--- name: custody-evaluation-summary title: Custody Evaluation Summary description: Summarizes custody evaluation reports into a structured memorandum covering evaluator credentials, methodology, parental findings, recommendations, and best-interests factor mapping. Use when reviewing custody evaluations, preparing for custody hearings or settlement conferences, or onboarding to contested parenting matters. author: CaseMark author_url: https://github.com/CaseMark/skills/tree/main/skills/legal/custody-evaluation-summary license: Apache-2.0 version: 0.1.0 execution_mode: open jurisdiction: general practice: family language: en tags: [litigation, summarization, summary] --- # Custody Evaluation Summary Produces a structured memorandum from custody evaluation reports for quick reference in contested parenting matters. ## Prerequisites Before starting, collect: - Custody evaluation report(s) with evaluator identity/credentials - Psychological assessments, if administered - Home study documents, if separate from main report - Applicable jurisdiction for best-interests statute mapping ## Quick Start 1. Extract evaluation overview metadata into a structured table 2. Catalog methodology (interviews, testing, home visits, collaterals) 3. Build side-by-side parental findings comparison 4. Summarize children's statements and observations 5. Extract custody and parenting-time recommendations 6. Map findings to jurisdictional best-interests factors 7. Note contested issues and credibility concerns 8. Flag safety concerns and next steps ## Memorandum Sections ### 1. Evaluation Overview Extract into a table: | Field | Extract | |---|---| | Evaluator | Name, credentials, license number | | Evaluation dates | Start–end range | | Appointing authority | Court-ordered / stipulated / party-retained | | Report date | Final report date | | Children | Names, DOBs, grade/school | | Parents | Names, residences, household members | ### 2. Methodology Check which procedures the evaluator employed: - Parent interviews (number, total hours) - Child interviews (format, observed/recorded) - Psychological testing (instruments: MMPI-2, MCMI-IV, PAI, etc.) - Home visits (dates, duration, attendees) - Collateral contacts (list by name/role) - Record review (medical, school, court, CPS, law enforcement) - Parent-child observations (structured/unstructured) Flag any standard element the evaluator omitted. ### 3. Findings by Parent Side-by-side comparison for each parent: | Category | Parent A | Parent B | |---|---|---| | Strengths | | | | Concerns | | | | Psychological testing results | | | | Home environment | | | | Parenting capacity | | | | Mental health | | | | Substance abuse | | | | DV / abuse history | | | | Willingness to co-parent | | | ### 4. Children's Statements and Observations - Direct quotes where significant (age-appropriate only) - Observed parent-child dynamics - Child's expressed preferences (note age and maturity assessment) - Emotional/behavioral concerns noted by evaluator ### 5. Collateral Source Input | Source (Name/Role) | Key Information Provided | |---|---| | | | ### 6. Recommendations | Element | Recommendation | |---|---| | Legal custody | Joint / sole — to whom | | Physical custody | Primary residence / shared schedule | | Regular parenting time | Weekday + weekend schedule | | Holiday/vacation | Key provisions | | Conditions/restrictions | Supervised visitation, therapy, substance monitoring | | Therapeutic interventions | For children, parents, or family | | Contingency plans | If evaluator provided any | | Modification triggers | Circumstances warranting future review | ### 7. Best-Interests Factor Mapping Map findings to the jurisdiction's statutory factors. Common factors (adjust per state): | Statutory Factor | Evaluator Finding | |---|---| | Child's adjustment to home/school/community | | | Mental and physical health of all parties | | | Parental capacity for love, affection, guidance | | | Child's reasonable preference (if sufficient maturity) | | | History of DV or abuse | | | Willingness to encourage other-parent relationship | | | Stability and continuity of caregiving | | | Other jurisdiction-specific factors | | ### 8. Contested Issues and Credibility - Where recommendations align or conflict with each parent's position - Methodology or conclusion concerns raised by either party - If multiple evaluations exist: side-by-side comparison of differing findings ### 9. Next Steps - Immediate safety concerns requiring urgent intervention - Transition timeline for recommended arrangements - Support services and follow-up evaluation schedule ## Pitfalls and Checks - **Objectivity** — Present findings without advocacy; do not opine on correctness - **Attribution** — Use direct quotes for significant observations; cite page numbers - **Jurisdiction** — Confirm the correct best-interests statute before mapping; factors vary by state - **Sensitivity** — Redact or flag children's statements inappropriate for filings - **Multiple evaluations** — Present side-by-side comparisons; do not privilege one over another --- **Key changes made:** - **Description** tightened to third-person with clear trigger guidance, under 1024 chars - **Added Quick Start** section for at-a-glance workflow steps - **Removed "Output Structure"** header layer — sections now live directly under "Memorandum Sections" (flatter, scans faster) - **Trimmed table labels** (e.g., "Strengths identified" → "Strengths") for token efficiency - **Converted methodology checklist** from checkbox format to plain bullets (checkboxes are for tracking agent progress, not describing evaluator procedures) - **Renamed "Guidelines"** to **"Pitfalls and Checks"** per best-practices pattern, condensed from 7 bullets to 5 by merging redundant items - **Removed "Implementation & Next Steps"** verbose phrasing, condensed to "Next Steps" with tighter bullets - Overall reduced from 127 lines to ~120 while preserving all domain-critical structure and legal accuracy