Guardianship Evaluation Georgia

Two Evaluations, Not One

Georgia's adult guardianship process involves two separate clinical assessments, and families often confuse them:

The pre-filing affidavit evaluation. If a single petitioner files GPCSF 12 (rather than two petitioners with personal knowledge), they need a sworn affidavit from an authorized clinician who examined the proposed ward within 15 days before filing. This is the petitioner's evidence — it supports the petition.

The court-ordered evaluation. After the court finds probable cause, it appoints an independent evaluator to conduct a formal functional capacity assessment. This evaluator cannot be the same professional who signed the pre-filing affidavit. Their report is the court's evidence — it informs the judge's decision.

Both evaluations must be conducted by professionals authorized under Georgia law. HB 36 (effective July 1, 2025) significantly expanded who qualifies.

Who Can Conduct the Court-Ordered Evaluation

Under HB 36, the list of authorized evaluators now includes:

• Licensed physicians
• Licensed psychologists
• Licensed clinical social workers (LCSWs)
• Physician assistants
• Psychiatric/mental health nurse practitioners
• Clinical nurse specialists
• Licensed professional counselors
• Licensed marriage and family therapists

Before HB 36, the list was more restrictive. The expansion addresses a real access problem: in rural Georgia counties, finding a licensed physician or psychologist willing to perform guardianship evaluations could take weeks. Adding licensed counselors, social workers, and nurse practitioners dramatically increases availability, especially outside metro Atlanta.

The proposed ward's legal counsel can challenge the evaluator's clinical credentials and functional methodology — another HB 36 addition that strengthens due process protections.

What the Evaluator Assesses

The court-ordered evaluation goes far beyond a clinical diagnosis. Under HB 36, the evaluator must perform a comprehensive assessment covering:

Actual functional abilities. Can the person make and communicate decisions about healthcare, finances, daily living, and safety? The assessment focuses on what the person can do, not what their diagnosis predicts they should be able to do.

Medical and school records. The evaluator reviews existing documentation to understand the person's clinical history, educational trajectory, and service history.

Existing support systems. Who already helps this person? What community resources are in place? The evaluator must assess whether informal supports — family, friends, service providers — are sufficient to address the person's needs without court intervention.

Cultural and linguistic background. The evaluator must account for communication barriers, cultural norms around decision-making, and language access. A non-native English speaker's difficulty expressing complex preferences in English doesn't equal incapacity.

The Evaluation Process

The evaluation cannot be scheduled earlier than the fifth day after service on the proposed ward. This timing is part of the due process protections — no one should be surprised by a capacity evaluation.

The proposed ward's court-appointed attorney has the right to attend the evaluation, though they cannot actively participate in the clinical interview itself. Their presence ensures the evaluation is conducted fairly.

All statements the proposed ward makes during the evaluation are legally privileged. They can only be used to determine capacity within the guardianship or conservatorship proceeding — not in any other legal matter.

The 7-Day Report Deadline

After completing the evaluation, the court-appointed evaluator must file a sworn, written report with the court within 7 days. The report is served on both the proposed ward and their attorney.

The report must state:

• The evaluator's clinical findings regarding functional capacity in each relevant domain
• Whether the proposed ward can make and communicate significant responsible decisions
• What less restrictive alternatives were considered and why they're insufficient (or sufficient)
• Any recommendations regarding the scope of guardianship needed

If the evaluation report does not support a finding of incapacity, the court must dismiss the petition. The case ends there — no hearing is scheduled.

Preparing Your Family Member for the Evaluation

The evaluation is an assessment, not a test to pass or fail. But preparation helps:

Bring documentation. If your family member has records showing their decision-making abilities or limitations — IEP progress reports, employment evaluations, therapy notes — share them with the evaluator in advance.

Don't coach responses. The evaluator is trained to distinguish between rehearsed answers and genuine functional understanding. Coaching your family member to say specific things can actually undermine the evaluation's validity.

Ensure comfort. The evaluation should happen in an environment where the proposed ward feels comfortable enough to demonstrate their actual abilities. If your family member shuts down in unfamiliar clinical settings, discuss this with the evaluator beforehand.

Prepare for questions about daily life. Evaluators typically ask about daily routines, money management, medical decisions, safety awareness, and social relationships. These aren't trick questions — they're functional assessments designed to understand what the person can handle independently.

The Georgia Adult Guardianship & Alternatives Guide covers the full evaluation process and includes preparation frameworks that help families document both their family member's capabilities and their limitations — the balanced picture that leads to the most appropriate court order.

See more Georgia guides →