The amount of time caseworkers spend in court suggests that is an important location for mobile work. Testers in Staten Island and Manhattan reported spending on average four days a month at court (4.12 and 3.95 days respectively). Approximately 60% of testers in Staten Island reported waiting in court more than five hours for a typical court appointment, whereas only 31% of Manhattan testers reported waiting in court more than five hours for a typical appointment. The average length of time spent waiting in court houses was higher in Staten Island (5.60 hours) than in Manhattan (4.36 hours).

These differences relate to the total number of hours testers use the laptop in court houses.

Approximately 45% of testers in both field offices reported using their laptops while at the court house. Staten Island testers used the laptop on average for 2.77 hours a week, similarly, Manhattan caseworkers reported on average 1.86 hours of use a week. Manhattan has a higher proportion of workers using the laptop for one to three hours a week (52%), as compared to Staten Island testers (35%).

Overall, Graph 4 below shows that more Manhattan than Staten Island testers reported favorable conditions for working on the laptop while at court. A smaller proportion of Manhattan testers reported technical difficulties or lack of privacy as a very big problem. The proportion of Staten Island reporting court problems was approximately 73% for establishing a connection, 75 % for loss of connection, almost 80% for slow speed, and about half (48%) for lack of privacy. Interviews with Staten Island testers revealed that there is no private room to wait in the court house and caseworkers are mixed in with the general population and so are unable to work on any confidential information. They said that if they had a place to work privately, they would use it more frequently even with the technical challenges.

Graph 4 - Problems Using the Laptop in the Court Houses

In terms of technical difficulties, it seems that the overall experience of Manhattan testers was again more divided. For example, 36 % of testers reported establishing connection as not a problem, and almost the same proportion (38 %) reported it as problematic. Similar patterns are present for loss of connection, although speed of connection seemed to be a more of a problem for testers (47 % reported it as problematic versus 30 % perceiving it as not a problem). In interviews, it was noted that Manhattan family courts offer a private room for caseworkers that provides privacy conditions to complete CPS work.

It is uncertain why Staten Island used the laptops more in court houses given the reported problems using it there. Several case workers stated that they simply do not bring the laptop to court with them any more, given the technical difficulties. However, the survey information clearly shows that use in court is important. Both field office testers mentioned that the laptop would bring the greatest benefits if it could be used reliably in court – the long wait times mentioned provide the worker with the ability to work on documentation while waiting to be called.