From the GAO Report

5/4/2024

MJ Redesign

5/7/2024 09:18:01

One must be careful when requiring services to adopt a "standardized suite of performance measures." Metrics tied to case outcomes are not necessarily related to performance. Also, having judge advocates that have mostly served in litigation billets get promoted doesn't signify the "litigation track" is effective. Another concern I had with this report was the mention of standardized requirements to serve in litigation billets. While I agree a certain degree of experience in military justice is required, we have to be careful not to constraint the services from selecting the best applicants since we are not trying as many cases and selecting arbitrary numbers/metrics could significantly lower the pool of JAs qualified for the position.

Philip Cave link

5/7/2024 10:10:17

Excellent point. It reminds me of the monthly Attribution Metrics game. Was the TC or DC responsible for the case taking more than 90 days?

The number of cases completed and how quickly they were completed is not the sole or best measure of effectiveness. For example, 50 cases completed within 90 days (that was the old standard) may not account for their being 45 guilty pleas, three MJA, and two members—nor do wins and losses necessarily answer the question. Focusing on the five contested cases may not be the best measure without looking at the nature of the case and how the counsel went about the presentation before and in court.

The problem may be exacerbated depending on the real experience of the supervisor/rater.

It would be interesting to add Admin Boards into the mix. As an SDC, new DCs did their first few months in Admin Boards. The board is a fertile training opportunity to develop personal and case presentation habits and advocacy skills. Counsel doesn't need to know the rules of evidence; you get to do direct of an "accused" more times than in trial, you may get to cross-examine witnesses, and you are working with a "panel." That is also an opportunity for the supervisor to assess the mentoring needs as the DC moves into courts. For a DC, that's also a less consequential way to deal with losing and moving on to redefining success.

So, if you are developing a PQS, speaking Navy, perhaps three to six months of Boards might be an initial qualifying standard.

Nathan Freeburg

5/7/2024 14:07:58

I have to concur with both Mr. Cave and MJ Redesign. You may well be able to create metrics that "work" for Forts Liberty and Cavazos, Norfolk and the San Diego area and the like, but will not work so well with a small installation that has one contested trial a year...

Comments are closed.

CAAFlog

From the GAO Report

Archives

Categories