The AOC’s goal is to have 80% of the state caseload on Contexte and to shutdown the legacy CMS by the end of 2014. With current staff we are able to conduct multiple concurrent projects using a combination of factors including geographic location, project size, caseload, and type of court. The following factors will be considered in determining the AOC’s readiness to deploy Contexte in a requesting court:
Is the request for district court only, circuit court only or both?
If both circuit and district court can be trained and migrated simultaneously, then AOC won’t have to return to the location at a later date to migrate the other court.
If the request is for a district court, is it part of the state district court pilot project?
AOC will be sensitive to the evolving nature and jurisdiction of the limited jurisdiction courts and support the effort to modernize the judiciary.
Is the request for a single county or an entire judicial circuit?
When implementing in multi-county circuits it can be challenging for the judicial staff to have only some of their counties in the new system.
How many counties are in the circuit?
The number of counties impacts both the geographic area required for travel and the ability to complete an entire judicial circuit. For larger judicial circuits it may be more prudent to first implement the counties with bigger caseloads.
How many judges are in the circuit?
Larger court and clerk staff size results in longer projects and more training.
Have all the clerks and judges agreed to participate?
The AOC must be thrifty with available funding. If only part of a court or clerk’s office is willing to participate, then the project makes less economic sense.
Does the court have sufficient hardware and Internet bandwidth to participate?
Some courts may require additional hardware or infrastructure upgrades in order to proceed.
How large is the caseload being added into Contexte?
The AOC will try to increase the caseload in Contexte to achieve the goal of 80% in 2016; however, AOC must conduct a mixture of large and small projects in order to manage the effort.
What is the estimated travel expense for the project, and are sufficient funds available?
The size of the project, the distance from Little Rock, and the cost of travel may impact the AOC’s ability to conduct the project. The AOC will rely on regional functional staff as much as possible to limit travel expense.
Does the court require a data conversion?
Data conversions require significantly more effort by both the AOC and the court and cause projects to last much longer.
Can the court afford the cost of data conversion?
If a court requires conversion, but is unable to afford this supplemental effort, then the project may need to be delayed until it is affordable.
What imaging system is used by the court?
Contexte has been successfully integrated with the D.I.S.C. DocsServer, Fidlar and Apprentice imaging systems. The effort by the imaging vendor to integrate into Contexte may delay a project.
Can the project be conducted concurrently with another project?
Multiple projects in adjacent counties or cities can lead to a more efficient use of limited resources. A district court project and circuit court project in the same county could share some of the training and implementation effort.
If AOC is not ready, can the court contract with Xerox for implementation or conversion services?
If a court is ready to implement the system but the AOC is unable to schedule the project as soon as the court would like, it may be possible for the court to contract directly with Xerox and pay for implementation services in order to speed the process. AOC is working with Xerox to develop an affordable solution for courts that are ready before the AOC is ready. This may include the ability of a court to pay for a full implementation project or even part of a project – such as data conversion.