Recap of Part 1
This is Part 2 of a three-part series about the barriers to the adoption of court reminder systems. In Part 1, I reviewed research showing that reminders are practical, cost-effective, and promote fairness. Still, adoption remains low. You can read Part 1 here.
Now we look at why change is so difficult.
The Public Sector Was Designed for Stability, Not Rapid Change
Government IT environments face structural limitations that hinder modernization. These limitations are not the fault of staff or leadership. They are inherent to the system itself.
The National Center for State Courts' Trends 2025 report emphasizes that courts operate under a mandate of continuity. They must keep mission-critical functions running at all times, leaving little room for experimenting with new tools or redesigning processes. The report notes that many courts rely on outdated case management systems, siloed data, and manual workflows that were never designed to integrate with modern communication tools. These realities make even minor improvements feel burdensome.
The National League of Cities' Municipal Digital Services Action Guide reinforces this point. The guide states that true digital transformation is not simply adding new software. It requires rethinking how work is done, redesigning services around residents, improving internal coordination, and providing staff with the training and resources needed to support change. These steps are often challenging for local governments because staff are stretched thin and responsibilities are divided across multiple departments.
Modernization Requires Integration, Not Just Tools
Ideas42's Essential Guide explains that effective reminder programs depend on automatic enrollment, multilingual messaging, multiple reminder intervals, and clear templates. These features only work when agencies can reliably integrate data, maintain accurate contact information, and coordinate across systems such as CMS, citation, booking, and probation databases. Many counties lack this infrastructure.
The Effective Communications fact sheet shows that appearance rates improve significantly when reminders are paired with clear, simple, and consistent messaging. However, producing this level of communication requires time, design resources, and thoughtful implementation; counties with limited staffing struggle to take on this work even when the benefits are clear.
It Is Not Reluctance. It Is Structure.
When we talk to counties, they are not opposed to modernization. They are navigating:
• Staff shortages
• Fragmented systems
• Limited IT bandwidth
• Strict procurement and data governance rules
• The reality that daily operations always come first
Even when funding is available, implementation still requires time, coordination, and trust. Courts must communicate with judges, clerks, probation officers, and IT staff. They must determine who manages configuration, who updates contact information, and how new workflows fit into existing processes. They must also be confident that adoption will not disrupt hearings, dockets, or case processing.
The barrier is not reluctance. It is structure.
These systemic realities make it clear why reminders remain underused despite strong evidence and broad public support.
Part 3 will focus on how the right partner can remove these barriers and make modernization simple for any county.
Sources for Part 2
• NCSC Trends in State Courts 2025
https://www.ncsc.org/sites/default/files/media/document/NCSC-Trends-2025.pdf
• NLC Municipal Digital Services Action Guide
https://www.nlc.org/resource/building-innovative-digital-services-municipal-action-guide/
• Ideas42 Essential Guide to Court Reminder Programs
https://www.ideas42.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/i42-1530_RemindersRpt_Final.pdf
• Ideas42 Effective Communications Fact Sheet
https://www.ideas42.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Effective-Communications-to-Increase-Court-Appearances_Fact-Sheet.pdf
• Pew Charitable Trusts, "States Underuse Court Date Reminders," 2025
https://www.pew.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-briefs/2025/05/states-underuse-court-date-reminders
About Greg Shugart
Director of Government Relations
Greg Shugart brings over 30 years of public sector experience to the eCourtDate team, with a background in court administration, criminal justice reform, and government operations. He previously served as Criminal Courts Administrator for Tarrant County, Texas, where he led statewide-recognized initiatives in pretrial modernization, court communications, and system efficiency. Greg now contributes to eCourtDate’s strategy and partnerships, helping agencies implement technology that improves access, compliance, and trust in the justice system.