Image of the Judicial Council of California Seal

2022 California Rules of Court

Rule 5.220. Court-ordered child custody evaluations

(a) Authority

This rule of court is adopted under Family unit Code sections 211 and 3117.

(Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2007.)

(b) Purpose

Courts order child custody evaluations, investigations, and assessments to assist them in determining the health, prophylactic, welfare, and best interests of children with regard to disputed custody and visitation issues. This dominion governs both court-connected and private child custody evaluators appointed under Family Code section 3111, Family Code section 3118, Evidence Code section 730, or chapter xv (commencing with department 2032.010) of championship 4, part 4 of the Code of Civil Process.

(Subd (b) amended constructive January 1, 2021; previously amended effective January 1, 2003.)

(c) Definitions

For purposes of this rule:

(1)  A "child custody evaluator" is a courtroom-appointed investigator as defined in Family unit Code department 3110.

(two)  The "all-time interest of the child" is equally defined in Family Code section 3011.

(3)  A "child custody evaluation" is an expert investigation and analysis of the health, safe, welfare, and all-time interest of children with regard to disputed custody and visitation issues.

(4)  A "full evaluation, investigation, or assessment" is a comprehensive test of the health, prophylactic, welfare, and best interest of the child.

(v)  A "partial evaluation, investigation, or assessment" is an examination of the health, safety, welfare, and all-time interest of the child that is express by court guild in either fourth dimension or scope.

(6)  "Evaluation," "investigation," and "assessment" are synonymous.

(Subd (c) amended effective January ane, 2003.)

(d) Responsibility for evaluation services

(i)  Each court must:

(A)  Adopt a local rule by January 1, 2000, to:

(i)  Implement this rule of courtroom;

(two)  Determine whether a peremptory challenge to a court-appointed evaluator is allowed and when the challenge must be exercised. The rules must specify whether a family court services staff member, other county employee, a mental wellness professional, or all of them may be challenged;

(3)  Allow evaluators to petition the court to withdraw from a case;

(iv)  Provide for acceptance of and response to complaints virtually an evaluator's operation; and

(v)  Address ex parte communications.

(B)  Give the evaluator, before the evaluation begins, a copy of the court gild that specifies:

(i)  The appointment of the evaluator under Evidence Code department 730, Family Code section 3110, or Lawmaking of Civil Procedure 2032; and

(2)  The purpose and telescopic of the evaluation.

(C)  Crave kid custody evaluators to adhere to the requirements of this rule.

(D)  Decide and allocate betwixt the parties any fees or costs of the evaluation.

(2)  The child custody evaluator must:

(A)  Consider the health, prophylactic, welfare, and best interest of the child within the scope and purpose of the evaluation equally defined past the court guild;

(B)  Strive to minimize the potential for psychological trauma to children during the evaluation process; and

(C)  Include in the initial meeting with each child an age-appropriate explanation of the evaluation process, including limitations on the confidentiality of the process.

(Subd (d) amended constructive January 1, 2007; previously amended constructive January 1, 2003.)

(east) Scope of evaluations

All evaluations must include:

(ane)  A written explanation of the procedure that clearly describes the:

(A)  Purpose of the evaluation;

(B)  Procedures used and the time required to get together and assess information and, if psychological tests will exist used, the function of the results in confirming or questioning other data or previous conclusions;

(C)  Telescopic and distribution of the evaluation report;

(D)  Limitations on the confidentiality of the process; and

(East)  Cost and payment responsibility for the evaluation.

(2)  Data collection and analysis that are consistent with the requirements of Family unit Lawmaking section 3118; that let the evaluator to observe and consider each party in comparable ways and to substantiate (from multiple sources when possible) interpretations and conclusions regarding each child'southward developmental needs; the quality of zipper to each parent and that parent's social environment; and reactions to the separation, divorce, or parental conflict. This procedure may include:

(A)  Reviewing pertinent documents related to custody, including local police force records;

(B)  Observing parent-child interaction (unless contraindicated to protect the best interest of the child);

(C)  Interviewing parents conjointly, individually, or both conjointly and individually (unless contraindicated in cases involving domestic violence), to assess:

(i)  Capacity for setting historic period-advisable limits and for understanding and responding to the kid's needs;

(ii)  History of interest in caring for the child;

(iii)  Methods for working toward resolution of the child custody conflict;

(4)  History of child abuse, domestic violence, substance corruption, and psychiatric illness; and

(five)  Psychological and social functioning;

(D)  Conducting age-advisable interviews and observation with the children, both parents, stepparents, step- and half-siblings conjointly, separately, or both conjointly and separately, unless contraindicated to protect the best involvement of the child;

(E)  Collecting relevant corroborating data or documents equally permitted by police force; and

(F)  Consulting with other experts to develop information that is beyond the evaluator'southward scope of practice or area of expertise.

Subd (e) amended constructive Jan 1, 2021; previously amended effective Jan 1, 2003, July 1, 2003, and January 1, 2007.)

(f) Presentation of findings

All evaluations must include a written or oral presentation of findings that is consistent with Family Code section 3111, Family Lawmaking department 3118, or Bear witness Code section 730. In any presentation of findings, the evaluator must do all of the following:

(1)  Summarize the data-gathering procedures, information sources, and time spent, and nowadays all relevant information, including information that does not support the conclusions reached;

(2)  Describe any limitations in the evaluation that result from unobtainable data, failure of a party to cooperate, or the circumstances of item interviews;

(3)  Only make a custody or visitation recommendation for a party who has been evaluated. This requirement does not forestall the evaluator from making an acting recommendation that is in the best interests of the child; and

(4)  Provide clear, detailed recommendations that are consequent with the health, condom, welfare, and best interests of the child if making any recommendations to the court regarding a parenting plan.

(Subd (f) adopted effective Jan i, 2021.)

(one thousand) Confidential study; requirements

(i) Family Code section 3111 evaluations. An evaluator appointed under Family unit Lawmaking section 3111 must do all of the following:

(A)  File and serve a report on the parties or their attorneys and whatsoever attorney appointed for the kid under Family Code section 3150; and

(B)  Attach a Notice Regarding Confidentiality of Child Custody Evaluation Report (form FL-328) equally the start folio of the kid custody evaluation study when a court-ordered child custody evaluation study is filed with the clerk of the courtroom and served on the parties or their attorneys, and any counsel appointed for the child, to inform them of the confidential nature of the study and the potential consequences for the unwarranted disclosure of the report.

(2)Family unit Code section 3118 evaluations. An evaluator appointed to carry a child custody evaluation, investigation, or assessment based on (one) a serious allegation of child sexual abuse; or (two) an allegation of child corruption under Family Code section 3118 must practice all of the following:

(A)  Provide a total and complete analysis of the allegations raised in the proceeding and address the health, rubber, welfare, and best interests of the child, as ordered by the court;

(B)  Consummate, file, and serve Confidential Kid Custody Evaluation Report (form FL-329) on the parties or their attorneys and any attorney appointed for the child under Family Code department 3150; and

(C)  Attach Notice Regarding Confidentiality of Child Custody Evaluation Study (form FL-328) every bit the first page of the child custody evaluation written report in (B) to inform the parties or their attorneys of the confidential nature of the report and the potential consequences for the unwarranted disclosure of the report.

(Subd (g) adopted effective January one, 2021.)

(h) Cooperation with professionals in another jurisdiction

When i political party resides in another jurisdiction, the custody evaluator may rely on another qualified neutral professional for assistance in gathering information. In order to ensure a thorough and comparably reliable out-of-jurisdiction evaluation, the evaluator must:

(one)  Brand a written request that includes, as appropriate:

(A)  A re-create of all relevant court orders;

(B)  An outline of issues to exist explored;

(C)  A list of the individuals who must or may be contacted;

(D)  A description of the necessary structure and setting for interviews;

(E)  A statement every bit to whether a home visit is required;

(F)  A request for relevant documents such as law records, school reports, or other document review; and

(Chiliad)  A request that a written written report exist returned only to the evaluator and that no copies of the report be distributed to parties or attorneys.

(ii)  Provide instructions that limit the out-of-jurisdiction report to factual matters and behavioral observations rather than recommendations regarding the overall custody plan; and

(3)  Attach and discuss the report provided past the professional in some other jurisdiction in the evaluator's last report.

(Subd (h) relettered effective January 1, 2021; adopted as subd (f); previously amended constructive January 1, 2003.)

(i) Requirements for evaluator qualifications, training, continuing education, and feel

All child custody evaluators must meet the qualifications, training, and standing didactics requirements specified in Family Code sections 1815, 1816, and 3111, and rules 5.225 and 5.230.

Subd (i) relettered constructive January 1, 2021; adopted every bit subd (chiliad);previously amended constructive July ane, 1999, January i, 2003, and January i, 2004.)

(j) Ethics

In performing an evaluation, the kid custody evaluator must:

(1)  Maintain objectivity, provide and gather balanced information for both parties, and control for bias;

(2)  Protect the confidentiality of the parties and children in collateral contacts and non release data well-nigh the case to whatsoever individual except as authorized past the courtroom or statute;

(three)  Not offering any recommendations near a party unless that political party has been evaluated direct or in consultation with some other qualified neutral professional;

(4)  Consider the health, prophylactic, welfare, and best involvement of the kid in all phases of the procedure, including interviews with parents, extended family members, counsel for the child, and other interested parties or collateral contacts;

(5)  Strive to maintain the confidential relationship between the child who is the subject of an evaluation and his or her treating psychotherapist;

(6)  Operate inside the limits of the evaluator'south grooming and feel and disclose any limitations or bias that would touch on the evaluator'southward power to conduct the evaluation;

(7)  Not force per unit area children to state a custodial preference;

(eight)  Inform the parties of the evaluator's reporting requirements, including, but not express to, suspected kid abuse and neglect and threats to harm one's cocky or some other person;

(nine)  Not disclose any recommendations to the parties, their attorneys, or the chaser for the child earlier having gathered the information necessary to support the conclusion;

(10)  Disembalm to the court, parties, attorney for a political party, and attorney for the child conflicts of involvement or dual relationships; and not have whatsoever date except past court order or the parties' stipulation; and

(eleven)  Be sensitive to the socioeconomic condition, gender, race, ethnicity, cultural values, religion, family unit structures, and developmental characteristics of the parties.

(Subd (j) relettered effective January 1, 2021; adopted as subd (h); previously amended effective January ane, 2003 and January 1, 2007.)

(k) Price-effective procedures for cross-examination of evaluators

Each local courtroom must develop procedures for expeditious and price-constructive cross-test of evaluators, including, but not limited to, consideration of the following:

(1)  Videoconferences;

(2)  Phone conferences;

(three)  Audio or video examination; and

(4)  Scheduling of appearances.

(Subd (chiliad) relettered constructive January i, 2021; adopted as subd (i); previously amended constructive January 1, 2003; previously relettered as subd (j) effective January 1, 2010.)

Rule five.220 amended constructive Jan 1, 2021; adopted as rule 1257.3 effective Jan 1, 1999; previously amended and renumbered constructive January 1, 2003; previously amended effective July 1, 1999, July 1, 2003, Jan 1, 2004, January i, 2007, and January i, 2010.

[ Back to Top ]