activities of individual managers in specific business activity groups — not an all-inclusive, top-down approach — and provides objective scoring of the maturity of the use of well-known and beneficial quality practices at the organizational front-line.
My Model Appellate Court Scorecard
One of the significant contributions from my research is the Model Circuit Operational Scorecard, which I developed to provide a practical tool for appellate courts to measure and report performance. This one-page scorecard condenses key performance indicators into an easy-to-understand format that courts can make available annually on their websites or in annual reports.
The scorecard includes measurements for the following:
- Total case processing time (mean, median, and 80% performance levels)
- Case processing intervals (opening, briefing, submission, hearing, and termination)
- Case opening and termination accuracy
- Key performance indicators met
- Public filing compliance
- Public service satisfaction
- Employee satisfaction
- Quality standard maturity scores
This scorecard serves as a transparent way to communicate court performance to the public while also providing court administrators with a clear framework for tracking improvements over time. It uses readily obtainable data and straightforward calculations, making it adaptable for courts at any stage of quality management implementation.
My Recommendations for Appellate Court Clerks
Based on my research and practical application of these concepts at my court, I offer five specific recommendations for appellate courts seeking to improve their operations:
- Expand the Use of Quality Management Tools – Begin with ASQ/ANSI G1, which provides an incremental approach suitable for courts without existing quality management systems.
- Implement Lean Six Sigma Practices – Start by identifying and eliminating waste in existing processes before progressing to more complex statistical tools to reduce variation.
- Implement Expanded Operational Performance Reporting – Develop uniform formats for meaningful performance measurements addressing accuracy, timeliness, customer satisfaction, and quality management standards, such as my Model Circuit Operational Scorecard.
- Adopt Minimum Baseline Performance Standards – Create realistic, data-driven performance targets based on historical performance at the 80% level.
- Expand Awareness of Quality Management Practices – Educate court staff about available quality resources and frameworks to encourage adoption of these proven methods.
Conclusion
As I conclude in my research, by demonstrating validated quality practices delivering cost-effective services to the public, all American courts can serve as champions not only of the rule of law and individual rights but also of good government worthy of the public’s continued trust and confidence.
For appellate court clerks, embracing quality management practices represents an opportunity to enhance operational efficiency, improve service delivery, and ultimately strengthen public trust in the judiciary. The structured approaches outlined in my research provide a clear roadmap for courts at any stage of their quality journey.
To further support courts interested in implementing quality management practices, I’ve created www.QualityinCourts.com, an online, open-source resource providing tools, templates, and research materials to help judiciary professionals improve their operations. I encourage all appellate court clerks to visit this site and leverage these resources in their own quality improvement efforts.
Contact Information
Jarrett B. Perlow
Circuit Executive and Clerk of Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
perlowj@cafc.uscourts.gov
View my research on my SSRN Author page:
https://ssrn.com/author=5272847