Producing quality evaluations at a reasonable cost

• Published date: 01 January 2023
• Author: Aaron Robb
• Date: 01 January 2023
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12696

COMMENTARY

Producing quality evaluations at a reasonable cost

Aaron Robb

Forensic Counseling Services, Frisco, Texas, USA

Correspondence

Aaron Robb

Email: aaron@texascounseling.org

One of the concerns heard through the process that produced the AFCC Guidelines for Parenting Plan Evaluations in

Family Law Cases (Guidelines) was the rising cost of evaluations, and the barrier that such costs pose to the family

courts. As one of the guiding principles for parenting plan evaluations is a just and equitable process (AFCC, 2022),

avoiding increasing financial burdens on families was a critical issue for the task force as it produced the most recent

revision. At the same time, survey data obtained by the task force showed a broad range of costs for evaluations.

Reported costs split approximately equally into three categories: $5000 or less, $5000 to $10,000, and $10,000 or

more, with comments regarding wide variability depending on evaluator experience, community size, and other

factors. While there will always be jurisdictional differences in the cost of living, and cases where greater complexity

results in greater cost, there are several basic approaches which make it possible to follow professional guidelines

while remaining cost-effective for the families we serve.

STRUCTURE–HOW ARE EVALUATIONS ORDERED AND SET UP?

The first critical point where there can be cost savings is by attorneys doing their due diligence on the front end.

More than once this author has been brought in on cases where evaluators clearly lacked the competence to do the

work they were assigned,

1

but unfortunately the family did not learn this until well after a report had been com-

pleted. In other circumstances, families with limited means agreed on a particular evaluator because they had a low

initial retainer, rather than one with a higher flat fee structure, only to ultimately spend far more in the long run as

they recognized the implications of initial in describing the retainer. These are areas where attorneys must be coun-

selors at law and help guide clients in the right direction by asking the questions that litigants lack the experience

and context to even recognize on the front end of an evaluation. At the same time, there may be ways to streamline

costs through orders which address easily foreseen events, such as requiring the evaluator to attend trial without

the necessity (and cost) of a subpoena, as long as there is a written request and their appearance fee is paid

in advance, or the attorneys providing shared documents to the evaluator jointly (e.g., using cloud-based storage

systems) to avoid duplicative costs both in the attorney reviewing documents and in attorney efforts.

Looking past individual families and at the macro issues of structuring evaluations, courts and attorneys can take

steps to create systems that acknowledge that some clients may be unable to afford evaluations, and yet the court

1

More than once the assigned evaluator had not completed the minimum training required in the jurisdiction. The evaluators were unaware of being

unaware of the requirements, in a classic Dunning-Kruger effect.

DOI: 10.1111/fcre.12696

© 2022 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.

Family Court Rev. 2023;61:65–68. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/fcre 65