Research and data

Court workload analysis

Workload assessment

The Judicial Council uses weighted caseload assessments to measure the number of judges and other resources needed in each court. This is a widely recognized and accepted approach for evaluating workload. The resulting calculation is an estimate of the resources needed for each court’s case processing work.

Weighted caseload relies on three basic components:

  1.  annual number of court filings by case type;
  2. caseweights and other model parameters that estimate how much time court case processing activities take by case type;
  3. a staff-year value, which quantifies the amount of time case processing staff or judicial officers have for their work activities.

Judicial Workload Study

The Judicial Workload Study is a weighted caseload methodology to measure trial court judicial officer need. The resulting calculation estimates the number of judicial officers required for each court’s case processing work. The results of this study form the foundation for the Judicial Needs Assessment, which the Judicial Council conducts and reports biennially to the Legislature.

Judicial Needs Assessment

Government Code section 69614(c) requires that the Judicial Council report biennially to the Legislature on the need for new judgeships in the Superior Courts using the uniform criteria for allocation of judgeships described in Government Code section 69614(b). The public’s right to timely access to justice is contingent on having adequate judicial resources in every jurisdiction.

Past Judicial Workload Studies

September 2019: The Judicial Council approved updated caseweights used to measure judicial need.

December 2011: The Judicial Council (the council) approved updated caseweights used to measure judicial need.

October 2008: The council approved the need for the Legislature to create the remaining 50 judgeships identified in the 2007 update to the workload study; approved a new list of 100 additional judges that are needed to meet the demands of continued workload growth in the trial courts; and approved a mandated study to the Legislature reporting on the factually determined need for new judgeships in each superior court.

December 2007: The council approved the allocation methodology for converting 11 subordinate judicial officer (SJO) positions in FY 2007-2008 and 146 SJO positions eligible for conversion in subsequent years.

October 2007: The council approved seven vacant SJO positions for conversion to judgeships based on the recommendations contained in this report.

February 2007 : The council adopted the criteria for approving trial court requests for changes in the number of authorized SJO positions.

February 2007 : The council approved the updated results of the statewide assessment of judicial needs. The 50 judgeships created by the Legislature in AB 159 were allocated to the trial courts on the basis of the recommendations contained in this report.

August 2004 : The council approved the updated results of the statewide assessment of judicial needs based on more-recent filings data and a minor modification in the assessment methodology. The 50 judgeships created by the Legislature in SB 56 were allocated to the trial courts on the basis of the recommendations contained in this report. SB 56 also adopted the Judicial Workload Assessment methodology approved by the council in this report.

October 2001 : approved the results of the statewide assessment of judicial needs including the ranked list of 150 recommended new judgeships.

August 2001 : The council adopted a set of judicial workload standards that can be used to assess the statewide need for additional judges.

Past Judicial Needs Reports

Resource Assessment Study

The Resource Assessment Study (RAS) is a weighted caseload methodology to measure trial court case processing staff need. The resulting calculation is an estimate of the staff needed for each court’s case processing work, expressed as full-time equivalents (FTE). 

The FTE need produced by RAS is translated into dollars using average salary costs, adjusting for local cost-of-labor using Bureau of Labor Statistics data, and including actual retirement and health care costs. Non-personnel costs and other elements are factored into the Workload Formula to project the total funding need for each court.

Past reports