Judicial Performance Evaluation

Since opening its doors in 2006, IAALS has been at the forefront of efforts to improve and expand programs for evaluating the performance of state and federal judges. We have earned a reputation as the “go to” group for research, recommendations, and practical assistance in the JPE field.

We have accomplished this by serving, in a number of contexts, as a convener of JPE program administrators, judges, lawmakers, and scholars who are committed to promoting and ensuring effective judicial performance evaluation in states around the country.

IAALS’ JPE Working Group provides an essential forum for this convening. Founded in 2007 with JPE program administrators and scholars from seven states, the group now benefits from the participation of representatives of 15 states.

IAALS has also convened two national conferences on the topic of judicial performance evaluation. Our first conference in 2008 focused on the development, structure, and improvement of JPE programs across the nation, and in 2011, our second national conference focused on performance evaluation for appellate judges.

Our JPE Working Group and our national JPE conferences, in addition to our ongoing research and information gathering in this area, position us well to serve as an adviser to states that are considering the adoption of robust JPE programs.

Click here for information about states with Judicial Performance Evaluation programs.

Transparent Courthouse Revisited: An Updated Blueprint for Judicial Performance Evaluation offers a menu of recommended practices and tools for...
IAALS administers a Working Group of JPE program administrators and scholars around the country, which facilitates sharing of ideas and information.
This website provided Coloradans with an innovative educational resource for voting in judicial elections, and has served as a model for other states.
IAALS has been working to improve and expand judicial performance evaluation programs since our founding in 2006. One of the major challenges these...
We have taken a closer look at how best to evaluate appellate judges for two essential reasons, and developed a model process.
This study assesses whether, as some claim, there is empirical evidence that women and minority judges are evaluated less favorably than their...

Recent Blog Posts

Judicial performance evaluation (JPE) took center stage in the Fall/Winter 2017 issue of Voir Dire, the American Board of Trial Advocates’ magazine...
This week, Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper signed legislation to reauthorize and restructure the state’s judicial performance evaluation (JPE)...
Robust evaluation of judges has a dual purpose. It educates judges on their strengths and weaknesses on the bench and equips them to make necessary...