Michigan’s Judicial Data Warehouse (JDW)

Why Build a Judicial Data Warehouse? Currently, Michigan’s 241 trial court locations are supported by 29 different case management systems deployed on 150 different servers. A statewide court database does not exist and this creates a void in the knowledge about individuals and cases in the Michigan Court system. Centralized Name Index Provides Court Personnel with the ability to find a person known to the Michigan Judicial System for all cases in which he/she is involved. Statewide Database Provides the SCAO and Court Personnel with the ability to build queries for statistical analysis or summary information from trial courts with different case management systems. Standardization Provides the SCAO and Court Personnel the ability to execute those queries, without having to understand the data specific to a county or court system.

Who is building the Judicial Data Warehouse? State Court Administrative Office Mark Dobek/Margo Runkle Judicial Information Systems State of Michigan Department of Information Technology Bull Information Systems Neal Zuzga Project Manager

How is the Judicial Data Warehouse being built? Bull Services utilizes the following key processes to build the Judicial Data Warehouse: Extract, Load, and Transformation (ELT) Process Update Process Auto Balance Process Standardization Process Address Cleansing and Standardization Unique Person Identification Process Field Staff can access the Judicial Data Warehouse via: Web-based Name Search Application, Hummingbird BI-Query (reporting tool). Sensitive and non public data is restricted to proper personnel.

Standardization Process Standard Values have been established for: Alternate Name Type (examples AKA, DBA, MIN) Attorney Type (A, I, R, U, W) Case Security (P, N) Case Status (C, D, O, P, U) Disposition Code (examples: AMD, DIS, GTY, JGE, SET) Gender (F, M, U) Party Type (examples: BUS, D, FOC, GDN, JUV, P) Offense Code Type (M, L, S) Offense Original or Amended Indicator (O, A) Offense Modifier (A, C, L, S) Race (A, B, H, I, M, W, U) Standardization and cleansing of Addresses Postal Soft is used to standardized addresses. Unique Addresses are stored and address history is maintained. Translation Tables Each source system has a conversion table listing their source codes along with the converted JDW standard codes.

Unique Person ID (UPI) ID assigned to uniquely identify an individual. ID is assigned based on pre-defined matching criteria. Currently, matching criteria is based on: Driver’s License Number Social Security Number State Identification Number Name/Date of Birth/Address Conservative approach used to match and assign the same UPI number to an individual.

When is the Judicial Data Warehouse being implemented? When implemented Statewide (EST 12/2008) 83 Counties 241 Courts 29 Software Providers 100 plus software applications Currently Implemented (2/2007) 80 Counties 181 Courts 22.8 million cases in the warehouse now

JDW Implementation Map Roscommon Roscommon JDW Implementation Map February 2007 ONTONAGON BARAGA Gogebic IRON MENOMINEE HOUGHTON KEWEENAW MARQUETTE ALGER DELTA SCHOOLCRAFT DICKINSON EMMET CHEBOYGAN PRESQUE ISLE MONTMORENCY OTSEGO ANTRIM CHARLEVOIX LEELANAU BENZIE GRAND TRAVERSE KALKASKA CRAWFORD OSCODA ALCONA MASON OCEANA NEWAYGO LAKE OSCEOLA CLARE GLADWIN MECOSTA ISABELLA MIDLAND BAY ARENAC HURON TUSCOLA SANILAC LAPEER ST. CLAIR SAGINAW MUSKEGON KENT OTTAWA MONTCALM GRATIOT IONIA CLINTON SHIAWASSEE GENESEE BERRIEN CASS VAN BUREN ALLEGAN BARRY KALAMAZOO ST. JOSEPH BRANCH CALHOUN JACKSON HILLSDALE LENAWEE EATON INGHAM LIVINGSTON WASHTENAW MONROE WAYNE OAKLAND MACOMB MANISTEE WEXFORD MISSAUKEE ROSCOMMON OGEMAW IOSCO CHIPPEWA MACKINAC LUCE ALPENA Implemented Partially Implemented. Refer to Regional Implementation Map. Partially Implemented On Hold (Application Decision Pending) Partially Implemented and Application Decision Pending

Data Sharing/Functionality Highlights DLN Matching with MDOS – compares the court’s DLN with the DLN from MDOS. This results in more accurate matches when assigning the UPI number. The MDOS DLN, Address, Gender, and DOB is displayed in BI-Query and the Name Search Application. Death Record Matching with MDCH – compares Name and DOB with individuals with court records to the MDCH Death Record Database, allowing court personnel to cease collection efforts or cancel outstanding warrants on deceased individuals. Report available in BI Query only.

New Functionality Under Development Sweep Reports – Matching data with Department of Corrections to provide information on inmates who owe the courts fees. A predefined query will be developed so users can easily generate reports on these individuals and initiate the process to collect those fees. Updating Data in the JDW – This is currently a monthly process. Efforts are underway to change this to a more frequent basis. New Data – Efforts are underway to add new data to the JDW. This includes Parole and Probation information from the Department of Corrections, and Sentencing and Financial data from the courts.

Conclusion There are several benefits to implementing a Judicial Data Warehouse, namely: One statewide court database User-friendly applications (web-based Name Search application and the BI-Query reporting tool) On Demand, Adhoc Reporting capabilities (BI Query) – allowing field staff to retrieve information within minutes. The JDW brings the courts into the 21st century with information technology resulting in better decision making, quicker turnaround time, and the ability to easily exchange information with other agencies to serve and protect Michigan citizens.

Judicial Data Warehouse Application Demo

JDW Web Application Main Menu

JDW Web Application Search Options

JDW Web Application Search Results Screen

JDW Web Application Case Detail Screen

JDW Web Application Case Detail Screen (continued)

JDW BI Query Application Main Menu

JDW BI Query Application Predefined Reports

Predefined Report Example State Offense By Police Agency Report

JDW BI Query Road Map Adhoc Queries

JDW BI Query Links of Interest

Example Adhoc Query Show me the total number of Personal Protection Orders filed in Genesee County in 2005. PPO Case Types: PH - Stalking PJ - Juvenile PP - Domestic PO – Protective Orders

Case Type Count PJ 41 PP 1713 PO 32 PH 440

Example #2 Show me everyone with an Outstanding Warrant in Lake County. I want to see the person’s name, address, date of birth, and DLN.

Lake County Outstanding Warrants - total 563 Last Name First Name DOB DLN Address City State ABRAHAM KIRLEE   RR 1 IDLEWILD MI ADAMCZAK JOSEPH 19860119 4600 FULLERTON ROAD LUTHER AGUIRRE JOSE 19821107 D03376802 8224 W AVALON DR PHOENIX AZ AIRHART RANDY 19610206 A663730051098 636 LAKE ST KALAMAZOO ALDWORTH MICHAEL PO BOX 340 BALDWIN STEPHANIE 2692 W SKEELS RD MONTAGUE 19780811 A436603676628 13289 N WOODBRIDGE AVE BITELY ALLISON DAVID 19880115 A425135755042 5440 GRAND RIVER DR NE GRAND RAPIDS ALLMAN GARY 19460409 A455271441278 25038 CURRIER ST DEARBORN HEIGHTS ANDERSON NADINE 15330 ASBURY PARK DETROIT ANDREWS WANDA 19550713 A 536 866 487 70 FLORENCE ST ARNOLD RONALD 19650718 A624744738567 41 LONDON LN MOUNT MORRIS ATLOGICH ELIZABETH 19560511 A342210585359 2902 W. 32ND ST ATWELL STEVEN 19730426 A340777288320 93 HYACINTH ST SW AUSTIN BILLY 3894 CAMELOT DR SE

Example #3 Show me the number of open cases by Judge in Midland County.

MIDLAND COUNTY – OPEN CASES BY JUDGE Judge's BAR Number Open Cases 32468 1175 666 39794 630 38701 521 11990 504 31391 268 43096 202 22405 82 21712 72 43826 52 2751 36209 14