Results through August 2026
JuryQ has now processed thousands of jury summonses across a growing group of counties and courts. Looking at the aggregated performance data across JuryQ courts, the results are encouraging: a 70% juror response rate and a 95% in-person appearance rate.
For every 100 summonses sent through JuryQ, roughly 70 jurors respond. For every 100 jurors qualified to serve, about 95 appear in person.
Those results are meaningfully higher than the historical rates courts commonly describe to us during discovery and implementation conversations, where response rates are often closer to 50% and appearance rates closer to 75%.
What Response Rate and Appearance Rate Actually Mean
Response rate and appearance rate measure two different stages of the jury process.
Response rate measures how many summoned jurors respond to the summons at all. A 70% response rate means that for every 100 summonses sent through JuryQ, approximately 70 people complete some form of response.
Appearance rate measures how many jurors who are ultimately qualified and expected to serve actually appear in person. A 95% appearance rate means that for every 100 qualified jurors expected at the courthouse, approximately 95 show up.
The difference between those two percentages is normal. Not everyone who responds to a summons ultimately qualifies or is required to appear. Some jurors may be excused, disqualified, deferred, or otherwise removed from the active pool.
What stands out is that both JuryQ metrics are running above the levels courts commonly tell us they experienced before modernizing their jury process.
How JuryQ Compares
| Juror Metrics | JuryQ Performance | Typical Court Benchmark |
| Response Rate | 70% | ~50% |
| Appearance Rate | 95% | ~75% |
Typical court benchmarks reflect historical response and appearance rates shared with JuryQ through court research, discovery, and implementation conversations. They are not derived from a standardized national dataset, and results can vary significantly by jurisdiction.
Even with that variation, the gap is meaningful. JuryQ courts are seeing more summoned jurors respond and a very high percentage of qualified jurors actually arrive when expected.
Why Are the Numbers Higher?
There is rarely one feature responsible for better juror participation. Instead, the results appear to come from removing friction at several points throughout the process.
Clearer, More Effective Summonses
JuryQ modernizes the summons experience with clearer instructions, more accessible information, and a direct path for jurors to take action.
When jurors understand what is being asked of them and how to respond, fewer people are lost at the very beginning of the process.
Easier Digital Onboarding
A guided digital experience streamlines registration, information sharing, and status updates, reducing friction at every step.
Communication Through Multiple Channels
Courts can reach jurors through multiple channels—SMS, email, phone, and push notifications—ensuring critical updates are seen.
Mobile Push Notifications
JuryQ also includes a dedicated juror mobile experience that allows courts to send timely push notifications and updates.
Rather than making broad claims about what every other jury management platform does or does not offer, the important point is simpler: JuryQ gives courts another direct communication channel that fits the way people already receive reminders and updates in everyday life.
Better Visibility for Court Staff
The juror experience is only half of the equation.
Behind the scenes, JuryQ helps automate reporting, juror status tracking, check-in, notifications, and other administrative workflows that might otherwise depend on spreadsheets, phone calls, paper forms, or manual follow-up.
That gives court staff better visibility into who has responded, who is qualified, who is expected to appear, and where follow-up may still be needed.
Together, these tools are designed around one objective: make it easier for jurors to understand, respond, and appear without creating more work for court staff.
Strong Results Across Different Court Environments
The results are consistent across various court environments.
JuryQ is being used across counties with different populations, jury volumes, staffing structures, and operational needs. Yet the aggregated response and appearance data has remained consistently strong.
That matters because jury administration is not identical from one jurisdiction to another. A system that works well in one environment may not automatically translate to another.
The early JuryQ data suggests that simplifying communication, onboarding, reminders, and court workflows can improve juror engagement across a range of court settings.
As the platform expands, we will continue monitoring that performance across a broader group of jurisdictions.
What Courts Are Saying
“JuryQ delivered a pilot that proved both operational efficiency and meaningful participation gains across multiple court dates. Their team was highly responsive, implementing feedback quickly and rolling everything out with impressive speed and simplicity. The all-inclusive pricing model made it easy to understand, present, and plan for inclusion in our upcoming budget.”
—Michael Gould, Collin County, Texas
“JuryQ made our Grand Jury process incredibly smooth. Their team was there to support us every step of the way, the customer service has been excellent, and the pricing is very reasonable. Our judge was also very pleased with both the process and the juror turnout.”
—Shirley Graham, Irion County & District Clerk
“Before JuryQ, we were using a state-issued system and managing much of the jury process manually. JuryQ was implemented in just one week, and on our first couple of summons we achieved over a 70% response rate and a 100% appearance rate. The responsiveness and hands-on support made the process efficient and easy for both our staff and our constituents.”
—Kaitlin Eubanks, Callahan County District Clerk
Early Results. Consistent Trend.
The current figures reflect JuryQ performance data over 12 months through August 2026. The dataset is still growing, but the trend is increasingly meaningful because it is based on thousands of summonses and results from multiple courts rather than a single pilot or court date.
A 70% response rate and 95% qualified-juror appearance rate do not mean every jurisdiction will produce identical results. Court populations, local procedures, summons practices, and other factors can all affect participation.
What the data does show is that JuryQ courts are consistently achieving strong juror engagement while modernizing the administrative side of jury management.
We will continue measuring these results as additional courts come onto the platform and the dataset grows.
See What Better Juror Participation Could Look Like in Your Court
If your court is still relying heavily on mailed notices, manual follow-up, spreadsheets, legacy software, or disconnected systems, JuryQ offers a more modern approach.
The platform is designed to help courts improve juror communication, increase response and appearance rates, reduce no-shows, improve jury attendance tracking, and simplify the work required behind the scenes.
See JuryQ in action and learn how the platform could fit your court’s jury process.
