Resources / Study / Innovation for Court ADR

Just Court ADR

The blog of Resolution Systems Institute

My Favorite Resource: A Year in Review

Nicole Wilmet, December 20th, 2019

It’s hard to believe that another year of My Favorite Resource has gone by! Much like last year, I have had such a wonderful time connecting with ADR friends across the country to learn about a wide variety of helpful and informative resources. In the spirit of sharing and reminiscing, I thought what better way to get the season started than by revisiting with all the My Favorite Resource readers all the wonderful resources from this year! Sit back, grab a cup of cocoa, and let’s begin!

  • In January,Sally Campbell, the Dispute Resolution Services Manager for the Supreme Court of Virginia, who shared about Appellate Mediation: A Guidebook for Attorneys and Mediators.
  • In February, Tom Valenti, dispute resolution professional and founder of Valenti Law, shared that his favorite resource is the Kluwer Mediation Blog.
  • In March, Tracy Johnson, the Executive Director at the Georgia Office of Dispute Resolution, shared that one of her favorite resources is the network of colleagues she has developed through the Georgia Council of Court Administrators.
  • In April, Robyn Weinstein, ADR Administrator at the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, shared her love of the New York City Dispute Resolution Listserv.
  • In May, Christine Poulson, Executive Director at Resolution Virginia, shared that her favorite resource is the National Association for Community Mediation’s (NAFCM) email listserv.
  • In June, Sharon Sturges, Director of the Colorado Judicial branch Office of Dispute Resolution, shared about the National Center for State Courts website and publications.
  • In July, D.G. Mawn, NAFCM, shared his love of NAFCM’s On Demand webinars.
  • In September, James Alfini, RSI Board Member and Dean Emeritus and Professor of Law at South Texas College of Law, shared that his favorite resource is the Center for Judicial Ethics at the National Center for State Courts.
  • In October, Alyson Carrel, RSI Board Member and Clinical Associate Professor and Assistant Director of Northwestern Pritzker School of Law’s Center on Negotiation and Mediation, shared that her favorite ADR resource is the Dispute Resolution Resources for Legal Educators section of the University of Missouri Law School’s Center for the Study of Dispute Resolution website.
  • In November, Cassie Lively, Executive Director at the Center for Conflict Resolution, shared about NAFCM’s Virtual Library.

Last, but not least, I thought I would share my favorite resource to cap of the year. One of my favorite ADR resources from this year has been The Little Book of Restorative Justice by Howard Zehr. I have been passionate about restorative justice for a few years and I first came across this resource shortly before I completed circle training this year. I value this resource because I think it is a tremendous guide for anyone interested in restorative justice that provides a nice overview of the principles and goals of restorative practice. As a somewhat novice to this subject when I picked up this resource, I felt that Zehr’s book deepened my understanding of the basics and theory behind restorative justice. For those unfamiliar with this resource, I would recommend reviewing Zehr’s definition of restorative justice (pg. 37), as well as his list of what restorative justice is not (pgs. 8-13).

Thank you again to each of the participants in this year’s series! To the readers of My Favorite Resource, I hope this year’s haul of resources leads you to discover your new favorite resource!

If you are interested in sharing a resource in 2020, please contact me at nwilmet@aboutrsi.org.

Research Year in Review

Jennifer Shack, December 19th, 2019

This year we learned about the efficacy of a variety of dispute resolution programs, explored party trust in mediators, and considered ways to assess and improve the party experience in dispute resolution processes.

Program evaluations

The theme of evaluations of ADR programs is that participants like them. This includes the multiple studies I summarized for our Mediation Effectiveness Studies database. Each of the studies that looked at the participant experience found high levels of satisfaction and, in comparative studies, the level of satisfaction was greater for those going through mediation than those who did not.

Nevada and Michigan provided us with insights into their child protection mediation (CPM) programs. The evaluation of Nevada’s statewide program found that family members were highly positive about all aspects of the mediation. All of them thought the process was fair. Almost all said they were able to voice their opinions, were treated with respect and were able to be a part of finding answers to the problems discussed. Almost 90% said the others really listened to them. For all practical purposes, these responses did not vary based on whether they were foster parents or natural parents. The study also found that there was no difference in satisfaction rate based on the stage at which mediation occurred, but that satisfaction was higher when mediation resulted in agreement as compared to when it did not.

Child protection mediation participants in Michigan were also highly satisfied with their experience in mediation. In the two counties with experience data, participants said that they had the opportunity to express themselves, gained a better understanding of the issues, felt respected and felt the process was fair to them. In a statewide comparison between those family members who participated in mediation and those who did not, through who went through CPM gave slightly higher ratings on case resolution, staff courtesy and courtesy of the judge.

I also discussed an evaluation I conducted of the Civil Stalking Pilot Mediation Program in Ohio.  While there wasn’t enough survey data to determine how satisfied participants were with their experience, we did find that almost ¾ of these cases reached agreement, with most of the agreements being for the parties to have no further contact.

Switching to restorative justice, we learned that participants in Nebraska’s Youth Conferencing Program also have high rates of satisfaction. In addition to being satisfied with the process, most participating youth and victims believed that the victim youth conferencing VYC made the justice system more responsive to their needs. Further, almost all of the victims agreed that it was helpful to talk directly with the person who was responsible for the harm, and most said that meeting that person reduced any fear that he/she would commit another crime against them. The youth held similar opinions: most said it was helpful to talk directly with the victim and almost all of them said that after the meeting they had a better understanding of the full impact of the crime on others. In addition to providing a positive experience to participants, youth conferencing led to a high rate of agreement completion, with almost 95% of the youth ending with full compliance.

Research

From a study of one restorative justice program in Nebraska, we move to a compilation of forty years of research on victim offender mediation (VOM). The research found that victims receive multiple benefits from VOM. Victims who participate in VOM as compared to those who went through the traditional process received more restitution, had less fear of re-victimization and were less likely to remain upset after the process. Additionally, participation in VOM leads victims to feel empowered and to have a more humanized view of the offender.

Offenders were also found to receive benefits from the VOM process. These included being more empathetic toward victims of their crimes, being held directly accountable to victims (which is a core need for many offenders), being able to deal with their feelings and seeing victims change their feelings toward them, feeling empowered, and avoiding jail or court.

Other benefits accrue to the courts and community. Some studies found that VOM led to a higher rate of agreement completion than the traditional process. Many studies, but not all, found that VOM led to a lower recidivism rate than the traditional process. A few studies also found VOM to be cost-effective. Short-term, VOM lowers costs by being less expensive than court. Long-term, lowered recidivism and lower incarceration rates lead to cost savings. One study found as well that mature programs were more cost-effective than those that were just started up, and another found that those involving community mediation centers were more cost-effective.

Two of the studies I summarized were about trust in the mediator. We learned that participant trust in the mediator is the same whether mediation is in person or via a sophisticated video conferencing tool, in which sensitive microphones and special cameras that pan and zoom are used to help participants follow the flow of the conversation. We also learned that mediators and parties have similar perspectives on what mediator behaviors and characteristics engender trust in parties, with the exception of eight factors for which the parties were significantly more likely than the mediators to say built trust with mediator. These were:

  • The mediator’s familiarity with legal aspects relating to the dispute
  • The mediator suggests an alternative or a way out of the dispute
  • The mediator provides candid and frank input about the dispute
  • The mediator does not linger too long on the dispute but advances toward its settlement
  • The mediator is appointed by an authority, such as a reputed judge
  • The mediator shows an interest in the parties’ mutual concerns and focuses on their common goals
  • The mediator highlights the rules of mediation
  • The mediator talks to the parties about informal matters as opposed to just talking about the dispute

We also looked at research focusing on access to justice. A study of judicial settlement conferences in Canada examined what factors were related to parties’ sense of access to justice, as indicated by their sense that the process was fair and useful, as well as their sense that the settlement judge provided professional support. These included: the judge being active in helping the parties to reach a resolution that is fair and suited to their needs; communication that creates trust; the judge facilitates a just process and a process that complies with ethical norms.

Two of my summaries were of articles that used research to argue for changes to how we approach disputes resolution. Nancy Welsh argued that transparency is essential to help to equalize the knowledge of one-shot users and repeat players, allow for public oversight, and make it less likely that mediators would engage in unethical behaviors. She then noted that mediation is now often imposed on parties through contracts and mandated by the courts. For these mediations, there is a greater responsibility to ensure that the processes are fair and effective. Thus, Welsh argues for a new set of standards for these “compelled” mediations that call for more information to be imparted about mediations.

Jean Sternlight focused her attention on online dispute resolution (ODR), arguing that ODR should be designed to take into account human psychology. That requires an imaginative approach to determining whether and how to incorporate technology into dispute resolution. She suggests that “computers are not likely the best tool for helping humans think through how they want to respond to a dispute, and how they might creatively work things out with a fellow disputant.” She concludes that ODR may best be used for disputes that involve wants that are simple and predictable, such as small online purchases.

I’m looking forward to a research-filled 2020!

A Look Back on 2019

Nicole Wilmet, December 18th, 2019

I cannot believe we are already in the last month of this decade! What a wonderful and full year 2019 has been here at RSI. From court program evaluations to trainings and conferences, we have had a very exciting year and continued to make great strides in serving communities with court alternative dispute resolution! As RSI’s Resource Center Director and Court ADR Connection Editor, I have had the pleasure of sharing each exciting moment with you this year. To culminate 2019, I am looking back on all of RSI’s monumental moments this year.

This year, our Resource Center continued to provide a wealth of court ADR information and we expanded our Research Library with a plethora of new resources, including:

We also celebrated growth and several important milestones this year. In February, Alyson Carrel, Clinical Associate Professor and Assistant Director of Northwestern Pritzker School of Law’s Center on Negotiation and Mediation, joined our Board of Directors. In March, Jennifer Shack celebrated 20 years at RSI! In May, RSI was honored with the Association of Family and Conciliation Court’s Irwin Cantor Innovative Program Award, which recognizes innovation in court-connected or court-related programs! In August, the Honorable Nancy Katz (ret.), who works with JAMS as a mediator and an arbitrator, joined our Board of Directors. Last, but not least, this month, our program coordinators Olga Ivari and Kevin Malone celebrated six years at RSI! Olga is the Program Coordinator for our Lake County Foreclosure Mediation Program and Kevin is the Program Manager for both our Kane County Foreclosure Mediation Program and Child Protection Mediation Program.

This year, our organization continued to explore ways to serve the court ADR community. Under a planning grant from the Family and Interpersonal Resilience and Safety Transformation (FIRST) Fund, we spent time this year studying the current landscape of intimate partner violence (IPV) screening tools. To support this research, in June, RSI convened a summit of experts in mediation, family law and intimate partner violence (IPV) to help us explore whether an online tool (such as a website or an app) could improve the frequency and quality of mediator screening for IPV prior to mediation. The result of our research and findings are summarized in our report, Considering an Online Pre-Mediation Tool to Screen for Intimate Partner Violence: Findings & Blueprint, which explores the gap between “best practices” and reality when it comes to mediators screening for IPV and discusses how technology may help address these deficits.

Executive Director Susan Yates and Director of Research Jen Shack also did a bit of traveling this year, attending and presenting at conferences and seminars across the U.S. In April, Susan and Jen headed to Minneapolis for the American Bar Association Section of Dispute Resolution Annual Conference. While there, Jen presented on what her evaluations of child protection mediation programs in Chicago and Washington, D.C. can tell other courts about how to design programs that are effective, efficient and address the needs of all mediation participants. In October, Susan conducted a series of three seminars on “Building Your Court’s Civil ADR System” at New Mexico’s statewide ADR conference in Santa Fe. In November, Susan and Jen also attended the 2019 International Online Dispute Resolution Form. While there, Jen presented on what factors should be examined when evaluating litigants’ experience of online dispute resolution. If you are interested in learning about how RSI can work with your court program in 2020, send a message to our staff!

Phew! Who knew so much could happen in one year?! As December (and this decade!) nears its close, I know that each of us here at RSI are thankful for a wonderful 2019. We look forward to all that awaits in 2019!

Olga Ivari and Kevin Malone Celebrate 6 Years at RSI!

Just Court ADR, December 17th, 2019

This year marks six years with RSI for two members of our staff, Olga Ivari and Kevin Malone! Olga and Kevin manage RSI’s mediation programs here in Illinois. Olga is the Program Coordinator for our Lake County Foreclosure Mediation Program and Kevin is the Program Manager for both our Kane County Foreclosure Mediation Program and Child Protection Mediation Program.

Congratulations Olga and Kevin on six years with RSI, we are grateful to you for all of your hard work!

Support RSI this Holiday

Susan M. Yates, December 16th, 2019

Dear friend of RSI,

With the giving season upon us, I want to tell you about how Resolution Systems Institute is directly and profoundly helping people through mediation services – and ask for your support. These services are some of many ways RSI helps improve access to justice by enhancing court ADR.

Did you know that along with our research, resources, evaluation and dispute system design services,RSI operates two foreclosure mediation programs and a child protection mediation program in northern Illinois?

The media may not be covering foreclosure any more, but many homeowners who experience job loss, high medical expenses and divorce still find themselves in danger of losing their homes. In Kane and Lake counties, RSI works with homeowners, lawyers, lenders, the court and experienced mediators to help work out whether there is a way for homeowners to retain their homes. This past year, our programs served 423 homeowners, resulting in 83 homes saved from foreclosure.

RSI also works to help keep children safe and minimize their time in foster care. Through our Child Protection Mediation program in Kane County, RSI brings together volunteer mediators to help families and social workers achieve those goals. Here’s what one party said after a mediation: “I was finally able to talk to [the other party] as an equal and I feel like they finally heard me. I don’t think I could have done this without [the mediators’] help.”

We are grateful for the support we receive from the courts and from funders like the Illinois Bar Foundation for these programs. But those do not cover all the costs of these programs. Your donation will support access to justice through mediation and through RSI’s research, resources, evaluation and dispute system design programs.

Please make a contribution to RSI. We are a tax-exempt, 501(c)3 non-profit organization, so your gift is tax-deductible as allowed by law. You will be helping families and homeowners and supporting everything else RSI does to improve access to justice through court ADR.

Thank you!

Susan M. Yates