	Background

Biennially, the Judicial Conference, the federal judiciary’s principal  policymaking body, assesses the judiciary’s needs for additional  judgeships. The demands upon judges’ time are largely a function of both the number  and complexity of the cases on their dockets. Some types of cases may  demand relatively little time, and others may require many hours of work. The federal judiciary has developed workload measures for bankruptcy  judges to estimate the national average amount of a judge’s time that  different types of cases may require. In assessing the need for additional bankruptcy judgeships in a bankruptcy  court, the Judicial Conference first considers the court’s weighted case  filings. The Judicial Conference has established 1,500 annual weighted  case filings per authorized judgeship as an indicator of a bankruptcy  court’s potential need for additional judgeships. However, our analysis focused solely on the weighted case filings  workload measure. Each case filed in a bankruptcy court is assigned a case weight. Total annual weighted case filings for  any specific bankruptcy court is the sum of the weights associated with  each of the cases filed in the court in a year. Total annual weighted case  filings per judgeship represent the estimated average amount of judge time  that would be required to complete the cases filed in a specific bankruptcy  court in a year. Weighted case filings per judgeship is the total weighted filings divided by  the number of authorized judgeships. How the Case Weights Were Developed

The Federal Judicial Center (FJC) developed the weights, adopted by the  Judicial Conference in 1991, based on a 1988-1989 time study in which 272  bankruptcy judges (97 percent of all bankruptcy judges in those years)  recorded the time they spent on specific cases for a 10-week period. Once the case weights had been created, total weighted case filings were  calculated for each bankruptcy court. Of course, the actual time that individual judges spend on case-related and  non case-related work will vary. Assessment of Case Weight Methodology

Overall, the methodology used to develop the bankruptcy case weights  appears to be reasonable. FJC researchers systematically used the reported  time data to develop the case weights and made an effort to address all  known limitations in the data. It is important to note that the case weights  were designed to estimate the impact of case filings on the workload of  bankruptcy judges. 2002 and 2008 Research Designs for Updating the Bankruptcy Case Weights

In June 2002, the Judicial Conference Committee on the Administration of  the Bankruptcy System decided to begin a study to create new bankruptcy  case weights. Future updating  of the weights could include revision of case weight values and/or  developing case weights for new case categories. The data from the time  study could be used to validate the feasibility of the new approach.The  preliminary design for this study appeared to be reasonable. The extent to which new provisions in the  Bankruptcy Reform Act affect bankruptcy judges workload depends, of  course, on the frequency with which they are invoked and the time it takes  to address them. The FJC has again initiated a new case weight study that includes data  collected over 5 10-week reporting periods from May 2008 through May  2009. Each active  and recalled bankruptcy judge is to participate during one of the 5  reporting periods. Appendix I: Quality Assurance Steps the Judiciary Takes to Ensure the Accuracy Of Case Filing Data for Weighted Filings

All current records related to bankruptcy filings that are reported to the  Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts and used for the bankruptcy court  case weights are generated by the automated case management systems in  the bankruptcy courts. Time studies, in general, have the substantial  benefit of providing quantitative information that can be used to create  objective and defensible measures of judicial workload, along with the  capability to provide estimates of the uncertainty in the measures.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Judicial Conference of the United States, the federal judiciary's principal policymaking body, uses 1,500 annual weighted case filings per authorized judgeship (judgeship position) in a bankruptcy court as an indicator of the need for additional bankruptcy judgeships for that court. Total annual weighted case filings for any specific bankruptcy court is the sum of the weights associated with each of the cases filed in the court in a year. Total annual weighted case filings per judgeship represent the estimated average amount of judge time that would be required to complete the cases filed in a specific bankruptcy court in a year. In May 2003 GAO testified on whether weighted case filings were a reasonably accurate measure of the case-related workload of bankruptcy judges. The accuracy of weighted case filings rests in turn on the soundness of the methodology used to develop them. GAO's work focused on whether the methodologies used to develop the current case weights and to revise and update those weights were likely to result in reasonably accurate measures of bankruptcy judges' case-related workload. This statement is based on GAO's May 2003 testimony on weighted case filings as a measure of bankruptcy judges' case-related workload and documentation provided by the Federal Judicial Center (FJC) in June 2009 on subsequent efforts to update the current weighted filings measure.

What GAO Found

In May 2003 GAO reported that the methodology used to develop the case-related workload measure for federal bankruptcy judges--weighted case filings--were likely to result in reasonably accurate workload measures. The current study to revise those weights, begun in 2008, uses the same methodology as the study used to develop the current case weights and, as designed, is also likely to result in reasonably accurate workload measures. (1) The time demands on bankruptcy judges are largely a function of the number and complexity of the cases on their dockets, with some cases taking more time than others. To measure these differences, the Judicial Conference uses weighted case filings, which are a statistical measure of the average estimated judge time that specific types of bankruptcy cases are expected to take. Each case filed is assigned a weight, and the total weight of all cases filed in a bankruptcy court divided by the number of judgeships for that court provides a measure of the total average case-related workload per judgeship. (2) In assessing the need for new bankruptcy judgeships, the Judicial Conference relies on the weighted case filings to be a reasonably accurate measure of case-related bankruptcy judge workload. Whether the weighted filings are reasonably accurate depends in turn upon the soundness of the methodology used to develop the case weights. (3) On the basis of the documentation provided for our review and discussions with FJC and Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts officials, GAO concluded in 2003 that the case weights, as approved by the Judicial Conference in 1991 and 1996, were likely to be reasonably accurate. (4) The original case weights are now 18 years old. Changes in the intervening years in case characteristics, case management practices, and the implementation of new statutory or procedural requirements, such as the many changes in 2005 Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act, may have affected the continued accuracy of the current case weights. (5) To the extent that the case weights now understate or overstate the total time demands on bankruptcy judges, use of the weights could potentially result in the Judicial Conference understating or overstating the need for additional bankruptcy judgeships. (6) In 2008, the Federal Judicial Center began a study to revise the current case weights that is designed to collect data on the time bankruptcy judges spend on cases filed during 5, 10-week data collection periods from May 2008 through May 2009. Each active and recalled bankruptcy judge is to participate during one of the five reporting periods. This study design permits the development of new case weights based on the same type of objective time data as the current weights, which we found to be reasonable.