2025 AFCC Fall Virtual Conference Evaluation
Workshop 18

Workshop 18: Standardizing Forensic Evaluations: A Data-Driven Remedy for Overloaded Courts

This workshop will explore how the lack of standardization in forensic evaluations burdens courts and compromises family justice. Presenters will offer actionable strategies for improving referral practices, evaluator qualifications, and reporting methods. Evidence-based approaches will be shared to support fairer outcomes and ease strain on court systems. This session will include research findings, real-world examples, and a roadmap for interdisciplinary collaboration to promote consistent, transparent, and culturally sensitive practices in child custody, parenting, and risk-related assessments.

Question Title

* 1. The content of the presentation was consistent with the abstract in the conference brochure

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

Question Title

* 2. Based on the content of this session, I am able to: (1=Strongly disagree, 5=Strongly agree)

	1	2	3	4	5
1. Identify three critical deficiencies in current family court evaluation practices and describe how they negatively impact judicial efficiency and family outcomes.	1. Identify three critical deficiencies in current family court evaluation practices and describe how they negatively impact judicial efficiency and family outcomes. 1	1. Identify three critical deficiencies in current family court evaluation practices and describe how they negatively impact judicial efficiency and family outcomes. 2	1. Identify three critical deficiencies in current family court evaluation practices and describe how they negatively impact judicial efficiency and family outcomes. 3	1. Identify three critical deficiencies in current family court evaluation practices and describe how they negatively impact judicial efficiency and family outcomes. 4	1. Identify three critical deficiencies in current family court evaluation practices and describe how they negatively impact judicial efficiency and family outcomes. 5
2. Apply evidence-based guidelines for developing appropriate referral questions, selecting qualified evaluators, and implementing standardized reporting practices in family law settings.	2. Apply evidence-based guidelines for developing appropriate referral questions, selecting qualified evaluators, and implementing standardized reporting practices in family law settings. 1	2. Apply evidence-based guidelines for developing appropriate referral questions, selecting qualified evaluators, and implementing standardized reporting practices in family law settings. 2	2. Apply evidence-based guidelines for developing appropriate referral questions, selecting qualified evaluators, and implementing standardized reporting practices in family law settings. 3	2. Apply evidence-based guidelines for developing appropriate referral questions, selecting qualified evaluators, and implementing standardized reporting practices in family law settings. 4	2. Apply evidence-based guidelines for developing appropriate referral questions, selecting qualified evaluators, and implementing standardized reporting practices in family law settings. 5

Question Title

* 3. Please rate presenter: Lisa Long, PsyD (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

	1	2	3	4	5
Level of knowledge and expertise	Level of knowledge and expertise 1	Level of knowledge and expertise 2	Level of knowledge and expertise 3	Level of knowledge and expertise 4	Level of knowledge and expertise 5
Teaching ability	Teaching ability 1	Teaching ability 2	Teaching ability 3	Teaching ability 4	Teaching ability 5
Maintained my interest	Maintained my interest 1	Maintained my interest 2	Maintained my interest 3	Maintained my interest 4	Maintained my interest 5
Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 1	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 2	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 3	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 4	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 5

Question Title

* 4. Please rate presenter: Marlena Ryba, PhD (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

	1	2	3	4	5
Level of knowledge and expertise	Level of knowledge and expertise 1	Level of knowledge and expertise 2	Level of knowledge and expertise 3	Level of knowledge and expertise 4	Level of knowledge and expertise 5
Teaching ability	Teaching ability 1	Teaching ability 2	Teaching ability 3	Teaching ability 4	Teaching ability 5
Maintained my interest	Maintained my interest 1	Maintained my interest 2	Maintained my interest 3	Maintained my interest 4	Maintained my interest 5
Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 1	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 2	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 3	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 4	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 5

2025 AFCC Fall Virtual Conference Evaluation
Workshop 18

Question Title

* 1. The content of the presentation was consistent with the abstract in the conference brochure

Question Title

* 2. Based on the content of this session, I am able to: (1=Strongly disagree, 5=Strongly agree)

Question Title

* 3. Please rate presenter: Lisa Long, PsyD (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

Question Title

* 4. Please rate presenter: Marlena Ryba, PhD (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

Question Title

* 5. Please rate this session presentation overall (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

Question Title

* 6. How much did you learn as a result of this CE program? (1=Very little, 5=Great deal)

Question Title

* 7. Information presented in this session reflected the most current evidence on this topic (1=Disagree, 5=Agree)

Question Title

* 8. How useful was the content of this CE program for your practice or other professional development (1=Not useful, 5=Extremely useful)

Question Title

* 9. Additional Comments