Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

G1 equitable accessible affordable aall 2013 annual meeting


Published on

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

G1 equitable accessible affordable aall 2013 annual meeting

  1. 1. Part 1 – James Bamberger Director, Washington State Office of Civil Legal Aid Part 2 – David Keyes Community Technology Program Manager, City of Seattle Part 3 – Brian Rowe LSNTAP – Project Coordinator With thanks to the Hon. Donald Horowitz (Ret.) King County Superior Court Moderator – Rick Stroup Public Law Library of King County
  2. 2.  Sit Close  Emergency Exits  Silence Your Devices  Tweet to #AALL13  Questions at the Aisle Microphone  Materials Available at
  3. 3. James Bamberger, Director Washington State Office of Civil Legal Aid
  4. 4. Established by Washington Supreme Court in 1994 to:  Promote fair and full access to the justice system for low and moderate income people  Facilitate the development of non-duplicative civil legal aid delivery system  Address impediments that operate to impede or deny access to the justice system Supreme Court Order and ATJ Board Guiding Principles embrace principle that: Washington State’s justice system is founded on the fundamental principle that the justice system is accessible to all persons.
  5. 5. ATJ Board establishes Technology Committee to facilitate the coordinated development of technology-based legal aid initiatives and to guide a consumer-focused effort to promote full and inclusive use of emerging technologies in promoting access to the justice system Emergence and implementation of new technologies within the justice system creates concerns about institutionalizing a “digital divide”; perpetuating existing and creating new systemic barriers to access; marginalizing persons who do not have access to technology or experience barriers to using technology; and compromising the ability of individuals to achieve “justice outcomes” consistent with the merits of their cases. Jean Holcomb, King County Law Librarian and ATJ Technology Committee Chair, writes article in May 2000 Washington State Bar News asking:
  6. 6. The Digital Divide and Digital Justice: Do Clients Need a Technology Bill of Rights?
  7. 7. ATJ Board establishes “ATJ Technology Bill of Rights (TBoR) Committee  Hon. Donald Horowitz (King County Sup. Ct. Ret.), Chair  Jean Holcomb (Director, King County Law Library), Vice-Chair Mission Statement: “To create a body of enforceable fundamental principles to ensure that current and future technology both increases opportunities and eliminates barriers to access to and effective utilization of the justice system, thereby improving the quality of justice for all persons in Washington State.”
  8. 8. Understanding the Challenge; Defining the Objectives ATJ TBoR Committee reaches out to local, state and national law and public librarians, including:  Jan Walsh, Washington State Law Librarian  Deborah Jacobs, Librarian. City of Seattle  Nancy Kranich, President, American Library Association Introduction to 1976 ALA Library Bill of Rights A model that suggested:  Simplicity  Accessibility  Focus on Core Objectives/Values
  9. 9.  Public and law librarians included in every aspect of the work  Key stakeholders from other communities engaged throughout:  Courts  Court administrators  Clerks  Civil legal aid/Access to Justice Community  Criminal justice system representatives  Low income individuals and low income community leaders  Representatives of key ethnic and minority groups throughout the state  More than 100 volunteers from a broad range of professional and technology oriented disciplines  Establishment of initial collaboration with UW Information School (formerly the UW Library School)
  10. 10.  Initial drafts prepared, circulated and critiqued  Independent consultant retained; focus groups of court system users and other key stakeholders (internal and external) held throughout Washington State  Focus group report and recommendations received  Informal library surveys conducted  Final drafts developed, circulated and critiqued, then delivered to the Washington Supreme Court and Administrative Office of the Courts with recommendation that they be adopted by court order applicable to all justice system entities under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court  Supreme Court issues order adopting the Washington State Access to Justice Principles on December 3, 2004
  11. 11.  ATJ Tech Principles are about values – not technology.  “The use of technologies in the Washington State justice system must protect and advance the fundamental right of equal access to justice. There is a particular need to avoid creating or increasing barriers to access and to reduce or remove existing barriers for those who are or may be excluded or underserved, including those not represented by counsel.”  ATJ Tech Principles focused on promoting six independent but related goals in service of a common overarching vision of how the justice system should operate: Requirement of Access to Justice Technology and Just Results Openness and Privacy Assuring a Neutral Forum Maximizing Public Awareness Use Best Practices
  12. 12. @ATJWEB #Atj-Tech-Prin To make the legal system more accessible and more fair to all through proper use of technology #Preamble Access to justice is a fundamental right. The justice system must use technology to enhance and deliver access to justice for all. #Scope By WA Supreme Court Order the Principles apply to & guide all who are under the Court’s authority, and will help others.
  13. 13. #1AdvanceATJ Do no harm. Advance access, understandability & usability for all with technology. Avoid pushing or keeping anyone out.
  14. 14. #2JustResults Tech should enable decision-makers to be properly informed so as to increase the likelihood of just results.
  15. 15. #3Openness&Privacy Tech should increase justice system transparency while respecting & protecting personal privacy.
  16. 16. #4NeutralForum Tech should help assure a neutral, fair, accessible, affordable and transparent forum for all.
  17. 17. #5MaxPubAware We must inform and advertise to all of the public about available tools, and how to find and access them.
  18. 18. #6BestPractices We must develop, use and share Best Practices standards, procedures & tools to implement the Principles.
  19. 19. The Supreme Court Order – December 3, 2004 Adopting the principles requires that Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) in conjunction with the Access to Justice Board and the Judicial Information Systems Committee to report annually on the use of the ATJ Tech Principles
  20. 20. Building Implementation Infrastructure Adoption of 2006 Implementation Plan Develop organizational checklists and project development checklists Sponsor and host ATJ Tech Principles implementation and support website – Develop implementation guides for organizational leaders and technology system developers
  21. 21. Develop standard contract language that requires adherence to ATJ Tech Principles in the development of justice system technology initiatives Identify and chronicle best practices Maintain a robust and expanding relationship between the ATJ community and the iSchool Maintain a standing ATJ Board Technology Committee to help monitor and initiate technology use within the justice system and the development of best practices that serve the core objectives of the ATJ Tech Principles
  22. 22.  ATJ community develops JusticeNet idea – to build a system of integrated capacities, applications and interdisciplinary functions designed to make the justice system more accessible to all who need it, consistent with the ATJ Technology Principles  2009 Recovery Act proposes range of community based investment opportunities. ATJ Community joins with Communities Connect Network, public and law libraries, and others committed to enhancing and expanding digital literacy to promote the creation of courthouse and library-based Public Law and Justice Centers  Grant release press conference highlights Washington State’s novel proposal to expand justice system literacy through partnerships with courts, community based public computing centers and libraries  Development of statewide portal and two site-located projects (Chelan County and Kalispel Tribe)
  23. 23. Supreme Court Order Adopting ATJ Technology Principles ATJ Technology Principles Articles Donald Horowitz (Washington Law Review) Richard Zorza (Washington Law Review) ATJ Web ATJ Technology Resources Page
  24. 24. David Keyes, Community Technology Program Manager Department of Information Technology, City of Seattle
  25. 25.  Digital inclusion frameworks  Data sources on technology adoption  Applying the principles to systems  Communities Connect /JusticeNet  IT equity toolkit  Community Input and Bigger Picture David Keyes @diginclusion
  26. 26.  Access  Literacy  Content (reading & writing) For residents, businesses and NGO’s Digital Divide Digital Inclusion Broadband Deployment & Adoption
  27. 27. Access to devices and the Internet  Availability, cost, ease of use for connectivity to the Internet, and end-user hardware and software. Assistive technology. Also tech support. Literacy in using computer and Internet technologies  Skills required in order to utilize the equipment and Internet effectively for essential services, education, employment, civic engagement and cultural participation. Meaningful and useful content and services available  Services available for those in need, culturally and educationally appropriate design, marketing and placement appropriate to reach underserved communities, and enabling of content production and distribution by lower capacity residents, businesses and organizations.
  28. 28. Institute of Museum and Library Services, University of Washington, International City/ County Management Association. (2012 January).
  29. 29. 6/13 NTIA report: Exploring the Digital Nation
  30. 30.  71.7 percent have used Internet (NTIA/census 2011) ◦ 76.2 non-Hispanic Whites 82.7 Asian ◦ 58.3 Hispanic ◦ 56.9 Black Social media use is closer Smartphones: 56%. Higher income adults & under 35 lead (Pew) Education, Age, Income, Disability difference Libraries & public computing are still relevant 71.7 76.2 82.7 58.3 56.9 0 20 40 60 80 100
  31. 31. ◦ State Council on Digital Inclusion ◦ Developed state definition of digital inclusion ◦ BTOP Public Computing project  35 Centers in 7 counties  Access to Justice computers in 2 courthouses  Multilingual video content developed by WA Law Help ◦ PARTNERSHIPS!
  32. 32.  Where does info tech touch system users & operators?  The public?  Where do our systems enable others to touch the public?
  33. 33.  Identify accurate requirements  Make conscious and deliberate choices (i.e. languages)  Identify and Eliminate unintended barriers  Improve user acceptance
  34. 34.  What diversity is there in the stakeholders?  How does the project team reflect that diversity?  How does product design/selection ensure best outcome?  How are differing needs of different groups met throughout the project lifecycle? • Outreach • Training • Support 36
  35. 35. • Net Neutrality • Broadband • Universal Service Fund • Consumer cell/data plans • Digital literacy investments • Consumer rights/privacy/ security
  36. 36.  Apply equity principles internally to your own organization  Be at the table in planning delivery of e-services  Advise justice system web developers  Support patrons digital literacy  Apply equity principles in communications strategies
  37. 37.  National Everyone On Campaign  Pew Internet and American Life  NTIA report: Exploring the Digital Nation  Connecting People for Development Study  Communities Connect Network  Digital Inclusion Framework  Seattle Information Technology Equity Project Management Tool  Seattle Race and Social Justice Initiative  Seattle Information Technology Indicators
  38. 38. To learn about the research and evaluation projects lead by the U.S. IMPACT Study research group and how the IMPACT Team can help your library through implementing strategic evaluation, workshops, research, visit: Find out more about IMLS initiatives to help community leaders make strategic decisions about technology investments at ve_communities.aspx Learn about the project team and download a copy of the extended report: inclusion-framework/
  39. 39. Brian Rowe J.D., LSNTAP – Project Coordinator, Adjunct Professor, Seattle University School of Law, University of Washington Information School
  40. 40. Brian Rowe J.D. Techie Legal Geek @ Northwest Justice Project Blogger @ Youtube GeekightsNW.orgek
  41. 41. Cyborg Boy by ~Gryz at Deviant Art
  42. 42. Accessibility I. Requirement of Access to Justice
  43. 43.
  44. 44.
  45. 45.
  46. 46.
  47. 47.
  48. 48. Spell Suggest The Red Model - Rene Magritte
  49. 49.
  50. 50.
  51. 51. citpprinceton
  52. 52. Ingress
  53. 53. Public Law Library of King County
  54. 54. Thanks! Brian@BrianRowe.ORG Credits: Content Brian Rowe CC-BY with credit to: Northwest Justice Project Privacy Keyboard by By g4ll4is CC-BY-SA, Other images often used under fair use or CC as noted Rowe image by Bipolar Images - Geoffrey Gribbin Photography
  55. 55. QUESTIONS?
  56. 56. Tweet at #AALL13 Complete Email Evaluation Download PDF Materials Contact James Bamberger Contact David Keyes Contact Brian Rowe Contact Rick Stroup