全球智库信息集成服务系统

State and County Revenue Streams Vary Widely

• Most of the states examined fell somewhere between the extremes of state- and county-level funding for trial court systems.

Funded Services Vary Between State Courts

• Even trying to put labels on what is included in the state court system within a given state can become ambiguous and complicated.

How State Courts Spend Fee Revenue Varies Significantly

• A significant financing distinction separates states that permit their court systems to retain control over some portion of court-generated fee revenue from states that do not.

State Court Systems Vary in Their Flexibility to Carry Forward Resources or Revenue

• When the state court systems recognize revenue and their degree of flexibility in being able to draw on or bank funds can affect a system's agility given revenue volatility and create challenges in meeting cash-flow needs.

Line Items and Fund Allocation Vary Between Systems

• Some state legislatures provide for many more court system funding line items than others do — a state practice that can thereby reduce a court system's flexibility and autonomy in determining how to allocate appropriated funds.

Disclosure Differs Greatly Between Systems

• The details of what accounting information gets formally disclosed in the annual report and how this corresponds to the more detailed accounting that is undertaken in the operational management of the court system varies from state to state.

Governance Models Vary Significantly

• Line items and earmarks for special legislative priorities can frustrate attempts at efficient management of resources and slow the reaction time when funding shortages appear.