Page 266 - Ad Hoc Report June 2018
P. 266

 222 2 0 1 7
information. My primary concern is when I am projecting very significant expenditures for capital defense or I’m staffing a capital case, I’m con- stantly creating basically a shadow network of information that we, the defenders share among ourselves to try to project our weighted case open figures, our staffing figures, our funding figures.1036
The inability of defender offices to project budgets and determine staffing levels for their offices due to a lack of data was an issue at the time of the Prado Report, and it continues to be an issue in 2017. The CJA program is a billion dollar program, and data collection and analysis should be “commensurate with the great responsibilities that [defenders] now bear”1037 to provide accountability and justification for such a budget. That cumbersome management of Defender IT should make this data inac- cessible to defenders is unacceptable. Despite the best efforts of all parties to achieve efficiency and flexibility, reorganization resulted in a more convoluted and less man- ageable bureaucracy for the management of defender IT systems.
10.3.2 Continuing Ethical Concerns and Subsequent Breach
Defenders testified that despite the MOUs in place and continuing assurances
of confidentiality, they remain concerned. Maureen Franco, defender from the Western District of Texas, where NITOAD is staffed and operated, provided the fol- lowing examples demonstrating that some AO IT managers still do not understand what confidentiality entails and why it is important:
[O]ne AO IT manager explained that he had ‘top secret’ clearance and thus we (defenders) should not be concerned if he had access to our data. He did not understand that having access to our data when he is not a defender employee violates the duty of confidentiality owed to our clients. Another AO IT manager wanted access to our protected case management system (defenderData) in order to test applications within that protected realm—not realizing that allowing her through the firewall would jeopar- dize thousands of clients’ confidential data and information.1038
Another defender agreed that the MOUs are not sufficient, given the lack of understanding among AO staffers as to why they are necessary. She explained the agreements are simply “no substitute for what ought to be physical separation of our data management.”1039
Defenders repeatedly explained that this is a structural problem. Structural or
1036 SteveKalar,FPD,N.D.Cal.,PublicHearing—SanFrancisco,Cal.,Panel7,Tr.,at23.
1037 Id.at6.
1038 MaureenFranco,FPD,W.D.Tex.,PublicHearing—SantaFe,N.M.,Panel2,Writ.Test.,at5–6. 1039 VirginiaGrady,FPD,D.Colo.&D.Wyo.,PublicHearing—SantaFe,N.M.,Panel2,Tr.,at35.
No recommendation presented herein represents T H E A D H O C C O M M I T T E E T O R E V I E W T H E C R I M I N A L J U S T I C E A C T the policy of the Judicial Conference of the United States unless approved by the Conference itself.

   264   265   266   267   268