Rule 2-106.05. Administration of the performance evaluation program for judicial self improvement.

Intent:

To provide for the administration of the performance evaluation program for judicial self improvement.

Applicability:

This rule shall apply to the Judicial Council and to the Standing Committee on Judicial Performance Evaluation.

Statement of the Rule:

(1) The performance evaluation program shall use professionally recognized methods of data collection which may include surveys, onsite visits, caseload management data and personal interviews. Information shall be obtained from multiple sources to provide balanced information. Information from individuals shall be based on personal knowledge of the judge’s or commissioner’s performance.

(2) The Standing Committee on Judicial Performance Evaluation shall:

(A) propose to the Council a schedule of recommended activities and procedures by which to generate self improvement information;

(B) with the Council’s approval, provide a schedule of activities and procedures to all judges and commissioners;

(C) report to the Council recommendations for improving self improvement information; and

(D) propose to the Council any surveys and amendments. Subjects inquired into by a survey shall be drawn from but need not include all of the criteria established by Rule 2-106.02.

(3) Records and information generated for the self improvement of judges and commissioners are classified as private records. The survey results for each court level and geographic region, without identifying individual judges or commissioners, are classified as public records. Respondents to surveys shall be anonymous.

(4) Geographic regions are:

(a) Region 1: Judicial Districts 5, 6, 7, and 8;

(b) Region 2: Judicial Districts 1 and 2;

(c) Region 3: Judicial District 3;

(d) Region 4: Judicial District 4; and

(e) Region 5: The Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals.