Cfis and Apr Evaluators - Similarities and Difference - January 2008 - Family Law
| Publication year | 2008 |
| Pages | 31 |
2008, January, Pg. 31. CFIs and APR Evaluators - Similarities and Difference - January 2008 - Family Law
January 2008
Vol. 37, No. 1 [Page 31]
Family Law
CFIs and APR Evaluators - Similarities and Difference
by Mechelle Y. Faulk
Family Law articles are sponsored by the CBA Family Law Section to provide information to family law practitioners. Articles are intended to focus on practice tips and discussions of current issues within the realm of family law. New authors are welcomed.
Article Editors:
Meredith Patrick Cord, Colorado Springs, of Johnson & Cord, PC - (719) 471-4034, mpc@johnsoncord.com; Trish Cooper, Greenwood Village, of Cook, Cooper & Moses, LLC - (303) 623-1130, trish@ccmfamilylaw.com
About the Author:
Mechelle Y. Faulk is an Associate with Dufford & Brown, P.C., where she specializes in domestic and family law - (303) 861-8013, mfaulk@duffordbrown.com.
This article discusses the similarities and differences between a child and family investigation under CRS § 14-10-116.5 and an allocation of parental responsibilities evaluation under CRS § 14-10-127, as well as the significance of those similarities and differences.
Colorado statutes provide two avenues for the appointment of an individual to complete an investigation and report regarding the allocation of parental responsibilities (APR) in a domestic case after considering the factors set forth in CRS § 14-10-124. One avenue is CRS § 14-10-116.5, which permits the appointment of a child and family investigator (CFI). The other is CRS § 14-10-127, which, on the motion of either party or the court, requires the court to appoint an evaluator to conduct an APR evaluation, as long as the motion is not made for the purpose of delay.
This article provides an overview of the initial appointment of a CFI and an APR evaluator, including the similarities and differences between the two. It also discusses supplemental investigations and evaluations, updates to the original reports of a CFI and an APR evaluator, applicable standards, court appearances, and the preparation of testimony.
Appointment of a CFI
Pursuant to CRS § 14-10-116.5, a CFI "may" be appointed on the motion of a party or on the court's own motion to investigate child-related issues in domestic relations cases where parental responsibilities are at issue.(fn1) Thus, the appointment of a CFI is within the discretion of the court and is not mandatory. (This differs from the appointment of an APR evaluator, which is mandatory in most circumstances, as discussed below.)
The appointment of a CFI was meant as a method for the court to obtain information at less expense than a full APR evaluation.(fn2) Consequently, CRS § 14-10-116.5 does not circumscribe the evaluation with as much detail as CRS § 14-10-127. Instead, it requires that the specific duties of the CFI, which may be as broad or as narrow as the court determines is necessary, be set out in a written order of appointment.(fn3) For example, although some CFI appointments may require a CFI to investigate and make recommendations as to broad issues of parenting time and decision making, much like an APR evaluation, other CFI appointments may be limited to the narrow issue of whether it is in a child's best interests to attend a public or a private school or to continue to see a particular therapist.
Attorneys should be cautious when filing with the court a proposed order appointing CFI, because the CFI is limited to investigating, reporting, and making recommendations as specifically directed in the appointment order.(fn4) Even when using the model Order Appointing CFI promulgated by the Colorado Supreme Court,(fn5) attorneys should precisely and unambiguously state the duties of the CFI, so that the specific duties are clear to the parties, the CFI, and the court. This specificity will reduce confusion regarding the role of the CFI and will restrict the CFI to the issues for investigation in that particular case.
If the CFI's role is specifically defined in the order of appointment and the CFI identifies an issue outside the scope of his or her appointment that should be investigated, the CFI should bring that issue to the attention of the parties and the court so that the court may determine whether to broaden the CFI's appointment to address that new issue. This is important for a number of reasons. For example, if the CFI is appointed to investigate only whether a child should attend public school, such specificity would prohibit the CFI from spending the time and incurring the expense to investigate the broader issue of whether parenting time with one of the parties should be restricted, unless that CFI first obtained court approval to investigate that issue.
Costs and Fees
When appointing a CFI, the court must enter an order for costs, fees, and disbursements, which can be against any or all of the parties.(fn6) Often, the fees and costs of a CFI initially are shared by the parties in some proportion. (This is different from the initial costs and fees of an APR evaluator, which are paid by the party requesting the evaluation.(fn7)) Nonetheless, attorneys should keep in mind that the costs, fees, and disbursements of a CFI, no matter how initially allocated, may be reallocated at permanent orders or at the post-decree final hearing.(fn8)
Qualifications
A CFI may be an attorney, mental health professional, or any other individual who has appropriate training, qualifications, and an independent perspective acceptable to the court.(fn9) On the other hand, an APR evaluation cannot be performed by an attorney or a mental health professional who does not meet the qualifications of CRS § 14-10-127(4), as more fully set forth in the "Appointment of an APR Evaluator" section below. Thus, there are many more individuals who may serve as CFIs than may serve as APR evaluators.
Supplemental Investigations
CRS § 14-10-116.5 does not provide for a "supplemental" CFI investigation after the original CFI investigation and report has been completed. Therefore, if a party is dissatisfied with the original CFI investigation and wishes to have a second evaluation, he or she must request an APR evaluation pursuant to CRS § 14-10-127.
Appointment of an APR Evaluator
The procedure by which an APR evaluation can be obtained is set forth in CRS § 14-10-127. The statute states that the court "shall" order the evaluation on the motion of either party, unless the motion is made for the purpose of delaying the proceedings.(fn10) Unless a court finds that a party is requesting an APR evaluation solely for the purpose of delay, the...
To continue reading
Request your trial