DALLAS COUNTY DISTRICT COURT ADMINISTRATION

Transcription

1 DALLAS COUNTY DISTRICT COURT ADMINISTRATION April 7, 2009 BRIEFING MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Honorable Commissioners Court Duane Allen Gallup ADR Coordinator SUBJECT: ADR Program & Dispute Mediation Services BACKGROUND DMS primary function is to provide low cost mediation services in an effort to reduce the case load of the County s court system by resolving cases and disputes. On July 31, 2009, DMS had an organizational restructuring designed to improve the quality of services for the County and its citizens in July DMS s stated focus was on improving internal operations. In Commissioners Court on August 19, 2008, DMS was questioned about the restructuring, the termination of employees, and the lack of communication with county officials and staff. The stated reason for the restructuring was to improve service, by raising mediation numbers and success rates. DMS stated that they anticipated there would be no financial impact to the County and that their reorganization should result in long term cost savings to the County through utilization of new technology and a new organizational structure. However with the mediation consultant positions moving from full-time to part-time, many concerns were raised on whether there would be enough staff to fulfill the County s needs. Commissioner Dickey suggested it might be time the County should look at using a mediator pool, or go to bid and allow other entities the opportunity to serve, which was echoed by Commissioner Mayfield. DMS presented to the court that their mediation numbers and success rates had increased since the re-organization. Unfortunately, that is not reflected in the data below. In August, the ADR Coordinator surveyed the courts and the majority favored advertising the ADR contract for bid. In addition, many expressed an interest in evaluating the feasibility of an in-house ADR program working in conjunction with external ADR vendors (mediators), similar to Commissioner Dickey s above mentioned mediator pool concept. Since that time, the Civil and Family District Courts have decided to proceed with this proposal. While the County Courts at Law are still reviewing the matter. In reviewing the effectiveness of the current contract, using data that DMS provided to the County, disturbing trends have been observed using a 12 month average. Dallas Courts have 1

2 consistently sent DMS more cases, yet DMS was unable to translate these additional cases into mediations. It also appears that DMS was actually more effective prior to the re-organization than after. The possible reasons for these trends may be two-fold: (1) the movement of DMS s Mediation Consultants from full-time to part-time, (2) while the above mentioned new technology has yet to be implemented creating an over-burdened staff. DMS promised more mediations and better rates last August, however, mediations dropped significantly after the reorganization and have only recently began an upward trend. DMS is reporting a FY09 success rate of 67.85% which is showing improvement. However, the average number of mediations during the same time frame is 52 per month, falling short of the expected 100 mediations per month as per the contract. RECOMMENDATION Advertise for bid to all professional Dallas County mediators to submit a catalog bid whereby they meet certain requirements (not yet determined) set-forth by both the ADR office (representing the Judges), and the purchasing office, and agree to a price per mediation. Once the bid is closed those meeting the requirements would become approved vendors for a single year. Every year vendors will need to re-bid. This list of approved vendors would make up two pin-wheels, one Civil, and the other Family. Cases would be assigned by the ADR office to the mediators based on the pinwheel model. Once the case is assigned to the mediator, he/she becomes responsible for setting the mediation. The Mediator would be paid $200 per mediation by the County. In addition, the mediator could charge $100/ per party as a scheduling fee, which is what DMS currently does. This would benefit: Courts, by having only professional mediators mediating their Level 1 cases. The local mediator community, due to the ADR funds being dispersed throughout the community in a fair and competitive manor. The citizens of Dallas County, by getting high quality mediation for Level 1 cases at an affordable price in a convenient location. This recommendation is consistent with Dallas County s Strategic Plan by helping make Dallas County a destination of choice for residents and businesses alike. OPERATIONAL IMPACT There is a substantial need for affordable mediation service within the County. The Judges have overwhelmingly stated that if DMS is not awarded the ADR contract, there must be an alternative ADR Service. In reviewing the effectiveness of the current contract, using data that DMS provided to the County, disturbing trends have been observed using a 12 month average. Dallas Courts have consistently sent DMS more cases, yet DMS was unable to translate these additional cases into mediations. It also appears that DMS was actually more effective prior to the re-organization than after. The possible reasons for these trends may be two-fold: (1) the movement of DMS s Mediation Consultants from full-time to part-time, (2) while the above mentioned new technology has yet to be implemented creating an over-burdened staff. DMS promised more mediations and 2

3 better rates last August, however, mediations dropped significantly after the reorganization and have only recently began an upward trend. DMS is reporting a FY09 success rate of 67.85% which is showing improvement. However, the average number of mediations during the same time frame is 52 per month, falling short of the expected 100 mediations per month as per the contract. With this proposal a greater number of mediations should take place because the workload to schedule mediations would be spread among many mediators, instead of just three or four Mediation Consultants. It is also anticipated that with the Mediation Center in the George Allen, more Level 1 cases will be sent to the Center straight from the courts for pre-trial mediation when all parties are present. It is anticipated that the Mediation Center will need 6 mediation rooms, a couple of offices and a waiting room for a total of 1500 sq. feet One or two additional staff members will be needed and there will be a need for some basic office furniture and equipment. However, much of the furniture and equipment may be obtained from DMS. Per Cris Gilbert, DMS s CEO, much of their furnishings and equipment is Dallas County property. FINANCIAL IMPACT/CONSIDERATIONS Mediation cost during the last 12 months has averaged $502 per mediation; in addition another $200 is collected from 65% of the parties. Most of these level 1 mediations last two or three hours and it is the ADR office s opinion that $700 exceeds the threshold for low cost mediations. In the DMS Contract, Section II: Scope of Services, section A, paragraph 9, DMS estimated they could provide the County twelve hundred (1200) mediations per year. If achieved, the County s cost should equal $ per mediation. However the County s annual average cost per mediation was: $465 in September 2007 $427 in July 2008 $502 in January (This data is reflected in Appendices A & B. Calculations based on DMS s total monthly billing dollars, divided into the number of mediations, and averaged over a 12 month period.) This proposal will save Dallas County s ADR fund over $12,000 each month for the same performance currently generated with the existing ADR contract. In addition to the above savings, another $4,375 per month would be paid from the ADR Fund to the County s General Fund for rental of the Mediation Center. (See Appendix C for supporting information) The County will need to provide a location for the new Center where mediations can be heard. These up-front funds are available from the ADR fund. RECOMMENDED BY Duane Allen Gallup ADR Coordinator 3

4 Appendix A Average number of cases sent to DMS from Dallas courts has consistently grown from 187 in September 2007, to 204 in July 2008, to 208 in January 2009 Mediated cases were 64 in September 2007 and grew to an average of 70 in July 2008, only to fall back to 64 in January 2009 Mediations ending in a settlement have dropped from a high of 57.9% in September 2007, to 52.7% in September 2008 and have rebounded to 56.9% by January

5 1-Sep-07 1-Nov-07 1-Jan-08 1-Mar-08 1-May-08 1-Jul-08 1-Sep-08 1-Nov-08 $$$ Appendix B $520 $500 $480 Annual Avg cost per mediation County s annual average cost per mediation was: $465 in September 2007 $427 in July 2008 $496 in December $460 $440 $420 $400 Month Ending 5

6 Dollars spent per month Dollars spent per month Appendix C Per quote s I ve received on Downtown rental rates, the Average rental rate is $20.00 per foot, with the highest rent I ve found at $35.00 per foot. Therefore I ve used the $35.00 figure for demonstrational purposes. Square Feet needed Price per ft. Total Annual rent 1500 $ $ 52, Total Fixed cost Facilities Cost add employee Misc. Exp Monthly $4,375 $3,750 $400 $8,525 Annually $ 52, $45,000 $4,800 $102,300 Monthly # of mediations monthly Proposed Cost VS. DMS Cost 10 $10,525 $ 32, $12,525 $ 32, $14,525 $ 32, $16,525 $ 32, $18,525 $ 32, $20,525 $ 32, $22,525 $ 32, $24,525 $ 32, $26,525 $ 32, $28,525 $ 32,499 $35,000 $30,000 $25,000 $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $0 Proposed ADR vs. DMS # of mediations per month DMS Cost Proposed Cost What if scenario: If rental space were $70 per sq. ft. Proposed ADR vs. DMS $35,000 $30,000 $25,000 $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $ # of mediations per month DMS Cost Proposed Cost 6