b'JUSTICE COURTSOverall Court PerformancePast 12 Years Comparison of External Partners and Judges/Employees(in percentages and mean scores1 / red star2)Justice Courts Justice Courts100% 490% 19% 14%80%70% 24%60% 37% Poor 3 2.750% Fair 2.440% 44% Good30% 34% 220% Excellent10% 10% 18%0% 1External Partners Judges/Employees External Partners (n=164) Judges/Employees (n=181)(n=164) (n=181)1 Percentages may not equal 100% due to rounding. Mean scores are based on a 4-point rating scale: 4 = Excellent, 3 = Good, 2 = Fair, 1 = Poor. 2.5 is the midpoint of the rating scale. 2Red star = statistically significant difference between means scores of respondents. The difference is not due to chance.Q5: Courts of the Future: Innovative Ideas/Goals the Courts Should PursueExternal Partners (n=673) 11. Continue Virtual Proceedings 19%2. Technology Improvements 15%3. Timely Resolution 10%4. Litigant Assistance/Remote Services 8% See the next 2 slides for examples 5. Expand Treatment Programs/Services 7% in each category.6. Improve Access 7%7. Connect to Services/Collaborate 5%w/Partners8. Seek Support for New/Modernized 4%Facilities9. Miscellaneous 17%0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%% of All Responses (n=673)1This was an open-ended question. Consultant completed a content analysis coding the responses into themes/common categories.4320232027 Strategic PlanSuperior, Juvenile, and Justice Courts, Pima County 26'