Before you use this: please read Before You Use These Materials — particularly if you are currently in a family court matter. These templates are not litigation tools and using them as such will hurt your case and hurt the broader effort.
American family courts are the largest publicly funded decision-making institution in the country that publishes essentially no performance data. There is no national database of custody outcomes. There is no published ruling-pattern data. There is no longitudinal tracking of children whose lives the system shapes.
This toolkit helps citizens, researchers, and journalists request — through ordinary state public records laws — the data that family courts have spent a century not publishing. It is designed to be used at scale, in many states, by many people, with results aggregated over time into the empirical foundation that policy reform requires.
You do not need to be a lawyer to use this. You need a state of residence (or any state where you have standing to request public records, which in most states is everyone), an internet connection, and willingness to follow up on responses.
| Data You Want | Agency to Ask |
|---|---|
| Judge ruling patterns, caseload, disposition rates | State Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) |
| Guardian ad litem appointment lists, fees paid | County court administrator + state AOC |
| Custody evaluator rosters, approved-list criteria | State licensing board (psychology / MFT / social work) + AOC |
| Child support enforcement (IV-D) statistics | State Department of Human Services or Office of Child Support |
| Bar complaints adjudicated against family law practitioners | State Bar Association / Office of Disciplinary Counsel |
| Judicial conduct complaint statistics | State Commission on Judicial Conduct |
| Performance audits of family court administration | State Auditor / Legislative Audit |
| Court contractor and vendor payments | State Department of Administrative Services / Comptroller |
Customize the bracketed fields. Confirm your state’s public records statute citation before sending — most states publish their statute in plain language on the state legislature’s website.
[YOUR NAME]
[YOUR ADDRESS]
[EMAIL]
[PHONE]
[DATE]
[NAME OF AGENCY PUBLIC RECORDS OFFICER]
[AGENCY NAME]
[AGENCY ADDRESS]
Sent via: [PORTAL URL / EMAIL / CERTIFIED MAIL]
Re: Public Records Request — [BRIEF DESCRIPTION,
e.g., "Family Court Administrative Data, FY 2020-2025"]
Dear Records Officer:
Pursuant to [STATE PUBLIC RECORDS STATUTE — see state-specific notes below],
I respectfully request the following public records:
1. [SPECIFIC RECORD CATEGORY 1]
Time period: [DATE RANGE]
Format preference: machine-readable (CSV, Excel, or JSON). I do NOT
request PDF where the underlying data is stored in a structured database,
as conversion to PDF reduces the utility of the records and may increase
processing burden on the agency.
2. [SPECIFIC RECORD CATEGORY 2]
[as above]
3. [SPECIFIC RECORD CATEGORY 3]
[as above]
I am specifically NOT requesting:
- Records that would identify any minor child
- Records sealed by court order
- Records protected by attorney-client privilege
I AM requesting that any redactions made for the above reasons be
documented with a redaction log identifying the statutory or rule basis
for each redaction, as required by [STATE STATUTE].
Fee Waiver Request: I respectfully request a waiver of fees pursuant
to [STATE STATUTORY FEE WAIVER PROVISION]. Disclosure of these records
is in the public interest because they concern the operation of a
publicly funded judicial system whose performance has not been the
subject of empirical public review. Disclosure is not primarily in
my commercial interest; the records will be used for civic accountability
research and potential publication of aggregate analysis.
If full waiver is denied, please provide an estimate of fees BEFORE
processing the request, as required by [STATE STATUTE], so that I may
narrow the request if necessary.
Statutory Deadline: I understand the agency's response is due within
[STATE STATUTORY RESPONSE WINDOW]. If the request cannot be fulfilled
within that window, please provide a written explanation and a specific
date by which the agency expects to provide the records.
Please confirm receipt of this request within five business days.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
[YOUR NAME]All de-identified case-level disposition data for family court matters (custody, visitation, child support, dissolution, modification, contempt) for fiscal years [YEAR] through [YEAR], including: case number (de-identified or hashed), filing date, disposition date, judicial officer assigned, type of disposition (settled, default, contested trial, dismissed), party representation status (represented, pro se), and any fields the AOC routinely captures regarding parenting-time outcomes.
All records reflecting the appointment of guardians ad litem, custody evaluators, parenting coordinators, and special masters in family court matters for the period [DATE] through [DATE], including: name of appointee, appointing judicial officer, date of appointment, case type, and total fees paid by the parties or by the court.
All policies, procedures, training materials, and qualification standards governing the appointment, oversight, and discipline of guardians ad litem and custody evaluators.
All published and unpublished annual program statistics submitted to the federal Office of Child Support Services for fiscal years [YEAR] through [YEAR], including but not limited to: total caseload, paternity establishment rate, order establishment rate, current support collected, arrears collected, cost-effectiveness ratio, and federal incentive payments received.
Aggregate statistics, by county and by year, on: cases opened for IV-D enforcement; cases opened for IV-D enforcement in the absence of any missed payment; cases in which the obligor was served by means other than personal service; default orders entered without obligor appearance; modification petitions filed; modification petitions granted, denied, or withdrawn.
All policies, procedures, and performance metrics governing the decision to open IV-D enforcement, convert a private agreement to state-enforced status, or initiate collection action.
Any performance audits, management letters, or program reviews conducted on the state’s family court administration, child support enforcement program, or judicial branch performance metrics during the past ten fiscal years.
The following are starting points only. Statutes are amended; verify current citations through your state legislature’s website before sending.
Washington — Public Records Act, RCW 42.56. Generally permissive, with five-day initial response requirement. Strong case law against agencies asserting categorical exemptions.
Florida — Sunshine Law / Chapter 119, Florida Statutes. Constitutionally grounded right of access. No formal request format required.
Texas — Public Information Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 552. Ten-business-day response, with a frequently invoked Attorney General review process for asserted exemptions.
Oregon — Public Records Law, ORS 192.311–192.478. Reasonable response time required. Notable for explicit fee waiver provision in the public interest, ORS 192.324(5).
California — California Public Records Act, Government Code §§ 7920.000 et seq. (recodified 2023). Strong substantive rights, weak enforcement mechanism. The judicial branch is partially exempt — direct judicial decisional records are generally not reachable, but court administrative records ARE.
Illinois, New York, Massachusetts — Workable statutes, slow agencies. Plan for 60–90 day fulfillment cycles.
States with weaker statutes or judicial-branch carve-outs may require more patience, more appeals, and more legal support. Start with a friendlier jurisdiction if you are doing this for the first time; once you have a successful template from a permissive state, the harder states become approachable.
Almost every initial denial is one of:
“The records do not exist in the form requested.” Ask for the records in the form they DO exist. Agencies sometimes claim a query they can run is not a “record”; this is generally legally wrong, but jurisdiction varies.
“The request is overly broad.” Narrow it precisely, but get the narrowing in writing so you can re-request the rest later.
“The records are exempt as judicial records.” Distinguish administrative records from decisional records. Administrative records (caseload, appointments, fees, performance metrics) are generally NOT covered by the judicial exemption.
“Fees will be $X,XXX before we can begin.” Invoke the fee waiver provision, narrow the request, and if necessary appeal the fee determination as a constructive denial.
No response at all. This is a constructive denial in most states. Send a follow-up citing the statutory deadline and indicating intent to appeal. Most non-responses convert to responses at that stage.
A few practical notes:
These templates are aimed at patterns, not at people. The data you request should be aggregated, de-identified, and structural. Do not use these requests to investigate the specific officials handling your own case. The use policy at the top of this page explains why.