1
Preparing for MiFILE in Your Court
In early 2019, the MiFILE standard e-Filing solution will go live in the 37th District Court
(Warren), Ottawa County Probate Court, and 22nd Circuit Court (Washtenaw County) with the
rest of the state to follow. Courts can aid their transition by reviewing the information in this
document.
As MiFILE is implemented, courts will be required to maintain the official court record in
electronic format and store documents in an electronic document management system (EDMS)
to ensure the documents can be used in the way needed for the required retention period.
An EDMS must comply with the policies and standards established by the State Court
Administrative Office (SCAO). Each court must choose whether to use the free MiFILE Cloud
document management system (MiFILE Cloud DMS) provided by the SCAO, or purchase its own
EDMS.
The information in this document is designed to help courts with their initial assessment in this
regard and includes:
• List of MiFile Cloud DMS Features and Functions
• Table Summarizing EDMS Options
• Considerations for Evaluating the MiFILE Cloud DMS versus Local EDMS
• Necessary Hardware and Software Purchases in Addition to EDMS
• Creating an Electronic Image of Court Seal
• Recommended Resources
• Appendix: EDMS Policies and Standards Established by the SCAO
If you have any questions about the information in this communication, please send them to
[email protected]. Click here for up-to-date information on the statewide e-Filing project.
MiFILE Cloud DMS Features and Functions
The MiFILE Cloud DMS complies with the SCAO’s EDMS policies and standards and its system
requirements and functionality will be managed at the state level. It will process and store
court case-related data only, it cannot be used for other county or city data. The MiFILE Cloud
DMS includes standard document management interfaces, including imaging (scanning)
capability and provides predefined workflow and case processing tasks. It supports use of
electronic court seals. See minimum hardware and software requirements for the MiFILE Cloud
DMS.
2
Table of EDMS Options
Court
Options/Scenarios
Cost
Impact
Considerations
(Courts with EDMS now)
Considerations
(Courts without EDMS)
• Implement MiFILE
Cloud DMS that is
part of the MiFILE
solution in planned
wave
No
• No additional DMS integration
required
• May lose workflows from previous
DMS
• Clerk review and document
workflow will be combined in one
system with MiFILE Cloud DMS
• MiFILE project does not include
migration/conversion of existing
electronic documents to MiFILE
Cloud DMS
• No additional DMS integration
required
• Clerk review and document
workflow will be combined in one
system with MiFILE Cloud DMS
• Expand and/or
customize MiFILE
Cloud DMS
Yes
• Court will have to work with
ImageSoft after planned
implementation time; cannot hold
up waves
• Any customization of the MiFILE
Cloud DMS will be at the court’s
expense
• Court may not receive the
resources from ImageSoft and the
SCAO that they would otherwise
receive in the planned wave
• Any customization of the MiFILE
Cloud DMS will be at the court’s
expense
• Implement your
own court EDMS
(not MiFILE Cloud
DMS) and integrate
with MiFILE
Yes
• Integration may require more
effort from court if ImageSoft has
not worked with system before
(see MiFILE Integration Guide)
• Clerk review and document
workflow will not be combined in
one system
• Will keep existing workflows
• Would provide ability to add
workflows; although it would be
at the court’s expense, the court
would not be restricted by
statewide functionality
• Could integrate with the
local/county EDMS to implement
workflow with other local
agencies
• Integration may require more
effort from court if ImageSoft has
not worked with system before
(see MiFILE Integration Guide)
• Will require learning two systems;
one for clerk review and one for
document workflow
• Would provide ability to add
workflows; although it would be
at the court’s expense, the court
would not be restricted by
statewide functionality
• Could integrate with the
local/county EDMS to implement
workflow with other local
agencies
• Implement local/
county (not
statewide) version
of OnBase
Yes
• ImageSoft has done this
integration before
• May require learning new system
for document workflow
• Would provide ability to add
workflows at the court’s expense,
but court would not be bound by
statewide functionality
• ImageSoft has done this
integration before
• Will require learning two systems;
one for clerk review and one for
document workflow
• Would provide ability to add
workflows at the court’s expense,
but court would not be bound by
statewide functionality
3
Considerations for Evaluating the MiFILE Cloud DMS versus Local EDMS
The following table is designed to aid in your assessment and evaluation of the MiFILE Cloud
DMS versus a local EDMS. If you are using your own EDMS, see the integration guide posted
here: http://www.mifile.info/integration/.
Considerations for Evaluation
State EDMS
Local EDMS
Court is currently storing and managing electronic documents
Prefer an EDMS shared with local government (county or city)
Prefer an EDMS for managing court case-related data
Complies with standards established by the SCAO ?
Current document processing/workflow is relatively standard
Current document processing/workflow is customized
Direct integration between EDMS and case management system
1
File plan, folder, and metadata components are predefined
Prefer ability to control file plan, folder, and metadata components
Court has an IT department capable of maintaining an EDMS
Court does not have an IT department
Prefer to start small and reassess need for added functionality or control
Additional Hardware and Software Purchases
Beyond the hardware and software components of an EDMS, courts will also need to purchase
equipment and technology for capturing, accessing, and handling electronic documents. These
tools are necessary for both staff and the public and include:
Public Access and E-Filing Work Stations
Public Access: Whether e-Filing is implemented or not, when a court's public records are only
available electronically, the court must provide a means for the public to view those records,
while safeguarding nonpublic and confidential information. This may be accomplished by a
publicly accessible computer without Internet access.
E-Filing Work Stations: A public-access computer with an attached scanner will serve as a work
station for e-Filing, which may be necessary if a court wants to mandate e-Filing for all filers.
Additional details about mandating e-Filing will be available before the statewide roll out
begins. For courts that plan to provide access to e-Filing on location, an e-Filing work station
computer should be placed in an area near the clerk’s counter so that the clerk staff can assist
1
This would enable a court to view documents from the CMS or to view CMS data from the EDMS. A custom
integration would be required. For the MiFILE Cloud DMS, this will result in additional costs.
4
the public in their use of the computer. An e-Filing work station computer must be connected
to the Internet but it does not need to have access to the court’s network. See
http://www.mifile.info/mifile-optional-components/ for updates.
A common work station computer configuration consists of the following primary components:
• Miniature computer than can run a modern web browser
• Flat screen monitor
• Keyboard/Mouse
• Low-volume document scanner
Staff and Judicial Work Stations
Courts will need adequate and appropriate computer workstations in the courtroom, in
chambers, in the clerk’s office, and in other locations throughout the court. Certain features
are more desirable or necessary than others depending on the needs of the individual. For
example, a judge may want a touch screen monitor for viewing and handling documents, a
courtroom may benefit from signature pads for parties to sign documents, or varying scanner
volume and speed may be necessary for different areas of the court. Although these and other
features may be desirable, they are optional for an optimal end-user experience. At a
minimum, most workstations should include:
• Computer (with Windows 10 operating system or higher)
• Dual flat screen monitors (for example, one for accessing the case management system
and another for accessing the EDMS)
• Keyboard/Mouse
• Access to a scanner and printer or a multi-function device
Determining Hardware and Software Needs
The following questions are designed as a starting point for your initial assessment of hardware
and software needs in an electronic court environment. We recommend that courts start with
the minimum until e-Filing has been in place a while and reassess additional needs. We also
recommend that courts use open standards and off-the-shelf software as much as possible to
simplify expansion.
Considerations for Assessing Needs
How many courtrooms need a computer for the judge and court staff?
What kind of computer workstation does each staffperson need?
How many courtrooms need a printer, scanner, or facsimile machine?
Where will document processing/workflow be accomplished (courtroom, clerk’s office, chambers)?
Where will documents be scanned and by whom (courtroom, clerk’s office)?
5
Will physical changes to the courtroom need to be made to accommodate technology, such as
electrical outlets, structural changes, Internet connection?
Will evidence be presented digitally in the courtroom?
Will your court be providing equipment onsite for the public to use for e-Filing or do you plan to use
other local resources?
Making Arrangements to Create Electronic Image of Court Seal
If you do not already have an electronic image of your court seal for use on electronic
documents, you should make arrangements now for creating one. You may want to start by
contacting the company that produced your court’s hand pump or electric embosser about
producing an electronic image of your court’s seal. If the company is unable to provide an
electronic image of your court’s seal, provide a clear, good quality image of your seal stamped
or embossed on paper for use by your IT department, a graphic artist, or company that can
produce the seal in a graphics format. The court seal must adequately identify the court and
meet the following requirements:
• Graphics Format: PNG or TIFF
• Size: 1 ¼ to 1 ½ inch diameter circle, 144x144 pixels; cannot be resized on the document
• Grayscale (no color and no solid black)
• Orientation: Seal outlines should touch the edges of the image; whitespace around the
outside will lead to sizing precision issues
Recommended Resources
1. Developing an Electronic Records Preservation and Disposition Plan: Resource Bulletin
https://www.ncsc.org/~/media/Files/PDF/About%20Us/Committees/JTC/JTC%20Resource%
20Bulletins/6JTC%20E%20Records%2010%20FINAL.ashx
2. Electronic Records Management Guide for the Judiciary
https://nacmnet.org/sites/default/files/NACM_ERM_GuideFINAL.pdf
3. The NDSA Levels of Digital Preservation: An Explanation and Uses
https://www.ncsc.org/~/media/Files/PDF/About%20Us/Committees/JTC/JTC%20Resource%
20Bulletins/Webinar%20Materials/eRecords/Handout%203%20-
%20NDSA_Levels_Archiving_2013.ashx
4. Department of Defense 5015.2 Standard
http://jitc.fhu.disa.mil/projects/rma/downloads/p50152stdapr07.pdf
5. JTC Resource Bulletin, Making the Case for Judicial Tools
https://www.ncsc.org/~/media/Files/PDF/About%20Us/Committees/JTC/JTC%20Resource%
20Bulletins/Judicial%20Tools%201%200%20FINAL.ashx
6. JTC Resource Bulletin, Implementing Judicial Tools
https://www.ncsc.org/~/media/Files/PDF/About%20Us/Committees/JTC/JTC%20Resource%
20Bulletins/Judicial%20Tools%20II%2003-14-2016%20FINAL.ashx
6
Appendix – EDMS Policies and Standards Established by the SCAO
Overview of Policies and Minimum Functional and Procedural Standards for an EDMS
Requirement Area
General Functional
Standards
• Ability to implement and maintain metadata tagging
• Ability to maintain record integrity
• Ability to provide open standards interfaces, including accepting and filing
records from producing applications and the routing of documents
• Ability to support applicable security standards and activity audit tracking
•
Document
Retention and
Disposal Policies
• Electronic case documents with long-term retention requirements must be
migrated to new file formats before technology becomes obsolete
• Electronic case documents must remain accessible as hardware and software
technology changes; IT staff must migrate electronic documents whenever new
technology is upgraded or changed
• Electronic case documents that are not transferred to Archives of Michigan
must be disposed by overwriting or degaussing
• Backup capability must exist and must ensure synchronization between all
Authenticity of Electronic Case Documents and Data:
An electronic case record (both data and documents) is useful only if it continues to exist in a
form that allows it to be retrieved, and, after retrieved, provides reliable and authentic
evidence of the activity that produced the record. This is referred to as digital continuity or
record integrity.
The authenticity of an electronic record can be demonstrated by verifying that:
• the right document and/or data was put into storage properly;
• either nothing happened in storage to change this document and/or data or, alternatively,
any changes in the document and/or data over time are insignificant;
• all the correct documents and/or data and only the correct documents and/or data were
retrieved from storage;
• the processing was executed correctly to output an authentic reproduction of the record;
• appropriate security technology and procedures are in place and followed by all;
• activity audit tracking is in place for both the system and documents.
Authenticity can also be demonstrated by verifying that security and auditing are in place and
that the files and metadata are consistent with what was originally stored by the EDMS. To
save metadata about electronically born records and to maintain as much functionality as
possible, we recommend that electronically born records be retained in their native format
until it is necessary to migrate the records (see Maintenance of Electronic Case Data and
Documents for Retention Period below for details).
7
EDMS Requirements:
• Courts are required to store electronic case documents in an EDMS to ensure the ability to
use information in the way needed, for its retention requirements. This requires active
management of information through change so that it remains complete, available, and
usable in the way needed.
• As electronic filing is implemented, courts can choose the MiFILE Cloud DMS or purchase
their own systems. Digital imaging systems that are used to produce electronic images of
paper documents through use of scanning equipment are not necessarily electronic
document management systems.
• Courts must not store electronic case documents on an office drive; the EDMS will typically
have its own server(s) with the features described in this document, including security and
activity audit tracking.
• A court that purchases its own EDMS or that uses a digital imaging system to store
electronic case documents must comply with these standards, must back up the EMDS
regularly, and must have a disaster recovery plan in place.
1. EDMS Functional Standards (Required):
a. General Requirements
1) Ability to capture, manage, and retrieve records
2) Ability to implement and maintain metadata tagging
3) Ability to maintain record integrity
4) Ability to provide open standards interfaces, including accepting and filing
records from producing applications and support to workflow
5) Ability to support applicable security standards and activity audit tracking
6) Ability to handle document disposal
b. Specific Requirements
1) Capturing, Managing, and Retrieving Records
a) Ability to create, edit, and delete file plan components and identifiers
Mandatory File Plan Components
• Record category name
• Record category identifier
• Record category description
• Disposition instructions
• Disposition authority
• Transfer to Archives indicator
b) Ability to create, edit, and delete record folder components and identifiers
c) Ability to create, edit, and delete metadata elements or attributes
Mandatory Record Metadata Components
• Record identifiers, marking, and indicators
• Record descriptors (media type and format)
• Record dates
• Producing application and version, and PDF version
8
d) Ability to capture and populate metadata
e) Ability to capture and store transmission and receipt data from e-Filing
system
f) Ability to capture (scan) documents
g) Ability to file, annotate, and redact
h) Ability to search, view, copy, save, store, and print
i) Ability to schedule records for retention and disposal
j) Ability to associate attributes of a record folder to a record
k) Ability to support all SCAO-prescribed electronic formats
l) Ability to store e-mails
m) Repository (direct access device on which electronic records and metadata
are stored)
n) Storage space for nonactive records
o) Storage availability and monitoring (including offsite storage)
2) Maintaining Integrity
a) Ability to control access
define, update, assign permissions
view, modify, copy, link, print records and metadata
prevent unauthorized access to repository
export, backup, and remove audit files
b) Addition, designation, and version control, including ability to revert to
previous document versions
c) Audit functions
Ability to log actions, date, time, object identifiers, and user identifiers
for user accounts, user groups, records and record folders, associated
metadata elements, and file plan components
Audit analysis functionality
d) Ability to read and process stored records in same manner as original by
using any of the following methods
backward compatibility
maintaining hardware and software used to create or capture the record
maintaining hardware and software capable of viewing the record in its
native format
migrating the record to a new format before the old format becomes
obsolete
e) Safeguard/lockout/timeout features
f) Ability to backup stored records
g) Ability to store backup copies off-line and at separate location(s) to
safeguard against loss
h) Data integrity and disaster recovery capability
9
i) Rebuild capability; necessary for reconstructing records management
environment after a disaster.
3) Records Disposal (includes transfer and destruction)
a) Ability to schedule records for retention and disposal (records management
feature)
b) Ability to secure access, maintain context within a record series, and execute
disposition instructions for all records in the system (records management
feature)
c) Ability to preserve a record’s required metadata (records management
feature)
d) Ability to transfer required electronic documents and any associated
metadata to the Archives of Michigan at the end of the relevant retention
periods prescribed in the retention schedule. Court must contact Archives
for guidance.
2. Maintenance of Electronic Case Data and Documents for Retention Period:
a. Courts are required to maintain electronic case data and documents for their full
retention periods as prescribed in the retention schedule.
b. Most electronic case data and documents will be kept longer than the original
technology that was used to create them and new technology is not always
compatible with older technology. Long-term retention of electronic records must
be achieved in a manner that protects the records from degradation, loss of content,
or inability to access. Therefore, in order to ensure electronic case documents can
be used in the way needed for as long as needed, the documents should not be
stored in their original software format and on their original storage media for their
entire retention period.
c. Courts must ensure that all electronic case documents with long-term retention
requirements are migrated to a new file format before the technology becomes
obsolete. Long-term retention means the life of an electronic record is expected to
be longer than the life of the technology used. This is generally about 10 years, but
it can vary.
d. Courts are also responsible for ensuring that all electronic records remain accessible
as technology is upgraded or changed. Each time technology upgrades, courts
should inform their information technology staff of the need to migrate their
electronic case data and documents to the new technology.
e. Backup capability must ensure synchronization between all record category, file
plan, folder, record metadata, and content repositories. Backup copies must be
destroyed in accordance with the retention schedule. Backup processes should be
tested to ensure they are copying all of the records and data as intended.
EDMS Recommended Features:
• Document imaging and workflow integration to support the creation and management of
electronic documents and related data, and to maximize productivity.
• Retrieval assistance and free-text search (not just search capability of metadata).
10
• Ability to make global changes to record category names, record category identifiers, and
disposition components.
• Ability to reorganize file plan and automatically propagate the changes from the
reorganization.
• Ability to bulk load a file plan, electronic records, and record metadata.
• Interfaces with case management system, e-mail, word processing, MiFILE, and other
applications.
• Ability to write and generate reports.
• Web capability and viewer.
EDMS Policies:
Any provider of a system that creates, receives, maintains, uses, and disposes of court records,
whether at the state or the local level, is prohibited from selling, transferring, or otherwise
using those court records, except as authorized by law, Michigan court rule, or the Michigan
Supreme Court.
Any Michigan court that enters into a contract with a system provider for an electronic filing
system, a case management system, or a document management system that creates, receives,
maintains, uses, and disposes of court records shall ensure that the following provisions are
included in the contract:
• The provider shall not sell, transfer, or otherwise use a court record, except as
authorized by state law, court rule, or the Michigan Supreme Court.
• The provider shall dispose of records in compliance with statutes, court rules, and the
standards established by the SCAO.
• If the contract with the provider is terminated, the provider shall ensure that all records
are returned to the court or authorized custodian of those records. Duplicate records
shall be destroyed in accordance with the standards established by the SCAO and the
provider shall execute a signed certificate of media disposition stating that the data has
been destroyed in accordance with those standards.
Any Michigan court that shares an electronic filing system, a case management system, or a
document management system with the executive branch shall sign a memorandum of
understanding, approved by the Michigan Supreme Court, regarding the creation, receipt,
maintenance, use, and disposal of court records in that system. An individual court does not
need to have a memorandum of understanding if the Michigan Supreme Court has a statewide
memorandum of understanding with the executive branch agency that shares the system.
Whenever a court converts from one electronic filing system, case management system, or
document management system to another, it must establish policies and procedures that
ensure that all records are accessible in their entirety for the retention period of the related
records, as prescribed in the retention schedule.
11
Any person who retains possession of and refuses to deliver any records of the courts of
Michigan upon demand by the authorized custodian of those records shall be guilty of a
misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in the state prison not more than 2 years or by a
fine of not more than $1,000. MCL 750.491.
An electronic case management system and document management system must be capable of
transferring required data, electronic documents, and any associated metadata to the Archives
of Michigan at the end of the relevant retention periods prescribed in the retention schedule
and in the manner prescribed by Archives and the SCAO.