Instant Gun Check in TexasIII. Integration from the Courts' Perspective

A. The Need for Clarification

The federal government has been taking a piecemeal approach to creating national data standards through reporting requirements and federal grant programs for various executive branch functions, it has inadvertently created a incoherent web of data standards for state courts. These national data standards are being developed to facilitate administering government programs for a much more mobile citizenry. These standards were not originally envisioned to be directed at courts, but the successful administration of the programs necessarily requires court action and subsequently their data.

Three major executive branch initiatives impacting the courts are child support, criminal justice, and juvenile justice. Since the courts were not foreseen as having a significant role in the administration of such government programs, they were not targeted in the grant programs. Some jurisdictions, however, experienced success in partnering the courts with executive agencies to share grant funds to assist with the exchange of crucial court data.

As a result of this piecemeal approach to court data standards issues, state and local courts often use entirely separate and distinct software and hardware to administer these various functions. This compounds the complexity of the tasks that court officials perform. This approach falls short of maximizing what truly could be a meaningful partnership to exchange data. More grant programs like this could lead to a clerks office with several computers, but each could be used for only one purpose.

Most of the very large counties in Texas, including Harris, Dallas, Bexar, Tarrant, El Paso, Travis, and Denton have made huge investments in integrated systems over the past 25 years. Many of these counties are migrating to newer hardware and software platforms to accomplish a greater degree of integration and to make these systems friendlier to users.

Many of the larger states, including New York, New Jersey, Colorado, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina, are also investing in integrated systems. JCIT supports the concept of a statewide integrated justice system for Texas.

An integrated system is one in which the data related to a case or person flows logically from one government entity to the next as the administration of that case or person proceeds. At a minimum, an integrated justice system speeds the administration of cases, limits redundant data entry, and limits data entry errors. It is important that, in the course of integrating with executive agencies, courts have the option to operate one information system that is capable of administering all types of cases. Some jurisdictions may still choose to use separate systems for different case types, but that should be an option, not a funding requirement.

B. The Role of Local Government

Municipal and county governments should actively participate in the planning process (including the Texas Municipal League and the Texas Association of Counties) and provide funding for basic infrastructure needed for court officials. This includes: computers, local area network equipment (servers, hubs, cards, cabling, operating systems), office suite software, case management software, electronic legal research user fees. State and federal monies should be available to assist with this basic information technology infrastructure and to facilitate inter-jurisdictional administration of cases.

 

C. The Role of State Government

The state should establish standards; establish a statewide network to facilitate the exchange of data; negotiate contracts based on the standards to leverage the buying power of the courts to achieve lower costs; provide financial assistance to acquire the electronic toolset for court management; and to provide technical assistance and support to the courts to ensure that the infrastructure and data exchange operate efficiently and effectively.

1. Standards
The standards that JCIT is currently developing are geared to maximize functionality of the courts' limited resources and to ensure that data sharing needs can be facilitated. For these reasons, JCIT encourages all Texas courts to migrate to technology consistent with these standards at the end of the life-cycle of existing non-compliant software and equipment.

a. Case Management Software Standards
Standards for case management software systems developed by the state, counties, cities, and private vendors will include two aspects: 1) a standard data dictionary to ensure that systems track the essential elements to track cases for court purposes and to facilitate reporting requirements and 2) functionality standards to ensure that courts benefit from case management software systems to automate some of the business functions of court officers and employees. Data standards are being developed through:

(1) research being conducted on court data flow needs in Hays, Travis, and Williamson Counties by Dr. Ronald Wyllys' systems analysis class at the University of Texas Graduate School of Library and Information Science;

(2) research being conducted on existing local and statewide court data standards by the National Center for State Courts; under the direction of an eight member steering committee which includes one JCIT member and one OCA staff member;

(3) work being conducted by OCA staff as part of the State Agency Justice Information Coordinating Committee, which consists of OCA, the Department of Public Safety, the Department of Criminal Justice, the Youth Commission, and the Juvenile Probation Commission (advisory agencies include the Criminal Justice Policy Council, the Department of Information Resources, and the Office of the Attorney General), which is focusing on integration of criminal and juvenile information; and

(4) forums with vendors of case management software.

b. Information Transfer and Electronic Data Interchange
The courts of Texas should use internet protocol (IP) as the standard for information transfer and electronic data interchange. This supports JCIT's theme of keeping the courts in the mainstream of technology. This also is one of the primary protocols specified to be supported by the Department of Public Safety's upgraded law enforcement network, Texas Law Enforcement Telecommunications System; the statewide network JCIT identified as the network of choice for Texas courts.

c. Desktop Software
Standards for software, other than case management software, include the following areas: office suite software, desktop operating systems, electronic mail, internet browsers, document management systems, and electronic legal research.

(1) Office Suite:

Microsoft Office 97
Corel Perfect Office 8

(2) Desktop Operating System:

Windows 98
Windows NT 4.0

(3) Electronic Mail:

Microsoft Outlook97
Netscape Communicator 4.0
Eudora Pro 4.0
Novell GroupWise 5.0

(4) Internet Browser:

Microsoft Internet Explorer 4.0
Netscape Communicator 4.0

(5) Document Management:

under development by JCIT

(6) Electronic Legal Research:

under development by JCIT

d. Local Area Networks (LAN)
Standards for local area networks include the following areas: workstations, file servers, operating systems, topology (cabling, hubs, cards), electrical, and climate controls. When purchasing local area network equipment, careful attention must be paid to the system requirements of the court's case management software.

(1) LAN Workstations:
Courts should purchase or lease business-class, network-ready computers, with JCIT standard office suite, electronic mail, internet browser, operating system, and network client software pre-installed. If courts choose to purchase, a three year warranty (depot v. on-site) should be purchased. Courts should not purchase or lease computers until manufacturers have reduced the original purchase price for the processor generation (e.g. 400 MHz Pentium II) at least once; an initial price reduction generally occurs roughly two months from initial release. Courts should only purchase or lease computers from manufacturers that have been ranked by the Gartner Group as Tier 1 manufacturers; currently IBM, Dell, and Hewlett-Packard are ranked as Tier 1 manufacturers. The Gartner Group ranks computer manufacturers on the following criteria: enterprise stability, process, research and development, and historical information. JCIT has found that, in general, reliable technical support is not available to courts. JCIT has also found that once courts become reliant on computers to conduct their business, their business cannot be effectively conducted when their computer systems are unavailable. Due to these two findings, JCIT has recommended that the courts invest wisely to reduce support needs. These findings are especially critical for rural courts which will be farther removed from support centers and less likely to have local support available. LEASE OR PURCHASE CRITERIA: Courts are recommended to adopt a life-cycle for workstations, file servers, and notebook computers. JCIT recommends a three or four year life-cycle for workstations and file servers and a two or three year life-cycle for notebook computers. Generally, leasing is not a wise investment for life-cycles of more than three years.

(2) LAN File Servers:
Courts should purchase or lease business-class, file servers, with network operating software pre-installed. File server must be on the approved list of hardware for the network operating system chosen (Microsoft Hardware Compatibility List or Novell Certified). Courts should purchase warranty or maintenance (maintenance should be available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week) on file servers for the entire life-cycle of the equipment. Courts should not purchase or lease computers until manufacturers have reduced the purchase price for the processor generation (e.g. 400 MHz Pentium II) at least once; this initial price reduction generally occurs roughly two months from initial release. Courts should only purchase or lease computers from manufacturers that have been ranked by the Gartner Group as Tier 1 manufacturers; currently IBM, Dell, and Hewlett-Packard are ranked as Tier 1 manufacturers.

(3) LAN Operating Systems:
Courts should purchase Windows NT version 4.0 or Novell Netware version 5.0. These operating systems are very commonly used and support is generally readily available.

(4) LAN Topology:
Courts should only purchase 100 Mbps Ethernet network topology equipment and cabling.

(a) Cabling:
Ethernet cabling should be at least Category 5 (ANSI/EIA Standard 568). Cabling installations should be documented, diagramed, labeled, tested, and warranted. Cabling should be concealed within walls and ceilings, if possible. Cabling should terminate at wall-plates and connect from wall-plates to computers with patch cables.

(b) Hubs:
Ethernet hubs should be 100 Mbps managed hubs that are rack mountable. All connections should be clearly labeled. 3Com, Cisco, and Ascend are industry leaders in ethernet hub manufacturing.

(c) Cards:
Ethernet cards should be 100 Mbps Ethernet managed cards. Allied Telesyn, 3Com, SMC, and IBM are industry leaders in ethernet card manufacturing.

(5) LAN Electrical and Climate Controls:

JCIT recommends that courts ensure that the operating environment for computers, especially file servers, be reliable. Electrical wiring and climate controls must be adequate to sustain computer operation. Equipment will have climate and power specifications included. Generally, a good operating environment for file servers is between 62 and 75 degrees Fahrenheit and humidity of less than 75%. File servers generally require an isolated ground clean power circuit. Laser printers should be on separate circuits.

e. Security
Security guidelines are being developed by JCIT for use by courts. Such guidelines will be based, in part, on existing security measures for the use of the Texas Law Enforcement Telecommunications System but will also address security at the workstation and local area network level, also. Guidelines will include operating procedures, a computer security policy, and an encryption standard.

JCIT has issued a recommended electronic mail and internet access policy for court officials and employees. This policy is available on the Judicial Internet Server at: http://www.courts.state.tx.us/jcit/

f. Internet Web Pages

Standards for judicial and court web pages are being formalized. JCIT recommends the following appropriate information to include: the names, and optionally pictures and biographical information, of judges, clerks, court administrators, and prosecutors; terms of office; contact information; court location information; hours of operation; court forms; pictures and history of the courthouse; information on prior officeholders; opinions (appellate courts); case information; and information about doing business with the court. JCIT recommends that the following types of information are inappropriate for a judicial or court website: advertising; campaign information; and endorsements of candidates or commercial enterprises.

g. Court Intranets

JCIT is developing standards and guidelines related to a court intranet, a private, secure network available only to court officials and staff. This network will be a complex web of court local area networks connected across the state via the Texas Law Enforcement Telecommunications System. Texas Law Enforcement Telecommunications System is also the telecommunications network that will serve as a law enforcement intranet. The court intranet and the law enforcement intranet will operate privately and secure from each other as well as from other governmental, private, and public computer users.

h. Voice Storage and Retrieval Services

JCIT is developing minimum standards for voice storage and retrieval services. Currently, the minimum standard that courts should achieve is to implement a voice mail or answering machine to receive calls when court employees are unavailable and when court employees are otherwise unable to answer incoming phone calls. Future standards envision that court data will be accessible through commands and menus accessible through telephone keypads; similar to services offered by most banks and credit card companies.

i. Disaster Recovery

JCIT is developing standards for disaster recovery planning including data back-up, off-site storage of data back-up; and contingency plans for computer down-time.

j. Risk Management

JCIT is developing risk management guidelines and standards related to information technology use.

k. Telecommunications

JCIT has identified the next generation of the Department of Public Safety's Texas Law Enforcement Telecommunications System as the network of choice for Texas Courts. Requirements for this network as identified by law enforcement officials are very similar to the needs of the telecommunications network needs of the courts:

  • ability to transmit a variety of types of data (text, video, internet, graphical images of documents, pictures, and fingerprints) on one-cross-functional network;
  • continuity and consistency of network services to urban and rural areas (DPS anticipates connecting to 1,355 sites, JCIT anticipates connecting approximately 1,750 sites, with a high percentage of co-located sites in city halls and county courthouses);
  • security, encryption, and integrity of network traffic;
  • low maintenance and usage charge;
  • reliability of telecommunications across telephone company turf; and
  • sharing a network with a data trading partner.

l. Paperless Litigation and Electronic Filing

JCIT is developing standards for the implementation of electronic filing systems within the state. Several jurisdictions are using electronic filing services provided by private vendors. Judge James Mehaffy, 58th District Court, Jefferson County, is the pioneer of electronic filing in Texas. Judge Mehaffy initiated electronic filing and service of documents related to mass tort cases, cases in which there are 10 or more plaintiff's attorney firms and 10 or more defense attorney firms involved in one case.

Electronic filing will evolve into the common method of conducting court business. JCIT is developing standards that will identify the document types courts will receive electronically and accompanying "electronic envelope" information that will provide information about the case to allow automatic processing by the court's case management system and case management systems of other law firms involved in the case.

JCIT is also developing electronic filing standards and recommendations regarding:

  • How to track a unique case
  • What constitutes E-filing
  • Who has ownership of electronic documents filed with the courts
  • What rights to electronic court records may be assigned
  • What constitutes notice/receipt
  • What are acceptable formats to ensure that documents can viewed
  • How to verify authenticity of sender and integrity of document

JCIT's electronic filing standards will define the electronic gateway for what types and formats of information a court will accept electronically, including information about the case that will link the received information to the case record in the court's case management system.

2. Support of JCIT Standards

OCA will work with the Department of Information Resources and the General Services Commission to establish statewide contracts that local courts can use to purchase standard equipment and software.

The standards established by JCIT have been incorporated into a draft Court Information Technology Standards Worksheet, see previous page, which will serve as a template for courts to create an information technology solution in their counties and municipalities.

3. OCA Provided Services to Assist Courts for Implementation

At an increasing rate, counties and municipalities are investing funds in the basic infrastructure needed for court operations. The areas where gaps exist to the courts making efficient use of these investments are: assistance with configuration, local area networking, training, internet access, and on-going support of standard court systems. OCA is providing several areas of direct support to courts at all levels: development of plans, policies, and contracts; JIMS software; hosting information on the internet; Help Desk; training; local area and statewide network assistance; budget assistance with commissioners courts and city councils; and assistance with grant requests.

a. Judicial Committee on Information Technology and its OCA staff support

State Funds Requested for Fiscal Year 2000: $296,000
State Funds Requested for Fiscal Year 2001: $296,000

JCIT will continue to establish standards, address policy issues, and provide general guidance for the implementation of court information systems. The OCA staff to JCIT conducts research, procures and manages contracts, and conducts planning.

b. Case Management Software and Support - JIMS

State Funds Requested for Fiscal Year 2000: $775,000
State Funds Requested for Fiscal Year 2001: $775,000

The OCA will continue development and support for its case management software; establish and work with vendors on data, functionality, and electronic filing standards; and collect electronic case-level data from the courts to facilitate public access, performance analysis, reporting, and integration. Implementation of its Windows-based software will occur in the courts of appeals beginning in February, 1999.

The district and county court Windows-based software package will be complete and available in January, 2000. The justice of the peace and municipal court Windows-based software package will be complete and available in March, 2000.

New systems being developed are geared towards greater accessibility and usefulness of court data and documents within the local court, and between the local court and:

c. Judicial Internet Server

State Funds Requested for Fiscal Year 2000: $140,000
State Funds Requested for Fiscal Year 2001: $140,000

(1) Court Web Sites: OCA is providing assistance with developing court websites. OCA is developing a standard template webpage for each court in the state, with a link to the court's official website.

(2) Legal Research: OCA is developing a Request for Offers for a statewide contract to make on-line electronic legal research available to judges and their legal staff. By using the internet as the vehicle to access this resource and by leveraging the buying power of the courts as a whole, fees will be more reasonable and maintenance and library costs will be reduced.

(3) Electronic Benchbooks: OCA is working with the judicial education training centers to assist with providing the judges of the state access to electronic benchbooks. A benchbook is a reference guide that provides judges with information about specific legal and judicial processes. Benchbooks are being tailored for:

  • district and statutory county judges,
  • county judges,
  • justices of the peace, and
  • municipal judges.

OCA has offered its assistance to convert documents to an internet friendly format and to provide access to such documents on its internet server.

(4) Electronic Procedure Manuals: Similar to an electronic benchbook, electronic procedure manuals for clerks and court administrators will be developed and hosted by OCA.

(5) Electronic Practice Manuals: Again, similar to an electronic benchbook, OCA will offer its assistance to develop and host electronic practice manuals for Prosecutors.

(6) Electronic Forms: An effort is underway to collect from the courts, prosecutors, and judicial training centers standard forms (e.g., appeal bonds, warrants, orders, complaints, judgements, magistrate warnings, oaths, plea forms, etc.) These forms will be put into electronic format and posted to the Judicial Internet Server making standard judicial forms more accessible and usable by all members of the judiciary. The OCA has recently converted the Texas Municipal Courts Education Center's Form Book (more than 200 forms) into HTML format and posted these forms that relate to justice and municipal court operations and magistrate functions on the Judicial Internet Server.

(7) Other Texas Legal Resources for Courts: The Judicial Internet Server, supported by OCA currently provides direct access to the following legal resources:

(a) The state and federal constitution;

(b) Texas statutes and codes;

(c) Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure;

(d) Texas Rules of Evidence;

(e) Recent opinions from the Supreme Court and Court of Criminal Appeals;

(f) Judicial Ethics Advisory Opinions;

(g) Texas Register;

(h) Texas Administrative Code;

(i) Code of Federal Regulations;

(j) Federal Register; and

(k) many other legal and judicial links of interest.

In the future, the Judicial Internet Server will host model rules regarding electronic access to court information and records, standards and procedures for electronic filing, and other rules and standards that are developed in response to electronic court issues. An objective of drafting, promulgating, and posting of these rules and standards is to detail to the public, the bar, and members of the judiciary what information is available and under what circumstances this information is available in accordance with state law and the myriad of rules and policies governing the courts.

(8) Data sharing

OCA will begin developing an index to and distributed search mechanism for court data on the Judicial Internet Server. These internet data tools will enable plaintiffs, defendants, attorneys, the public, the press, the courts, and other government agencies to search a central index of key information about cases pending and disposed in all Texas courts. Results of the initial search will most likely return a set of cases matching the search criteria. Each case in the index will have enough data to determine its status, and if the case has been disposed, what the outcome was. Each case index detail will provide a link to that court's detail records, if they are published on the internet by the local court or by OCA.

OCA has been operating the Texas Judicial Appellate Court Index Search since April, 1998. This public access tool allows searchable access to information about the status of cases pending or recently disposed in the appellate courts. This model will be enhanced with the installation of the Windows-based case management software for the courts of appeals, Supreme Court, and Court of Criminal Appeals to automatically replicate indexed data, rather than the current method of a court clerk extracting the data and sending it via e-mail to OCA.

OCA will begin developing a Texas Judicial Trial Court Index Search, based on the appellate model, in conjunction with the development of the Windows-based case management for district & county courts and justice of the peace & municipal courts.

This system of an index and distributed search has been chosen to ensure the quality of the data and its cost effectiveness. In the research conducted by JCIT and OCA, the primary alternative to creating this type of index and search tools is to create a data warehouse. A data warehouse is a central store of information collected from multiple and diverse sources. The data in a data warehouse is used to inquire against and to perform analysis against. Data warehouses are generally very expensive to implement and operate. OCA does not have enough resources to perform this function.

There are many governmental processes and the private practice of law that necessarily come to the courts to conduct a portion of those processes. The information that flows though the court functions as part of these other processes should be dynamically exchanged as events in the court processes occur.

Currently, courts at all levels are required to submit paper reports to state agencies on a monthly and quarterly basis. With a data standard and data sharing model, report generation and preparation time at the court level and processing time at the state level will generate significant time savings.

Some examples of types of information exchange that would increase the efficiencies of court and governmental work processes and the private practice of law are:

  • juvenile case information,
  • criminal case information,
  • foster care information,
  • child support information,
  • vital statistics information,
  • domestic violence protection order information, and
  • electronic case filing information.

The guiding theme of the work of JCIT, as set out by the Commission, is accessibility of court information. In order for information to be truly accessible in our decentralized court system, there must be coordination.

d. Judicial Help Desk

State Funds Requested for Fiscal Year 2000: $800,000
State Funds Requested for Fiscal Year 2001: $800,000

OCA is the only independent resource in Texas for information about court technology implementation. The Judicial Help Desk is a resource for courts to identify products that meet JCIT standards without a sales pitch. The OCA Help Desk provides troubleshooting for hardware and network issues, follow-up on higher level support conducted by contractors. The OCA Help Desk also supports OCA, judicial agencies, and Case Management users by providing software testing, documentation, training, and first and second level technical assistance. Programs supported include Microsoft DOS, Microsoft Windows, OCA Case Management, Corel WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, Lotus 1-2-3, Microsoft Excel, Groupwise, Microsoft Outlook, Microsoft PowerPoint, Microsoft Internet Explorer, Netscape Navigator, backup software, Novell NetWare, and more. Additional duties related to the OCA Case Management Software include coordinating user groups, researching technical and legal issues, evaluating and documenting user needs for programming staff, and publishing an OCA Case Management newsletter.

e. General Technology Training

State Funds Requested for Fiscal Year 2000: $1,400,000
State Funds Requested for Fiscal Year 2001: $1,400,000

JCIT has recommended the creation of a general technology training curriculum to be delivered to court officials. OCA is working with the Texas Center for the Judiciary, the Texas College of Probate Judges, the Texas Association of Counties, the Texas Justice Court Training Center, the Texas Municipal Courts Education Center, the Texas District and County Attorneys Association, and the Texas Municipal League to deliver a standard curriculum of court technology. This curriculum will include basic computer orientation, education about data sharing applications, electronic legal research, electronic manuals, and banks of jury charges, rules, and forms for judges, clerks, court administrators, and prosecutors.

f. Network and Infrastructure Assistance

State Telecommunications Infrastructure
State Funds Requested for Fiscal Year 2000: $2,000,000
State Funds Requested for Fiscal Year 2001: $2,000,000

Trial Court Technology

State Funds Requested for Fiscal Year 2000: $2,125,000
State Funds Requested for Fiscal Year 2001: $2,125,000

Appellate Court Technology

State Funds Requested for Fiscal Year 2000: $2,690,000
State Funds Requested for Fiscal Year 2001: $990,000

The OCA will provide assistance with the purchase, installation, configuration, and support of workstations, desktop operating systems, application software, LAN servers, LAN operating systems, ethernet hubs, cards, cabling, and statewide network connectivity.

g. Budget Assistance

OCA staff will provide assistance to courts to develop and present funding requests to Commissioners Courts and City Councils and grant requests for information technology that meets JCIT Court Technology Standards.

D. The Role of Federal Government

The federal government should provide an overarching plan to allow data sharing across states and to promote inter-jurisdictional data sharing within states. This is being accomplished through grant and entitlement programs administered by federal agencies. These grant programs are established in support of requirements imposed by federal legislation. Funding should be targeted not just for the data integration applications but also for basic infrastructure and networking. The federal government should also be responsible for creation and maintenance of national databases which combine state level databases to facilitate inter-state administration of cases.

(1) Grant and entitlement programs

Congress has approved numerous grant and entitlement programs geared toward implementing information systems to speed delivery and increase accuracy of executive branch services. Congress and federal executive agencies should identify funding for integration of court information systems with executive branch agencies including funding for basic infrastructure and networking.

(2) Program areas

(a) Child support:
Courts should be provided funding to integrate filing and collections information to facilitate interstate and inter-jurisdictional enforcement. Key players in this system are:

(b) Criminal justice:

Courts should be provided funding to integrate disposition and identification information to facilitate interstate and inter-jurisdictional enforcement and Brady bill enforcement (instant gun checks). Key players in this system are:

(c) Juvenile justice:

Courts should be provided funding to integrate information about juveniles to identify repeat offenders earlier. Integration will also facilitate administration of a State law which gives justice of the peace and municipal courts jurisdiction over the first two class C misdemeanor offenses of juveniles; subsequent offenses must be heard by a district court or county court. Key players in this system are:

 

Information Resources in the Future

(d) Foster Care:

Courts should be provided funding to integrate information regarding the status of parents, foster parents, and children. This will aid in removing children from abusive setting and speeding the adoption process. Key players in this system are:

(e) Mental health hearings:

Courts should be provided funding to integrate information regarding the status of individuals who are subject to involuntary mental health commitments.   Key players in this system are:

(f) Domestic violence protection orders and orders for emergency protection:

Courts should be provided funding to integrate information regarding the issuance of domestic violence protection orders to facilitate the interstate and inter-jurisdictional enforcement. Key players in this system are:

 

(3) Recent Developments

S. 2022, the Crime Identification Technology Act, was passed by Congress in October 1998. This legislation creates a $250 million per year grant program within the Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs to fund integrated justice systems among other items for federal fiscal years 1999 through 2003. No appropriation for this legislation was authorized; funding is anticipated for appropriations bills to take effect as early as July, 1999. This is the first federal legislation that specifically identifies courts and prosecutors as targeted recipients of integrated criminal justice information system grant funds. The legislation also requires that the approval process for state plans include the state's Chief Justice.

Without the planning process undertaken by JCIT and OCA on behalf of the courts, Texas would not be in position to take advantage of this new money for law enforcement or corrections.

Next IV. Conclusion



Return to
JCIT Annual Report
Table of Contents