When assessing the state of an indigent defense program, The Spangenberg Group looks to similar indigent defense systems across the country with which to compare the program. Making comparisons between various indigent defense systems is an imperfect science, due to a wide number of variables. Among the most important variables to consider in state-by-state indigent defense comparisons are the following:

• Whether the system is funded entirely with state funds, entirely with county funds, or a mixture of both.

• Whether the system is organized at the county, regional, or state level.

• Whether or not the state has the death penalty.

• Whether the system has a centralized organization responsible for statewide data collection, oversight, and/or policy making.

• The types and percentages of cases handled by various providers in the state. For example, does a specific program handle appeals or death penalty cases? What percentage of the total indigent defense caseload is made up of less time consuming cases such as misdemeanor or traffic cases?

• The rate of pay for court-appointed counsel in the state.

• The population of the state.

• The way in which programs define, and therefore count, cases. Different programs define cases by charge, by indictment, by defendant, by assignment and by disposition.

• The availability of complete, up-to-date and reliable data.

• States in proximity to Kentucky;
• States with state funded systems;
• States with public defender programs organized and administered at the statewide level;
• States with regional public defender offices;
• States that have the death penalty; and/or,
• States that collect reliable data at the statewide level.

Once the sample states were identified, The Spangenberg Group conducted telephone interviews with representatives of state public defender programs, Administrative Offices of the Courts, and statewide indigent defense commissions in each state chosen. Those interviewed were asked to provide: the total statewide number of indigent defense cases handled in fiscal year 1998; a breakdown of the statewide indigent defense caseload by felony, misdemeanor, juvenile delinquency cases, juvenile dependency cases, appeals, capital and post-conviction cases and other cases; the total statewide expenditure for indigent defense including public defender programs, court-appointed counsel and contract defenders in fiscal year 1998; the portion of the indigent defense expenditure provided by the state; the indigent defense expenditure provided by counties; and, the total amount of money generated for indigent defense programs through additional, non-general fund revenue sources in fiscal year 1998. In some instances, complete FY 98 data was not yet available; when this occurred FY 97 data was obtained instead.

The results of our comparison surveys are discussed at length in the following chapter.

^3.  & Illinois trial-level indigent defense services are county-funded and centralized data is not available.  Thus, we excluded Illinois from this study.