If you’ve ever worried whether your immigration evaluations are truly meeting what attorneys and judges need, this episode will change how you practice.

Psychologist and researcher Dr. Andrew Rasmussen is leading the first national, empirically grounded study on what makes psychological evaluations effective in immigration court. He breaks down what attorneys consistently say they want, what they don’t, and where evaluators unintentionally undermine cases.

We explore why a clear referral question matters, how too much (or too little) detail can backfire, and why “PTSD-only” reports often fail to support legal claims. You’ll learn how to stay in your expert role, link findings to the specific relief sought, and write with the court’s actual reader in mind... without drifting into legal conclusions.

🔗To follow Dr. Rasmussen’s research and the development of new evaluation guidelines, visit his project website and connect with him on LinkedIn.

🎓 Become an Expert Immigration Evaluator
Join our Certificate Training Program to gain the skills and confidence needed to conduct effective immigration evaluations.
👉 Learn More Here

📘 Not Sure Where to Start as an Evaluator?
Download our Free Guide to learn the essentials and see if this work is the right fit for you.
👉 Get your free guide

📲 Follow Us to Grow Your Expertise
🔹Instagram
🔹 Facebook
🔹 LinkedIn 

🌟 Join our private Facebook community for deeper discussions, peer support, and access to valuable training opportunities.

👉 Click here to join the group