Colorado’s Board of Psychologist Examiners dismissed a complaint filed against the license of Mark Kilmer, a high-profile parental evaluator who has said 90% of abuse allegations he hears in his work are false.

The complaint was filed by a mother who had Kilmer appointed as a parental responsibility evaluator in her divorce and custody case, and she’s also at the forefront of a class-action lawsuit against Kilmer that alleges he produces biased evaluations that favor abusive parents.

Evaluators are professionals hired to make recommendations about parental custody in court cases, and the cases commonly involve allegations of child abuse and intimate partner violence. Under the umbrella of these court-appointed personnel are parental responsibility evaluators and child-and-family investigators.

The Office of the State Court Administrator barred Kilmer from accepting new court appointments for parental evaluations in October, informing him that it had suspended him while the office investigated his suitability for the appointments.

He was terminated from the state’s roster of eligible evaluators in November. In her complaint filed with the Department of Regulatory Agencies (DORA) alleging Kilmer violated practice standards, Lauren May Woodruff alleges Kilmer admitted during testimony in a February hearing for her case he had not notified the court of his suspension according to his own contract and practice standards.

Colorado custody evaluator suspended amid criticism of evaluation industry

Kilmer’s suspension and termination followed investigations into Colorado’s parental evaluation industry by The Denver Gazette and ProPublica. In a previous interview with ProPublica, Kilmer said he disbelieves 90% of the abuse allegations he hears during his evaluation work.

Also among Woodruff’s accusations: Falsifying and altering records as Kilmer conducted the parental responsibilities evaluation in her case. An accusation Kilmer didn’t disclose to the court or the attorney on her case that her ex-husband had fled to another state during the PRE (parental responsibility evaluation) process and ongoing DHS investigations against him, prolonging the cost of the evaluation and the litigation in Woodruff’s case.

Her allegations include that Kilmer didn’t interview Woodruff’s children at her home, while conducting two interviews at her ex-husband’s home and failing to disclose he skipped scheduled home visits by Kilmer. He didn’t include in his evaluation reports made to the Department of Human Services by her children’s therapists and other mandatory reporters about suspected abuse, according to the complaint.

Colorado’s Board of Psychologist Examiners, part of the Department of Regulatory Agencies, dismissed Woodruff’s complaint after little discussion Friday. Members said during the meeting’s public session Kilmer has denied the accusations against him.

Kilmer’s psychologist license expires Aug. 31. 

The board voted to dismiss the complaint without publicly giving any reason, having apparently made their decision in the meeting’s executive session.

Woodruff expressed her frustration about the board’s decision in a text to the Denver Gazette. She said it seemed the members had only read media reports about the class-action lawsuit against Kilmer, rather than reviewing her complaint. Woodruff added dozens of people watching the board’s meeting Friday have also had complaints they filed with DORA dismissed.

Class-action suit filed against parental evaluator who said he disbelieves 90% of domestic violence allegations

“Kilmer’s response to the case had even negated his own court testimony on the matter, which was provided to DORA in the transcript,” Woodruff wrote. “On its face the Board members should have moved for further investigation in the very least.”

In a letter to the Office of the State Court Administrator last fall, Kilmer denied any bias in his evaluation work.

“Most respectfully, if anyone attempts to insinuate or complain that I do not understand how to assess, diagnose and treat victims and/or perpetrators of violent crime in the U.S.A., or how to parent appropriately – then they are mistaken,” he wrote. “They do not know me. Or they are falsely accusing me. I wouldn’t know how to be gender-biased if I had to.”

He has not responded to previous requests for comment. The Denver Gazette reached out to Kilmer on Friday afternoon for comment.

Colorado’s network of custody evaluators has historically had little practical oversight, accountability or opportunity for public scrutiny. Reports they submit to the court generally remain sealed, and the Department of Regulatory Agencies seems to rarely choose to investigate complaints made against evaluators’ professional licenses.

Investigations by The Denver Gazette found judges have relied on inaccurate and biased reports by evaluators and put children at serious risk by giving custody to abusive parents. In these instances, custody evaluators have shown apparent prejudice against one parent – usually mothers – questioning their credibility without proof and making assumptions about parenting without firsthand investigation.

Gazette reporter Chris Osher contributed to this report.

Correction: This article has been updated to clarify Mark Kilmer has been terminated from the state’s list of eligible parental evaluators.

Colorado’s parenting evaluation industry profits as bitter child custody cases thrown into chaos