The first step in applying the NPDWS standards (case weights) to determine staffing sufficiency is to sort your historical caseloads into 11 NPDWS case types.
To do this, a provider must:
Step 1: Map historic caseloads by NPDWS case types
Map Jurisdiction Charges into NPDWS Case Types
The provider must first map the jurisdiction’s criminal code (i.e., all the possible criminal charges that a client could be charged with) to a NPDWS case type. This is an onerous task, but it only needs to be completed once. After it is completed, a provider should only adjust this mapping to account for new statutory changes (e.g., new sentencing enhancements or reductions).
In defining the case types, the NPDWS report offers three types of guidance: (1) a description of the types of cases that fit within each case type, (2) examples of some charges that might fit within those definitions, and (3) an expected sentencing range for the case type. The table below shows the case type definitions provided in the NPDWS at 58-59 (Table 3.3).
NPDWS Case Types
|
Case Type |
Description |
Sentencing Range |
Examples |
|
01: FELONY – HIGH – LWOP |
Felonies with possible sentences of life without parole (LWOP) |
Life without parole |
|
|
02: FELONY – HIGH – MURDER |
Non-LWOP felonies involving intentional killing of a person |
Up to life with possibility of parole |
First degree murder; malice murder; second degree murder; felony murder |
|
03: FELONY – HIGH – SEX |
Non-LWOP felonies involving serious sex offenses |
More than 15 years (including life with possibility of parole) |
Rape; aggravated sexual assault; child sex abuse; child pornography with victim |
|
04: FELONY – HIGH – OTHER |
Non-LWOP felonies (including DUIs resulting in death), other than charges falling into the high felony categories for murder or serious sex offenses |
More than 15 years (including life with possibility of parole) |
Negligent homicide; manslaughter; aggravated assault; assault with a deadly weapon; kidnapping |
|
05: FELONY – MID |
Felonies (including DUIs resulting in death), including serious property crimes, serious drug distribution crimes, and less serious violent crimes |
Possible sentences of 3 to 15 years |
Arson; armed robbery; grand theft; breaking and entering; drug distribution or manufacturing; battery |
|
06: FELONY – LOW |
Felonies (including DUIs resulting in death), including less serious property crimes, less serious drug felonies, and minor crimes of violence |
Possible sentences of up to 2 years |
Theft; larceny; burglary; simple assault |
|
Case Type |
Description |
Sentencing Range |
Examples |
|
07: DUI – HIGH |
Repeat DUIs, serious DUIs, and DUIs causing non-fatal injuries (can be a felony or misdemeanor) |
Possible sentences of more than 2 years |
|
|
08: DUI – LOW |
First or successive DUIs (typically misdemeanors) |
Possible sentences of up to 2 years |
|
|
Case Type |
Description |
Sentencing Range |
Examples |
|
09: MISDEMEANOR – HIGH |
Serious misdemeanors (other than DUIs) involving enhanceable misdemeanors (such as misdemeanors triggering repeat offender sentencing), sex misdemeanors, or violent misdemeanors |
Any |
Domestic violence; misdemeanor assault; misdemeanor animal cruelty; exposure |
|
10: MISDEMEANOR – LOW |
Less serious misdemeanors (other than DUIs or those falling into the high misdemeanor category) |
Any |
Petty theft; drug possession; drug paraphernalia; trespass; status offenses; criminal traffic offenses |
|
Case Type |
Description |
Sentencing Range |
Examples |
|
11: PROBATION/PAROLE VIOLATIONS |
Probation or parole violations derived from either felony or misdemeanor offenses |
Any |
|
These three definitions (description, sentencing range, example) may not always align. A state charge might fit within the definition of one case type, but the sentencing guideline for the charge may fit within another. The provider will need to use their discretion in determining the most appropriate case type.
Example 1: In Jurisdiction X, first degree burglary is defined as entering a dwelling unlawfully with an intent to commit a crime therein if either (1) armed with a deadly weapon or (2) causing physical injury to any person who is not a participant in the crime. First degree burglary is punishable by up to 20 years in prison. Under the NPDWS, burglary is listed as an example of a Felony-Low charge, but the jurisdiction’s maximum possible sentence of up to 20 years in jail places this charge in the expected sentencing range for Felony-High-Other. In this circumstance, the provider should consider the common sentences for this charge, as well as how much attorney work relates to the facts related specifically to first degree burglary (here either a deadly weapon or bodily injury). Given these factors, the provider could map this charge as either Felony-Mid or Felony-High-Other, rather than Felony-Low.
Example 2: In Jurisdiction Y, manufacturing an illegal narcotic is punishable by up to 20 years in prison. Under the NPDWS case types, drug manufacturing is listed as an example of a Felony-Mid charge, but the maximum possible sentence of up to 20 years in jail places this charge in the expected sentencing range for Felony-High-Other. In this circumstance, the provider might consider the actual sentences for this charge, as well as how much the higher potential sentences increases the attorney work on these cases. Based on these facts, the provider would determine whether to define this charge as a Felony-Mid case or a Felony-High-Other case.
Once all potential charges are mapped to the NPDWS case types, this map will dictate how the provider sorts their historical caseloads into the NPDWS case types.
Identify Caseload
Before a provider begins to map historic caseloads, the provider must define the scope of the cases to be mapped. To compare years of caseloads, the scope of the caseload mapped for each year must remain consistent. The caseload often differs based on the provider type.
- Statewide public defense commission: If the commission oversees both full-time public defender offices and a comprehensive conflict program (contract or assigned counsel), the scope of caseload to be evaluated would likely include all cases assigned to any public defense provider in the state.
- County public defender office: If the provider is the primary public defender office in the county, the scope of the caseload to be evaluated would likely include only cases assigned to that office.
- Statewide public defender: If the provider is a statewide public defender office, conflict and overflow cases are assigned by the courts or by a separate program administrator, the scope of the caseload to be evaluated would likely be all cases assigned to the statewide public defender office.
Similarly, the provider must determine the types of cases to be measured. The NPDWS standards only encompass cases in adult criminal courts. The cases that are excluded from your calculations, e.g., juvenile delinquency, civil commitment, should be excluded consistently. Alternatively, if you use some other standards (case weights) to include these cases, the source(s) of those standards should be clearly identified. For example, at least one jurisdiction (Washington State) has adopted the NPDWS for juvenile delinquency cases.
Gather Historic Caseload Data
The provider must then gather historical caseload data by year. The year can be a calendar year, but it is more common that providers use a fiscal or budget year. The provider must know the number of new cases opened in each year (however defined), and the highest charge faced in each case.
How many years of caseload data do I need?
For purposes of Step 2 (projecting the future caseload), providers generally map at least three years of historic caseloads. Some providers map five or even ten years of historic caseloads. At an absolute minimum, providers need to sort one full year of cases into the NPDWS case types.
Counting Cases
In the NPDWS, “a case is defined as all charges filed against a client arising out of a single event or series of events and being prosecuted together.” NPDWS at x; 59. Failing to follow the NPDWS definition of a case, e.g., by counting charges rather than cases or by counting clients rather than cases, can result in overcounting or undercounting. Below are some examples of how to apply the NPDWS definition of a case.
Court Cases v. Public Defense Cases
Courts may assign case numbers or count cases in a manner that does not match this definition of a case. For example, some courts count every charge as a separate case and assign each charge its own case number. In this instance, a single public defense case may correspond to several cases and case numbers in the court’s data system. Other courts count multi-defendant cases as a single case. In this instance, multiple public defense cases, generally handled by the primary and conflict public defense system, may correspond to a single case number in the court’s data system.
Example 1: Client A is accused of selling illegal drugs and charged with one count of drug distribution and one count of drug possession. The court assigns each charge a separate case number but handles the charges together. In this instance, the charges are counted as a single case.
Example 2: Clients B and C are charged with breaking and entering. The court assigns the same case number to both clients. Client B is appointed a public defender and Client C is appointed assigned counsel. In this instance, each client’s case is counted as a separate case.
Example 3: Client D is charged with a misdemeanor assault. While on pretrial release, the client is rearrested and charged with an unrelated DUI offense. Because the two cases arose from separate unrelated events, each is counted as a separate case.
When is a case counted?
A case is counted in the year in which the public defense provider is assigned the case. Importantly, a case is only counted once:
- Cases that do not conclude before the end of one year are not counted again in the next year.
- Cases that leave the public defense provider’s office and then return are only counted once. For example, if a case were assigned to the public defense provider, then the client hired private counsel, and then the case returned to the public defense provider, that case would count once, in the year in which it was originally assigned to the provider.
Identifying Highest Charges
Because the NPDWS defines a case as all charges filed against a client arising out of a single event or series of events and being prosecuted together, the provider must label one charge as the highest charge. The highest charge is the charge that maps to the highest NPDWS case type; usually it is also the charge for which the client faces the most potential jail time.
Example 1: Client A is charged with drug distribution, drug possession, and felon in possession of a handgun. The drug distribution charge carries the greatest punishment, and would map as Felony-Mid case. The other two charges map as Felony-Low. The drug distribution charge is the highest charge, and the case will be mapped as a Felony-Mid case.
Example 2: After a deadly car accident, Client B is charged with negligent homicide and DUI. The negligent homicide maps as a Felony-High-Other and the DUI maps as a DUI-High. The negligent homicide is the highest charge and the case will maps as a Felony-High-Other case.
Sort Historic Caseloads into NPDWS Case Types
The provider then maps the historical caseload (by year) into the NPDWS case types, using the highest charge for each case.
The table below shows an example of five years’ worth of historical caseload data for a Fictional Jurisdiction (2020-2024). The 2020 and 2021 caseloads show the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Caseloads rebounded in 2022, stabilized there in 2023, and grew in 2024.
FAQ: Mapping Charges to Case Types
Absent data on how often the prosecutors pursued LWOP in murder cases, all murder cases should be categorized as Felony-High-Murder cases (the lower case type). Any resulting report should note that the estimated need is conservative because the provider did not have the data to separate out LWOP cases from murder cases and counted all such cases as Felony-High-Murder (the lower case type). The provider should consider beginning to track the number of murder cases in which LWOP is pursued.
But I want to show how many of our murder cases are LWOP, is there anything I can do?
The provider could review a number of past murder cases to determine the rate at which prosecutors sought LWOP. This type of sampling establishes the rate at which LWOP in a subset of cases. The rate can then be applied to all murder cases to estimate how many should be categorized as Felony-High-LWOP. To determine an appropriate sample size, the provider should consult a researcher.
FAQ: Defining a Case (Coming Soon)
FAQ: Sorting Cases by Highest Charge (Coming Soon)
Generally, each case is classified according to the most serious charge ever filed, even if that charge is later dismissed or reduced. Typically, the defense attorney works to get a charge dismissed or reduced. This work reflects the severity of the original charge.
An exception can be made for cases in which the charge is reduced very shortly after arrest as a result of an early exercise of prosecutorial discretion. However, if the defense attorney works on the case prior to the charge reduction or dismissal, the case should be categorized by the highest charge ever faced.
In the NPDWS, mandatory sentencing enhancements connected to the offender, including three-strikes laws, are not considered in determining case type. “For example, if they have had Felony–Low cases with life sentences as potential consequences because of some sort of enhancement, they were instructed to nevertheless include such representations in their estimates for the Felony–Low category proportional to the relative frequency in which such situations were actually encountered.” NPDWS at 60. In this example, this case would be considered a burglary case. It might be a very complicated burglary case because of the enhancement, but, as noted previous the standard (case weight) takes into account both very simple and very complicated cases.
Enhancements connected to the offense, as opposed to the offender, should be considered when determining highest charge and mapping cases to NPDWS case types. Because these enhancements would more commonly be separate charges, you would characterize a case by the highest charge with the enhancement. For example, the case of the client facing assault with a gun or deadly weapons enhancement would be treated as an assault with a deadly weapon charge. With the enhancement this charge likely would be mapped as a Felony-High-Other (e.g., aggravated assault; assault with a deadly weapon) rather than as a Felony-Low (e.g., simple assault).
California is an example of a jurisdiction that has offense-based enhancements. The Office of the State Public Defender in California put out a guide to applying the NPDWS that shows how they chart enhancements. See Office of State Public Defender, Understanding the National Public Defense Workload Study (Dec 2023).