PROPOSED PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY EVALUATION STANDARDS
I. INTRODUCTION
The Parental Responsibility Evaluation (PRE) law (C.R.S. § 14-10-127) authorizes an
evaluator to perform a family evaluation and file a report concerning disputed issues
related to the allocation of parental responsibilities and parenting time. Making
distinctions between complex and non-complex (simple) disputes concerning children
is difficult especially when disputes involve “high stakes” matters such as relocation,
early overnights for young children or allegations of parental alienation.
The Chief Justice Directive (CJD) 04-08 attempts to distinguish the CFI role from
PRE. In doing so, the CJD 04-08 draws a distinction between comprehensive
assessments accomplished under 14-10-127 and limited “investigations” under 1410-116.5 C.R.S.
Recognizing the comprehensive nature of PRE’s, EFS is organized to protect
those families and children who benefit from such assessments.[Please
review] Complex high conflict divorce assessment is the most challenging forensic
mental health assessment that can be undertaken. Resolving such disputes often
requires court orders which protect children while preserving the parent/child
relationships whenever possible. But organized groups of dissatisfied custody
litigants continue to communicate with legislators concerning their dissatisfaction
with the PRE role in cases concerning disputes about children.
Custody litigant complaints can be reasonable but many provide misguided
representations as to the behavior of evaluators. Evaluators are trained to assess
individuals, couples and families. Evaluators collect detailed information concerning
marital and family history from each parent and ascertain how each parent sees their
child and their relationship with that child. Evaluators review documents, motions,
court orders, transcripts, police reports, psychological test data from previous
evaluations, teacher report, educational records and medical and therapy records.
Evaluators also review personal data such as email communication between parents,
diary notes and autobiographical information provided by parents. In addition
evaluators may use formal assessment tools along with additional psychological
assessment data.
Evaluators may contact collateral sources: teachers, coaches, therapists who have
worked with family members, neighbors, extended family members and friends.
Children are interviewed age appropriately; sometimes they tell us a lot about how
parents care for them. In addition, parents and children are observed interacting;
during interactions the parent and children may be asked to discuss plans for a day
out, play a game together or be observed in free play. Evaluators often visit the
family homes, observing the child talk to their parents in the home setting;
evaluators may have children give a tour of the home because in doing so they are
showing their world and the world they inhabit with each parent. How parents
discipline and how they talk to their children in those settings provides data we
compare to information about the family from multiple sources.
In short, evaluators review the available record of family life and identify patterns of
behavior which help us understand how a parent functions and how children
Page 1 of 13
Proposed PRE Standards
respond. In addition to the consideration of multiple sources with multiple methods,
evaluators use specific issue protocols. For example, in relocation cases evaluators
often employ a research based relocation risk analysis. In parental alienation cases,
evaluators carefully collect family specific data using criteria which have been
developed over the last twenty years to rule out child abuse, neglect or some other
form of parent/child estrangement.
From the totality of this data, evaluators develop a set of inferences about how each
parent and children function together and make our recommendations to the court
based on those inferences. The evaluation is intended is to be helpful to the court in
making informed decisions concerning the allocation of parent’s responsibilities and
parenting time.
EFS has been organized for the purpose of protecting the comprehensive
nature of the PRE process. We are interested in assisting the families and
children who benefit from these assessments.[Please Review]
II. AUTHORITY
Statutory Authority For Parental Responsibilities Evaluations
C.R.S. § 14-10-127 authorizes the courts to appoint a licensed mental health
professional to conduct an evaluation of issues related to parenting time and
decision-making. Section (1)(b) specifies that “[t]he person signing a report or
evaluation and supervising its preparation shall be a licensed mental health
professional.” PRE reports are different from the Child and Family Investigator’s
report (under C.R.S. § 14-10-116.5). For example, the Child and Family
Investigator is not required for to be a mental health professional. The PRE statute
(4) lists the necessary areas of expertise in order to be allowed to testify regarding a
parental responsibilities evaluation:
(a) The effects of divorce and remarriage on children, adults, and families;
(b) Appropriate parenting techniques;
(c) Child development, including cognitive, personality, emotional, and
psychological development;
(d) Child and adult psychopathology;
(e) Applicable clinical assessment techniques; and
(f) Applicable legal and ethical requirements of parental responsibilities
evaluation.
Section (7)(b) also specifies that certain components be included in the report:
(I) A description of the procedures employed during the evaluation;
(II) A report of the data collected;
(III) A conclusion that explains how the resulting recommendations were
reached from the data collected, with specific reference to criteria listed in
section 14-10-124 (1.5) [best interests of the child], and if applicable, to the
criteria listed in section 14-10-131 [criteria for modification], and their
relationship to the results of the evaluation;
(IV) Recommendations concerning the allocation of parental responsibilities
for the child, including decision-making responsibility, parenting time, and
other considerations; and
Page 2 of 13
Proposed PRE Standards
(V) An explanation of any limitations in the evaluation or any reservations
regarding the resulting recommendations.
Beyond the statutory authority to conduct a parental responsibilities evaluation, the
professional has several sources for direction in conducting these evaluations; for
example, The Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in Family Law
Proceedings developed by the American Psychological Association (APA
Guidelines) and The Model Standards of Practice for Child Custody Evaluations
(of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) (Model
Standards).
[italicized may be moved to 8]
The APA Guidelines note: “Issues that are central to the court’s ultimate decisionmaking obligations include parenting attributes, the child’s psychological needs, and
the resulting fit,” and “The most useful and influential evaluations focus upon skills,
deficits, values, and tendencies relevant to parenting attributes and a child’s
psychological needs. Comparatively little weight is afforded to evaluations that offer
a general personality assessment without attempting to place results in the
appropriate context.”
The Model Standards, Section 4.6 (Presentation of Findings and Opinion), states in
part, “(a) In their reports and when offering testimony, evaluators shall strive to be
accurate, objective, fair, and independent, . . . (c) . . . evaluators shall give careful
consideration to the inclusion of diagnostic labels in their reports, (d) . . . evaluators
shall avoid including information in their reports that is not relevant to the issues in
dispute.”
Returning to C.R.S. § 14-10-127(7)(b), two of the required components in a report
need to be emphasized: (III), “[a] conclusion that explains how the resulting
recommendations were reached from the data collected”; and (V), “[a]n explanation
of any limitations in the evaluation or any reservations regarding the resulting
recommendations.” This statute clearly directs the evaluator to include any
limitations or reservations in the report.
The Model Standards, in § 12.2 (Articulation of the Bases for Opinions Expressed),
also state in part, “Evaluators shall explain the relationship between information
gathered, their data interpretations, and opinions concerning the issues in dispute.
There shall be a clear correspondence between the opinions offered and the data
contained in both the forensic report and the case file.”
The Model Standards also emphasize this point in § 5.12 (Incomplete, Unreliable, or
Missing Data), stating that evaluators “shall make known to the court when there are
incomplete, unreliable, or missing data . . . and shall articulate the implications . . .
upon any opinions communicated in reports or testimony.”
III.
PAYMENT
This language should be inserted into the billing and contracting part of the
Evaluators paperwork.
1. If the client wishes to do so he/she may request a detailed financial
statement at any time. The Evaluator will provide this within 14 days of
receiving the request.
Page 3 of 13
Proposed PRE Standards
2. If the client wishes to challenge or contest the hours billed for work by the
Evaluator the client shall within one month of the filing of the PRE with the
Court request a short, two hour appointment with a Rule 53 Special Master.
The client shall select a Special Master from the list of Special Masters
approved by the District in which the evaluation was filed, and pay any
retainer requested before the appointment. The Special Master selected MUST
have experience in Domestic Relations.
3. The Special Master will consider the representations of the client and
Evaluator as to the amount of time spent by the Evaluator (or any person
working with the evaluator whose time is billed) performing the each part of
work involved in the evaluation. The Special Master may reduce any amount
of time billed for any individual item on the statement following hearing
representations from both the client and the Evaluator.
4. If as a result of the client’s representations the Evaluator’s bill is reduced by a
total of more than 10% the client may request that the Evaluator pay the
costs of the appointment. The Special Master shall then decide what sum the
Evaluator shall pay, if any. If as a result of the representations of the
Evaluator the bill is not reduced or is reduced by less than 10% the client
shall pay all the Evaluator’s costs for preparing for and attending the
appointment and the costs of the Special Master.
5. The client may dispute the amount of the billing statement only once
pursuant to this clause and shall NOT pursuant to this clause request a
reduction in the hourly rate billed by the Evaluator. Accordingly the client
must consider and discuss the hourly rate billed by the Evaluator with the
Evaluator and his/her own attorney before signing the Evaluator’s contracting
documentation at the commencement of the evaluation.
STANDARD 1
THE PRE SHALL ACT PROFESSIONALLY
Evaluators shall provide their service in a manner consistent with the
highest professional standards, and conforming to the standards of their
own discipline. They shall be accurate and honest in their work and in their
communications with the parties, the parties’ counsel, and the court. While
the best interests of the child is paramount, evaluators shall respect the
rights, the dignity, and the welfare of the parties and the child with whom
they work.
COMMENT
The evaluator’s primary responsibility is to assure that the “best interests” of the
child who is the focus of the evaluation, (as defined in CRS section 14-10 124 et
seq), are thoroughly explored, understood, and accurately conveyed to the court. In
meeting this responsibility the evaluators should understand they are working with
family at a difficult and stressful time. The evaluators should attempt to establish a
positive and constructive professional working relationship with family members and
their counsel, and assure that they remain impartial and that their impartiality is
apparent.
Page 4 of 13
Proposed PRE Standards
The evaluator should be mindful of the diverse nature of families and respect
cultural, individual, and role differences, including those based on age, gender,
gender identity, race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, religion, sexual orientation,
disability, language, and socioeconomic status, and should consider these factors
when working with a family. The evaluator should be sensitive to the separate
interests, rights, wishes, and concerns of the parents, child/ren, extended family
members, and other parties in a case. The evaluator must remember they are in a
position of influence over a family’s future.
During the course of his or her evaluation, an evaluator will be in communication
with a variety of individuals, both lay and professional, and agencies. The means of
communication may involve direct interviews, phone contact, faxes, e-mail, or
written correspondence. The evaluator should consider the potential impact of
communication, remaining mindful of the content and tone.
STANDARD 2
THE EVALUATOR SHALL MAINTAIN OBJECTIVITY
The evaluator shall strive to maintain objectivity and independence. The
evaluator shall disclose to the parties, counsel and the court, any prior
relationships that might impair objectivity or independence, or give the
appearance of the same. If, during the course of the evaluation, the
evaluator becomes aware of an insurmountable bias or prejudice in dealing
with a case, they shall request to withdraw from their role and provide
proper notice to the Court, counsel and parties.
COMMENT
In compliance with C.R.S. 14-10-127 (1.2) (a), within seven days after his or her
appointment, the evaluator shall disclose to each party, the attorneys of record and
the court any familial, financial, or social relationship the evaluator has or has had
with the child, either party, the attorneys of record, or the judicial officer and, if such
a relationship exists, the nature of the relationship. If there is any other type of
relationship which might impair objectivity or the appearance of objectivity, that, too
shall be disclosed.
Various disciplines and organizations have guidelines and standards for doing
evaluations related to parenting time and decision-making issues. These guidelines
require evaluators to maintain impartiality and objectivity as well as avoiding
conflicts of interest or multiple roles when working with clients. An evaluator should
not have been a therapist or evaluator to any party, the parties’ family or new
partner, attorney or judicial officer involved in the case. There are occasions when an
evaluator is not aware of one of these relationships at the time the case starts, but
once knowledge is acquired, it must be disclosed. If the relationship with someone
on the case is privileged, the evaluator must disclose there has been a prior
relationship with someone involved in the case but the person and nature of the
relationship cannot be disclosed due to confidentiality.
There are times when working in high conflict families that it becomes difficult to
maintain objectivity through no fault of the evaluator. If the evaluator discovers this
has happened and feelings of bias cannot be set aside, the evaluator should request
to withdraw from the case.
Page 5 of 13
Proposed PRE Standards
STANDARD 3
THE EVALUATOR PROVIDES OBJECTIVE DATA TO THE
COURT AS AN EXPERT WITNESS
The evaluator is appointed in an objective capacity to assist the court by
following C.R.S. 14-10-127 and providing information concerning the child’s
best interests. The evaluators report shall include recommendations
concerning the allocation of parental responsibilities for the child, including
decision-making responsibility, parenting time, and other considerations
that are in the child’s best interests. The evaluator shall testify when
retained.
COMMENT
The evaluator should follow the criteria for completing an evaluation as laid out in
C.R.S. 14-10-127, while maintaining objectivity throughout the process. The
evaluation should be conducted and recommendations made with the child’s best
interests in mind. The wording of the statute allows for the evaluator to consider
factors beyond decision-making responsibilities and parenting time if that assists the
court in determining the best interests of the child. Once the report is completed and
submitted to the parties, their attorneys, and the court, the evaluator may be called
as an expert and will testify once they have received a subpoena and a retainer for
their testimony.
STANDARD 4
THE EVALUATOR SHALL NOT SERVE INCONSISTENT DUAL ROLES.
The evaluator shall not: (a) serve as a formal mediator in the case; (b)
provide psychotherapy to any of the parties or child in the case; (c) provide
legal advice to any party or otherwise act as an attorney in the case; (d)
later accept an appointment as a child’s legal representative (“CLR”) in the
same case or in the same family; (e) accept the appointment if they have
had a prior personal relationship or a prior professional role with the family,
other than a prior appointment as an evaluator; (f) serve as an arbitrator or
special master in the case prior to termination of his or her role as an
evaluator; (g) provide referrals for any other professionals.
COMMENT
(a) Mediation. Because PREs investigate and make reports and recommendations
they cannot, by definition, promise confidentiality to the parties involved; mediation
by contrast is confidential, CRS section 13-22-30. The PRE’s primary duty is advising
the court on the child’s best interests with regard to specific issues, and not resolving
such issues for the parties.
(b) Psychotherapy. As with mediators, therapists have a duty of confidentiality to
their clients that are at odds with a evaluator’s duties. The roles, purposes, goals,
responsibilities, approaches, and professional and ethical requirements of a treating
therapist are in conflict with those of an evaluator.
(c) Legal Advice. An evaluator is charged with investigating and reporting pursuant
to a court order and cannot provide legal advice to any party
(d) Child’s Legal Representative. The role requirements of the evaluator and the CLR
are in conflict with each other, CRS section 14-10-116.5 (1), specifically prohibits
this dual role.
Page 6 of 13
Proposed PRE Standards
(e) Prior Contacts. An evaluator should avoid multiple relationships which could
reasonably be expected to impair objectivity, competence or effectiveness. Prior
therapeutic relationships, for example, will be compromised and pre-existing
alliances and loyalties that a therapist or attorney or other professional or friend has
established will impair objectivity.
(f) Arbitrator or Special Master. An evaluator should not serve in any role that would
require them to arbitrate disputes between parties since this would require an
evaluator to take a position that would compromise their ability to provide an
impartial assessment and evaluation to the court.
(g) Referrals. An evaluator is performing an impartial assessment and evaluation for
the court. It is therefore inappropriate for the evaluator to make referrals or
recommendations to the parties or to the court for specific professionals to be
involved in the case in any way, unless such referrals or recommendations are
requested by the parties or the court.
Standard 5 (PARKER):
THE EVALUATOR MAY MOVE TO THE ROLE OF PARENTING COORDINATOR OR
DECISION-MAKER
In some cases an evaluator may agree to move to the separate role of
parenting coordinator (hereinafter referred to as PC), decision-maker
(hereinafter referred to as DM), or arbitrator after all of his or her duties as
the evaluator are completed and the appointment has been terminated by
the court. This move should only occur with the informed consent of both of
the parties and the parental responsibilities evaluator. The evaluator who
accepts an appointment as a PC/DM or arbitrator shall not be appointed as
an evaluator in the same case in the future.
COMMENT
At the conclusion of the evaluation and the entry of orders related to the allocation of
parental responsibility, the family may have ongoing needs for assistance from a
third party, or may in the future require assistance related to parenting disputes.
Some parties may find that the parental responsibilities evaluator‚ due to the prior
evaluation and familiarity with the family dynamics would assist them in resolving
outstanding or new issues. If the parties and the evaluator agree, it may be
appropriate to appoint the evaluator to the role of PC/DM or arbitrator by a new
appointment order clearly outlining the new duties. PCs, DMs and arbitrators are
being used with some frequency in Colorado to assist high conflict families that have
ongoing disputes, and their roles are defined by statute. The PRE standards are not
meant to apply to those serving in a PC/DM or arbitration role, as these roles have
their own standards.
STANDARD 6
THE EVALUATOR SHALL MAINTAIN COMPETENCE THROUGH SPECIALIZED
KNOWLEDGE, SKILL, EXPERIENCE, AND EDUCATION.
The evaluator shall accept appointments only if they are a licensed mental
health professional with a minimum of a master’s degree and have, in
addition, attained specialized knowledge and training in topics related to
Page 7 of 13
Proposed PRE Standards
the legal and psychological/social issues that are present in dissolution or
parenting cases.
COMMENT
An evaluator achieves competence through a combination of education, specialized
training, supervision, consultation, and professional experience. S/he has a
responsibility to develop and maintain the necessary understanding of the applicable
law and the professional standards that govern his or her duties and participation in
legal proceedings. The “relevant areas” in which an evaluator should demonstrate
experience, education or skills include the following:
(a) The effects of divorce and remarriage on children, adults, and families;
(b) Appropriate parenting techniques;
(c) Child development, including cognitive, personality, emotional, and psychological
development;
(d) Child and adult psychopathology;
(e) Applicable clinical assessment techniques;
(f) Applicable legal and ethical requirements of parental responsibilities evaluation.
STANDARD 7
THE EVALUATOR SHALL OBTAIN CONSULTATION WHEN THEY ENCOUNTER
AN AREA BEYOND THE SCOPE OF HIS COMPETENCE OR TRAINING
The evaluator shall obtain consultation with a mental health professional
qualified by training or experience in that area when the evaluation includes
an area that falls outside the scope of the evaluator’s training or
competence.
COMMENT
The evaluator must recognize when they are dealing with an area in which they are
not qualified due to a lack of training or experience. Some examples would be:
domestic violence, substance abuse or dependence, certain types of developmental
disabilities in children, and various types of risk (such as risk of parental abduction,
risk of violence, and risk associated with the impact of relocation on a young child).
Recognition of an area in which the evaluator is lacking training or competence
should lead to a consultation with a mental health professional who has knowledge in
that area. Should there be an appointment and the evaluator has too little
knowledge of specific areas relevant to the case, they may request to withdraw.
STANDARD 8
THE EVALUATOR SHALL COLLECT DATA AND CONDUCT AN INVESTIGATION
SUFFICIENT TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS IN CHILDREN’S BEST INTERESTS
The evaluator shall collect data and conduct an evaluation sufficient to
make recommendations that are in the child’s best interests as they relate
to parental responsibilities and any other consider the evaluator is directed
to address.
COMMENT
Page 8 of 13
Proposed PRE Standards
Per C.R.S. 14-10-127, recommendations are made after the evaluator interviews the
parties and children (when old enough to be interviewed), assesses the quality of the
relationship between the parents and children, assesses the parties and gains
information from pertinent outside sources.
Other professional organizations have similar guidelines about the need to evaluate
the parents’ attributes, the child’s needs and the resulting fit between the two. It is
difficult if not impossible to do this without meeting all family members and
observing parents and children together. Sometimes it may be difficult to conduct
in-person interviews and other forms of interviews may be used. However, all
efforts should be undertaken to have at least one in-person interview.
It is important to include new spouses and step-siblings (or new partners and their
children) in this process as they have significant contact and interaction with the
children. These new relationships impact the family system and time should be
spent to understand such dynamics.
A multi-method, multi-trait approach which incorporates diverse data improves the
validity and reliability of a PRE. Therefore, collateral contacts, psychological testing
and review of relevant documents can provide important information to support or
modify the findings of interviews and observations.
Evaluators should strive to be balanced in their approach. The same assessment
techniques should be used with both parents and each should be given a similar
opportunity to present their position.
Ultimately, there may be times when it is impossible to collect all the data in the
most appropriate manner. Evaluators should indicate the attempts they made to do
so, the barriers presenting them, and any limitations this places on the findings or
recommendations. C.R.S. 14-10-127 allows for evaluators to make
recommendations in the following circumstances: When an evaluator works in a
team he or she can make recommendations based on other team member’s work; a
team approach is used and the overall team recommendations are based on various
team members work; if one of the parties does not reside in Colorado and it is not
feasible to evaluate them; or if a party refuses or is unable to cooperate.
STANDARD 9
THE EVALUATOR SHALL HAVE AGE-APPROPRIATE COMMUNICATION
WITH THE CHILD INVOLVED
The evaluator shall inform the child of the purpose of their involvement and
the limits of confidentiality. The evaluator shall obtain information from the
child, including the wishes of the child, through appropriate interview
techniques.
COMMENT
The nature of the legal proceeding or issue should be explained to the child/ren in a
developmentally appropriate manner. The evaluator should ask non-suggestive
questions. The evaluator should be aware that a child’s stated views may vary over
time or may be the result of fear, intimidation, or manipulation. While the evaluator
Page 9 of 13
Proposed PRE Standards
must consider the wishes of the child, they need not adopt those wishes unless they
serve the child’s best interest.
STANDARD 10
THE EVALUATOR SHALL REPORT
CHILD ABUSE TO THE PROPER AGENCY AND THE COURT
COMMENT
In cases in which the evaluator suspects or knows that the child is being neglected or
abused, the evaluator shall take the steps required to ensure that law enforcement
and the proper department is informed, and shall take whatever additional steps are
believed necessary to protect the child.
STANDARD 11
THE EVALUATOR SHALL PREPARE A CLEAR, CONCISE, AND TIMELY REPORT
The evaluator’s conclusions and recommendations shall be presented in a
timely manner to the parties and the court in a written report that is clear,
non-technical, and follows from the body of the report.
COMMENT
The report should be based on a complete body of information that includes, at a
minimum, face-to-face contact with each party and the children; interactional
assessment of each party with the children; assessment of each proposed home
situation; consultation with any professionals deemed to be relevant to developing
an understanding of the parties, the children, their relationship, and their interaction.
The report should include information about the evaluator’s investigative process,
and should address the legal standard that applies to the case. It should also set
forth the child’s wishes even if those wishes are not ultimately recommended. It
should further include opinions and recommendations beyond the scope of the
court’s original order of appointment if these recommendations are deemed to be in
the best interest of the child, acknowledging that these recommendations are beyond
the scope of the evaluation but were elucidated during the evaluation process and
were deemed to also be in the child’s best interest.
STANDARD 12
THE EVALUATOR SHALL PROVIDE COPIES OF HIS OR HER FILE
The evaluator shall, if requested, make available to counsel or a party not
represented by counsel in the case or the child’s legal representative (if
appointed in this case) his or her file of underlying data or reports prior to
any scheduled hearing for which the evaluator was appointed, and only
after the report has been filed. This specifically includes disclosure of
evaluator notes, witness statements, completed questionnaires and results
of the psychological testing. [Underlying data from a psychological testing
can only be released to licensed psychologists.] Bill comment: Clients have a
right to ALL psychological test data.
COMMENT
Page 10 of 13
Proposed PRE Standards
An evaluator has an obligation to document and be prepared to make available all
data that form the basis for his or her opinions and recommendations. The data to be
disclosed includes all underlying data in the evaluator’s file, including the names and
addresses of all persons with whom the evaluator has consulted, except when an
evaluator believes the release of particular information (such as test data) would
endanger any person’s welfare. In such a scenario, the evaluator should inform
counsel and the court of their concerns and await further direction from the court
before releasing the information in question. Counsel or parties seeking release of
the file or underlying data or report subsequent to the hearing for which the
evaluator completed a PRE, must request a court order to release the file. This
directive is not intended to abridge or modify existing law. Where state or federal
law governs the release of confidential records, those laws shall apply. Where
secondary disclosure is prohibited by state or federal law, the court shall transmit
information under confidential cover.
STANDARD 13
PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING
Psychological test data should be collected as a task within the purview of any
evaluator who has the training to conduct such an assessment or be requested by an
evaluator who needs to obtain such data from another source.
COMMENT
Formal assessment is often useful to rule out psychopathology or to provide the
evaluator with psychometrically sound data relative to the psychological health of a
parent. Such data is not necessary in certain circumstances such as those cases
where neither parent raises mental health concerns.
STANDARD 14
THE EVALUATOR SHALL MAINTAIN CONFIDENTIALITY.
The evaluator shall maintain the confidentiality of their file and report and
disclose either only to the parties and their counsel or by court order.
COMMENT
The PRE report and underlying investigative materials shall not be disclosed in any
proceeding other than the proceeding before the appointing court absent a
determination by the appointing court that the need for the information requested
outweighs the need for privacy. An evaluator’s report, and by implication the
underlying case file, “shall otherwise be considered confidential and shall be sealed
and shall not be open to inspection, except by consent of the court.” CRS section
14-10-126(2). Standard 12 provides additional guidance. Because a PRE report and
file are court documents under seal, an evaluator has no authority to produce these
sealed court documents, nor may the evaluator disclose their contents absent
consent and an order from the appointing court.
STANDARD 15
THE EVALUATOR SHALL REQUEST TERMINATION OF THE APPOINTMENT
WHEN PERMANENT ORDERS OR THE POST-DECREE ORDER IS ENTERED
Page 11 of 13
Proposed PRE Standards
Although it is the court’s responsibility to terminate the appointment upon
the entry of permanent orders or post-decree adjudication, if the court fails
to do so the evaluator shall request that the appointment be terminated.
COMMENT
Once the report is filed and permanent orders are entered, a parental responsibilities
evaluator’s appointment pursuant to CRS section 14-10-127, terminates. It is an
abuse of the court’s discretion to continue the PRE appointment beyond permanent
orders, or adjudication of post-decree parental responsibility issues. The role of the
evaluator is to determine and recommend alternatives in the best interests of the
child. The parties’ inability to communicate is not a sufficient ground to continue the
appointment of the evaluator to act as a mediator or facilitator for the parties. (cf.
re CFI’s In re Marriage of Finer, /920 P.2d 325 (Colo. App. 1996). Once permanent
orders, or orders concerning post-decree parental responsibility issues enter, the
court has nothing more to do unless and until some issue is brought back before it
by proper motion. If the court has nothing more to resolve in the case, then by
definition an evaluator has completed their work. Nor can the court in its order
delegate to an evaluator the role of crafting or fine-tuning a parenting plan or of
resolving other parenting issues. The court might consider and adopt a parental
responsibilities evaluator’s recommendations, but the actual rulings must come from
the court. It is an abuse of discretion for the court to transfer its ultimate decisionmaking power and authority to a parental responsibilities evaluator. In re the
Marriage of McNamara, 962 P.2d 330 (Colo. App. 1998). Finally, once orders enter
are entered, there is no reason why the child and parents should suffer the expense
and continued invasion of privacy caused by an indefinite appointment, cf. In the
Interest of A.R.W., /903 P.2d 10 (Colo. App. 1994) (concerning a GAL in a paternity
case).
STANDARD 16
THE EVALUATOR SHALL DEVELOP WRITTEN POLICIES FOR THE PARTIES.
The evaluator shall develop written information about their policies and
procedures; the information shall include the nature of the services
provided, their qualifications, where complaints should be directed, fees and
billing procedures, how questions on billing will be handled and how
challenges to the amount charged can be made, how communication will be
handled, how sensitive information will be handled, and the evaluator’s
reporting obligations.
COMMENT
When first appointed, an evaluator should provide the parties with written
information that clarifies, along with the court’s appointment order, the nature and
scope of the services to be provided and the limits of confidentiality in courtappointed work. The initial information should describe the evaluator’s policies,
procedures, qualifications, and reporting obligations, as well as how a party can
contact the professional’s applicable regulatory or disciplinary agency.
It also is the responsibility of an evaluator to provide specific information to the
parties regarding fees, billing policies, and procedures used if there is non-payment
of fees. The evaluator should also include the process for a party to challenge or
Page 12 of 13
Proposed PRE Standards
request an arbitration on the evaluator’s final bill. An evaluator’s billing statements
should list all services performed and detail the time spent and the charges incurred.
STANDARD 17
THE EVALUATOR SHALL DEVELOP WRITTEN POLICIES FOR COUNSEL
The evaluator shall develop written information about how communications
and sensitive information from counsel or parties not represented by
counsel will be handled.
COMMENT
There are many reasons an evaluator, when first appointed, might find it helpful to
consult with counsel. They include, discussing timing issues, or raising problems or
concerns that develop during the course of a evaluator’s investigation. There should
be no non-disclosed conversations with one party’s counsel. An evaluator must
remain alert to avoid bias or the appearance of bias at all times regardless of the
level of parties’ conflict in the case.
STANDARD 18
THE EVALUATOR SHALL CONTACT THE ATTORNEYS AND/OR PRO SE
LITIGANTS IF THE EVALUATOR HAS QUESTIONS REGARDING THE SCOPE OF
THE EVALUATION ROLE
COMMENT
The evaluator shall contact the attorneys and/or pro se litigants via email, US mail,
or telephone to resolve any issues with respect to the scope of the evaluation. This
should be done as early in the evaluation process as possible. While C.R.S. 14-10127 allows for the evaluator to provide information to the court regarding anything
impacting the child’s best interests, there are occasions when the parties in the
evaluation process may not have the same understanding as to the evaluator’s role.
While confusion regarding the evaluator’s role may be resolved through emails or a
conference call, there may times when the evaluator requests a telephone status
conference with the court to clarify the issue.
STANDARD 19
THE EVALUATOR SHALL HAVE NO PRIVATE OR EX-PARTE
COMMUNICATION WITH THE COURT.
COMMENT
When a situation arises that requires the evaluator to notify the court of issues or
receive direction from the court, the evaluator can make a written request or request
a status conference. All communications with the court, including the final report,
should be served to the parties’ counsel or pro se parent.
Page 13 of 13
Proposed PRE Standards