MNCIS Services
From Mnjiwiki
This page provides an overview and suggestions for using MNCIS Integration services. Comprehensive documentation is available at the MNCIS Court Integration Services website.
Contents |
Introduction
MNCIS integration services fall into three primary categories:
- Submissions
- Notifications
- Queries
Submissions
Submission (eFiling) services, such as filing a Complaint or Citation are the most complex MNCIS services to implement. eFiling services are request/response services with the added twist of often having a second response associated with a request message.
The first response is an acknowledgment that the request was received and the second response is the actual confirmation that the request was satisfied (or rejected). Filing a successful Complaint will always have a second response. Depending on County business rules, some Citations may be completed with a single response. However, MNCIS party (name) matching rules make it impossible to always complete a Citation with a single response. If the party cannot be identified systematically (Ex. Tom Smith), human intervention by Court staff will be required and a second response must be supported.
This added complexity requires that an audit process be established to be sure eFiling services are completed and identify those situations where there may be an excessive delay completing the submission. Error handling is important also, as MNCIS validates the data is correct. Ensuring data values are correct and supporting errors and error correction processes requires more effort than is generally expected.
Notifications
Notification services provide messages in response to completion of Case or Party related events in MNCIS. As examples, notification messages are generated when:
- A Hearing is scheduled, rescheduled or cancelled
- A new Case is created
- A Warrant is issued, quashed or statisfied
- The name of an Attorney is changed
Subscribing to MNCIS notification services is done at a broad level (ex. County, Adult, Criminal, Hearings). To obtain notifications for a specific case requires an additional layer of software filtering outside of MNCIS. In addition, obtaining case level notifications for a specific person also requires filtering outside of MNCIS. As an example, if an agency wants to be notified when a warrant is issued on a specific person, additional software needs to be developed to provide this level of filtering.
There are also a number of considerations that need to be made regarding notification processing. The following provides a partial list of considerations:
- Does a user need to know about the notification?
- Should the agency system be updated without user intervention?
- What transport technology will be used?
- How will the technical infrastructure be monitored to identify problems?
Queries
Query services include CaseGet and CaseGet by Party.
For organizations new to MNCIS integration services, the CaseGet HTTP query service is a recommended starting point. Benefits of starting with CaseGet include:
- High Value - A broad range of data is available & learning CourtXML for CaseGet provides direct benefits for Case Notifications also.
- Faster Results - CaseGet is well suited for incremental implementation (ex. start with Hearings and later expand to other areas).
- Lower Cost - HTTP is free & very appropriate for a user initiated process like CaseGet. Free testing tools are also available and allow IT Professionals to gain experience with CaseGet without any programming.
- Less Complex - There is less error handling and infrastructure monitoring required so a robust solution is easier to implement than for Notification & Submission services.
