Adjudication Decisions Research Articles

Pharmacy resident involvement in prior-authorization drug request adjudication.

Results of a study to determine economic outcomes of pharmacy residents' involvement in prior-authorization drug request (PADR) adjudication within a Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system are reported. A retrospective review was conducted to identify PADRs adjudicated by pharmacy residents under a preceptor's supervision during the 2015-16 residency year. Only PADRs that were not approved as submitted (i.e., only those requiring formulary intervention) and that met other inclusion criteria were included in the analysis. Prior-authorization requests and adjudication decisions were characterized, and cost savings resulting from those decisions were calculated. Of the total of 752 PADRs adjudicated by 6 pharmacy residents during the study period, 42 met the inclusion criteria. About 90% of included PADRs were categorized as general medicine requests, and 9.5% were for oncology medications. The most common rationale for PADR nonapproval (cited in 60% of requests) was the availability of a preferred formulary alternative; the remainder of nonapprovals were due to medication safety concerns (e.g., contraindication to therapy, drug interaction potential, likelihood of adverse drug event resulting in patient harm, history of allergy to requested medication). Resident adjudication of PADRs resulted in total direct cost savings of $169,877.53 over the 12-month period, a mean of $4,044.70 per request. Pharmacy residents' involvement in adjudicating PADRs at a VA healthcare system resulted in substantial cost savings over the course of the residency year.

Predicting the Behavior of Law in the Juvenile Court: A Focus on Noncompliance Cases

A large body of research has examined racial and gender disparities in juvenile justice decision making, generally concluding that disparities continue to plague the system. However, little research has examined disparities in “noncompliance” cases, even though youth charged with these offenses comprise a considerable percentage of youth under the jurisdiction of the juvenile justice system. Using Black’s theory of law, the current study investigates the impact of race and gender on juvenile detention and adjudication decisions in “noncompliance” cases (e.g., probation violations, contempt, failure to appear) in a mid-Atlantic state. Findings suggest that Black’s theory does an adequate job of explaining the detention and adjudication decisions, and that race and gender continue to condition juvenile justice processing.

Communication Vagueness in the Literature Review Section of Journal Article Submissions

Evidence has been provided about the importance of avoiding American Psychological Association (APA) errors in the abstract, body, reference list, and table sections of empirical research articles. Specifically, authors are significantly more likely to have their manuscripts rejected for publication if they fail to avoid APA violations—and, thus, do not write with discipline—in these sections. In addition to adhering to APA, writing with discipline also includes avoiding communication vagueness. Thus, I analyzed communication vagueness in the literature review section of 71 manuscripts submitted to the journal Research in the Schools over a 3-year period. Findings revealed that the frequency of communication vagueness differed in relation to the following: (a) number of APA errors, (b) gender of lead author, (c) genre of manuscript, and (d) adjudication decisions. In particular, certain communication vagueness categories were statistically significant and practically significant predictors of whether or not a manuscript is rejected for publication by the editor. Implications of these findings are discussed.

Kewenangan Ombudsman Dalam Penyelesaian Pengaduan Pelayanan Publik

To prevent maladministration a special institution has been formed to handle maladministration in public services, namely the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman is authorized to process complaints from the public, including adjudication. The authority of the Ombudsman through the adjudication channel becomes a contradiction because the adjudication decision is not final and does not bind the parties, because the adjudication decision has only value as a recommendation. Based on the duties and authorities given to the Ombudsman, the process of resolving complaints of public services by the Ombudsman is the settlement of maladministration reported by the public and settlement of maladministration on its own initiative. The adjudication decision by the Ombudsman also does not provide legal certainty for the parties. Article 1 paragraph (11) of Law No. 25 of 2009 concerning Public Services needs to be changed by placing the adjudication process as the initial litigation process. Then it is necessary to change in Article 1 paragraph (7) of Law No. 37 of 2008 concerning the Ombudsman that the recommendation became one of the points in the dictum of the court's ruling.

Adjudication Materials on Agency Websites

This report examines the dissemination on agency websites of decisions and supporting materials issued and filed in federal adjudicative proceedings. In contrast to notice-and-comment rulemaking, which is supported by a fully digitized platform that allows members of the public to post comments to proposed rules and view materials contained in rulemaking dockets, there exists no single, comprehensive online clearinghouse for the public hosting of adjudication decisions and supporting materials. Instead, to the extent that a particular adjudication record is digitally available, it is likely to be found on the relevant agency’s website.

Unequal Treatment in Pretrial Detention in China

Drawing on 4,098 documents concerning adjudication decisions from three district courts in China, this study reveals that white-collar offenders enjoy favourable treatment in pretrial detention. Using statistical analysis, the article reveals that suspects without resources and social status are significantly more likely to be detained before trial; the higher rates of self-surrender and good behaviour among white-collar offenders play a vital role in considerably lowering the possibility of detention; bailed white-collar offenders also have advantages over detained suspects in probation and sentencing outcomes. Unlike previous studies on the extralegal reasons as explanations for these findings, we expand our perspectives to include the law, shuanggui, flaws in evidence, resources, crime-control orientation policy and punitive culture in order to explain the disparities.

Potential Motive to Fabricate and the Assessment of Child Witnesses in Sexual Assault Cases

Sometimes, perceived credibility of a child's sexual assault allegation determines investigative and adjudicative decisions. Surprisingly, there is very little research on one common cross-examination technique used to discredit the child complainant; the presentation of a potential motive for the child to fabricate the allegation. In Experiment one, participants provided three reasons for complainant credibility after reading a mock child sexual assault case. Amongst participants’ first reasons, motive for the complainant to fabricate the allegation was the second most frequent response. In Experiment two, participants rated the honesty, accuracy and credibility of both the complainant and accused in a mock trial where a motive to fabricate was either present, absent, or not mentioned. Motive to fabricate had no effect on ratings of the complainant. However, when the evidence against the accused was strong, the accused was rated as more accurate, more honest, and more credible when a motive was present than when one was not. The forensic implications of the results are discussed.

A “Win-Win-Win” Scenario – Reaping the Benefits of an EU Law on Administrative Procedure

A Law on Administrative Procedure (LAP) is an essential institutional feature of democratic and effective governments. It is a general law on executive law-making, setting out how laws and regulations should be made. The need for a LAP at EU-level is growing – to counter the EU's legitimacy deficit and to make the regulatory process more predictable and robust. At the same time, the EU regulatory “machine” faces new challenges and pressures, as it seeks to implement highly complex (risk management) regulation. Greater regulatory effectiveness depends on more transparency, evidence quality standards and participation. As such, an EU LAP appears to be the natural culmination of the EU Smart Regulation agenda. Since the European Parliament in 2013 called for the Commission to adopt a LAP-related legislative proposal, the debate has gained in visibility and political salience. This article makes the case for an EU LAP for the EU institutions, citizens and businesses – provided the Law enshrines the four key principles of good administration (transparency and consistency; public participation; public record; and accountability); it establishes clear and legally binding procedural standards; and it covers as a principle also rule-making and adjudication decisions by all EU institutions and bodies involved in the preparation, adoption, implementation and repeal of secondary legislation.

Adjudication-related processes are underreported and lack standardization in clinical trials of venous thromboembolism: a systematic review

ObjectivesAlthough the use of an adjudication committee (AC) for outcomes is recommended in randomized controlled trials, there are limited data on the process of adjudication. We therefore aimed to assess whether the reporting of the adjudication process in venous thromboembolism (VTE) trials meets existing quality standards and which characteristics of trials influence the use of an AC. Study Design and SettingWe systematically searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library from January 1, 2003, to June 1, 2012, for randomized controlled trials on VTE. We abstracted information about characteristics and quality of trials and reporting of adjudication processes. We used stepwise backward logistic regression model to identify trial characteristics independently associated with the use of an AC. ResultsWe included 161 trials. Of these, 68.9% (111 of 161) reported the use of an AC. Overall, 99.1% (110 of 111) of trials with an AC used independent or blinded ACs, 14.4% (16 of 111) reported how the adjudication decision was reached within the AC, and 4.5% (5 of 111) reported on whether the reliability of adjudication was assessed. In multivariate analyses, multicenter trials [odds ratio (OR), 8.6; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.7, 27.8], use of a data safety–monitoring board (OR, 3.7; 95% CI: 1.2, 11.6), and VTE as the primary outcome (OR, 5.7; 95% CI: 1.7, 19.4) were associated with the use of an AC. Trials without random allocation concealment (OR, 0.3; 95% CI: 0.1, 0.8) and open-label trials (OR, 0.3; 95% CI: 0.1, 1.0) were less likely to report an AC. ConclusionRecommended processes of adjudication are underreported and lack standardization in VTE-related clinical trials. The use of an AC varies substantially by trial characteristics.

Do the “Haves” Come Out Ahead in Shanghai Courts?

Drawing on 2,724 documents of adjudication decisions from Shanghai courts, this article tests theGalanter thesis that the stronger party tends to prevail over the weaker party in litigation. We find that the stronger parties not only win more often, but also do so by a large margin. Overall, institutional litigants fare better than individual litigants. When the litigants are classified by their organizational and social status, government agencies or government‐related companies are the biggest winners, enjoying an enormous advantage, and farmers are the most disadvantaged underdogs, with other individuals and companies in between. When controlling for legal representation, these winning gaps remain significant and sizable. The edge of the stronger parties recurs across categories of cases in different issue areas of the law. Echoing previous comparative studies, we cast doubt on the party capability theory. We speculate that the causes of judicial inequality inChina lie not only in resource gaps but also in the roots of the law and the nature of the court.

Conviction Odds in Chicago Homicide Cases: Does Race/Ethnicity Matter?

This study investigates disparity as it exists in the conviction of Latino, African American, and White offenders in Chicago homicide cases. The study participants were adults who had been identified by the Chicago Police Department as suspects in homicide incidents for the years 1990 through 1995. Information about the offender, victim, homicide incident, and adjudication of the homicide case in court was collected from police and court records. Logistic regression modeling was used to determine the odds of conviction for Latino, African American, and White homicide offenders at the adjudication decision point of criminal case processing. Results indicated that in Chicago homicide cases, when deciding guilt or no guilt for Class M Felony murder, neither race nor ethnicity mattered; what did matter the most was the offender–victim relationship, the number of charges filed against the offender, and the mode of conviction. This study continues the important tradition in racial and ethnic disparity studies of measuring the effect of offender–victim dyads on case outcomes. It builds on prior research in 2 ways: (a) by measuring the impact of the offender–victim dyad's race and ethnicity on conviction odds and (b) by expanding the scope of case-processing research through examining decision making at the pre-sentence adjudication stage, a point researchers have heretofore rarely examined.

Adjudication enforcement: partial final determinations and insolvency

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine two specific circumstances where UK courts may stay the execution of a judgment to enforce a statutory adjudication decision; where a final decision is sought on a discrete point; and where the winning party is insolvent. In this context, there is consideration of what a “binding” decision means for the purposes of Part II of the Housing Grants Construction and Regeneration Act 1996.Design/methodology/approachA black letter, doctrinal approach is adopted, using two High Court decisions as a focus for wider critical reflection.FindingsThe cases where a final determination on part of an adjudication decision is successful are rare and will depend on the facts. Despite some unorthodox recent decisions, the likelihood remains that parties will struggle to challenge part only of an adjudication decision. The leading case authorities support the underlying principle of the Construction Act insofar as adjudication decisions are binding and should be enforced or else the Court will impose punitive statutory interest on the debt. This principle applies even in cases where the adjudication decision is successfully challenged in such cases.Originality/valueThis paper also addresses two decisions given by Edwards‐Stuart J. in the High Court, both of which adopt a novel approach to the relevant issues, and hence this discussion of those approaches demonstrates originality.

Adjudication Decisions of Black, White, Hispanic, and Native American Youth in Juvenile Court

The current study examines the likelihood of adjudication for White, Black, Hispanic, and Native American juveniles in an urban county in Arizona. The study utilized the focal concerns perspective as the theoretical framework to explain racial and ethnical differences. The findings indicate that Hispanic and Native American youths had greater odds of adjudication than White youths. When examining race or ethnic and gender relationships, White girls were found to be the least likely of all the groups to be adjudicated. Girls in the other groups (Black, Hispanic, and Native American) did not have significantly different odds of adjudication than their male counterparts. Split models also revealed that legal variables and committing a drug offense had a significantly different effect for Hispanic and Native American youths than for White youths. The results and implications are further discussed.

Summary Affirmance Decisions

1. The process of screening, assigning, tracking, drafting, revising, circulating and then publishing adjudicative decisions is often time-consuming. Even where all members of a panel agree that an earlier decision was correct, disagreements concerning the rationale or style of a decision can take significant time to resolve. These institutional realities suggest a danger that adjudicators may not be most effectively allocating their decision-making resources to cases where there is a reasonable possibility of reversible error in the result below.

Ten Years on: Review of Adjudication in the United Kingdom

The Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 introduced statutory based adjudication into the United Kingdom. Since then there has been a volume of case law regarding enforcement of adjudication decisions and clarifications of procedural issues. This paper looks at the fundamentals of adjudication under the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act, trends in adjudication case law, and certain procedural clarifications from recent case law.

The impact of race on the adjudication of sexual assault and other violent crimes

This study assessed whether sexual assault offenders were differently adjudicated from other violent felons and to what extent any differences in adjudication decisions were explained by the defendant's race. Five court decisions were analyzed using a weighted sample of 41,151 cases adjudicated between 1990 and 1996 that were representative of cases in the seventy-five most populous United States counties. The results did not support the hypothesis that sexual assault cases were given, on average, more leniency than less serious violent offenses, however, various adjudication decisions for the four violent offenses were moderated by the defendant's race. Interaction models showed minorities were treated more punitively compared to Whites when they were charged with an assault, robbery, or murder, but they were treated more leniently when they were charged with a sexual assault. Explanatory models that accounted for the differential processing of minorities that were disproportionately lenient or punitive, depending on the crime, are discussed.

Designing Competition Law Institutions

A striking diversity of competition law institutions exists around the world. There are three basic institutional models: (1) the bifurcated judicial model, in which specialised investigative and enforcement authorities bring formal complaints before the courts; (2) the bifurcated agency model, in which specialised investigative and enforcement agencies bring formal complaints before separate, specialised adjudicative agencies; and (3) the integrated agency model in which a single specialised agency undertakes investigative, enforcement and adjudicative activities. Institutions may also combine features of the three models, but this article focuses on the three models as useful points of reference. This article conducts a preliminary evaluation of the advantages and disadvantages of each of these models against a set of normative criteria identified at the outset of the article, including such considerations as independence, accountability, predictability and flexibility. As these considerations suggest, important procedural values often will be in tension with one another. The article evaluates the tendencies of each of the models to vindicate the different normative criteria. It then considers the role of political appeals from adjudicative decisions. Finally, the article considers the political economy of the choice of institutional arrangement. While the article considers international experience, it draws primarily on Canadian experience.

Interests and Political Institutions in U.S. Long-Distance Telecommunications Policy

This study analyzes the “adjudicative rule-making decisions” made by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding the long-term dominant carrier, AT&T, in the U.S. long-distance service market over the period of 1965–1995. With the goal of identifying the determinants of FCC’s telecommunications policy decisions that were made in favor of AT&T over other common carriers or public interest groups, this study seeks to test regulation theories regarding interest group power and the roles of political institutions. A logistic regression model characterizing the conditions under which the FCC actually adopted policy decisions in favor of or against AT&T’s interests was developed to understand the response of the FCC and assess the relative effects of interest groups and political institutions on the FCC’s 699 decision cases. The logit analysis shows that FCC policy making is significantly influenced by simultaneous modes of interest group power, coming from AT&T, other common carriers, and other public interest groups, and the roles of political institutions, including the federal agency itself, Congress, Presidents, and the courts.

Decision making in delinquency cases: the role of race and juveniles' admission/denial of the crime.

Investigated how accused delinquents' admission/denial of their crimes affected adjudication and disposition decisions. An archival analysis of 2,043 adjudication decisions in 16 Georgia counties found that juveniles who admitted committing their crimes were treated more severely than juveniles who denied committing their crimes. Whites were more likely than Blacks to admit committing the crime, and, after controlling for this and other legal factors, race did not have a significant effect. In the second study, 67 judges, 53 probation officers, and 126 court service workers made adjudication and disposition decisions about three juveniles in an experimental simulation in which race of juvenile, length of prior record, and the juvenile's reaction to the crime (admitting or denying it) were systematically manipulated. Consistent with the archival study, juveniles who admitted committing their offense were treated more severely than juveniles who denied committing their offense. Possible reasons are discussed for why admitting a crime leads to more punishment.

STRATEGIC INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS IN CONTRACT BIDDING: FRAMEWORK FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM

The results of a case study involving two major construction contracting companies are presented indicating the informational and other needs and considerations of construction contract bidding adjudication decision makers. A strategic information model is described and the development of prototype decision support system based on Executive Information System technology.