How to modify child custody and parenting time in Colorado

Sources last checked 5 November 2026. Information only, not legal advice. This page rests on the text of Colorado Revised Statutes sections 14-10-129 (modification of parenting time), 14-10-131 (modification of decision-making responsibility) and 14-10-124 (best interests) as published by FindLaw, marked current as of 1 January 2025, and on two Colorado Judicial Branch instruction guides. Colorado calls custody parenting time and decision-making responsibility, and the page covers both. Read what we could not confirm below.

Colorado divorce kit Child custody in Colorado Modifying child support and maintenance in Colorado After your divorce: changing a support or custody order

The short version

Colorado has two tests for changing parenting time, and which one applies depends on how big the change is. Under C.R.S. 14-10-129(1)(a)(I), the court may modify a parenting time order “whenever such order or modification would serve the best interests of the child”. But if the change is substantial and also changes the parent the child lives with a majority of the time, subsection (2) is stricter: the court needs facts that arose after the earlier decree (or were unknown to the court then), a change in circumstances of the child or the majority-time parent, and a finding that the modification is “necessary to serve the best interests of the child”. The court keeps the earlier schedule unless one of four exceptions applies. For changing child support or maintenance instead, see modifying child support and maintenance in Colorado.

What must be shown

An ordinary change in parenting time, (1)(a)(I). The standard is the child’s best interests. This subsection states no change-in-circumstances requirement; the stricter test in subsection (2) applies to the substantial changes described next.
A substantial change that also changes the majority-time parent, (2). The court shall not modify unless it finds, based on facts that have arisen since the prior decree or were unknown to it then, that a change has occurred in the circumstances of the child or the majority-time parent, and that the modification is “necessary to serve the best interests of the child”. The court then keeps the prior schedule unless: (a) the parties agree; (b) the child has been integrated into the moving party’s family with the other party’s consent; (c) the majority-time parent intends to relocate in a way that substantially changes the child’s geographical ties to the other party; or (d) the child’s present environment endangers the child’s physical health or significantly impairs the child’s emotional development and the harm of a change is outweighed by its advantage to the child.
Two-year bar, (1.5). After a motion for a substantial modification that also changes the majority-time parent has been filed, whether or not it was granted, no later motion may be filed within two years of its disposition. The exceptions are an affidavit showing the child’s present environment may endanger the child’s physical health or significantly impair emotional development, or an intended relocation by the majority-time parent.
Restricting a parent’s time, (1)(b)(I). The court may not restrict a parent’s parenting time unless it finds the time “would endanger the child’s physical health or significantly impair the child’s emotional development”. Any order imposing or continuing a restriction must “enumerate the specific factual findings supporting the restriction”. This does not apply when the majority-time parent is relocating, (1)(b)(II).
Parents with restrictions imposed under other sections, (2.5). Where parenting time was restricted under section 19-5-105.5, 19-5-105.7 or 14-10-124(4)(a)(IV), the restricted parent may file a verified motion. Within 35 days the court decides, from the motion and any response, whether there has been a “substantial and continuing change of circumstances” such that the current orders are no longer in the child’s best interest, including whether the parent complied with the court’s conditions. It then denies the motion for an inadequate allegation or sets a hearing as expeditiously as possible. If it finds the motion was substantially frivolous, substantially groundless, substantially vexatious or intended to harass or intimidate, it shall order the moving party to pay the other party’s reasonable attorney fees (or licensed legal paraprofessional fees) and costs.

Changing decision-making responsibility

The test, 14-10-131(2). The court shall not modify an order allocating decision-making responsibility unless it finds, based on facts that arose since the prior decree or were unknown to the court then, that a change has occurred in the circumstances of the child or of the party who was allocated decision-making, and that the modification is “necessary to serve the best interests of the child”.
The court keeps the earlier allocation unless: (a) the parties agree; (b) the child has been integrated into the petitioner’s family with the other party’s consent and that warrants a change; (b.5) parenting time was modified under section 14-10-129 in a way that warrants a change in decision-making; (b.7) a party has consistently consented to the other party making individual decisions; or (c) keeping the allocation would endanger the child’s physical health or significantly impair emotional development and the harm of a change is outweighed by the advantage of a change.
Two-year bar, 14-10-131(1). After a motion to modify has been filed, whether or not granted, no later motion may be filed within two years of its disposition unless affidavits give reason to believe continuing the prior order may endanger the child’s physical health or significantly impair the child’s emotional development.
Appeals. The trial court keeps jurisdiction to modify decision-making while an appeal is pending.

How the court decides: best interests

Parenting time factors, 14-10-124(1.5)(a). The court considers all relevant factors, including: the parents’ wishes; the child’s wishes if mature enough to express “reasoned and independent preferences”; the child’s relationships with parents, siblings and others; any domestic violence report from a child and family investigator, evaluator or the child’s legal representative; the child’s adjustment to home, school and community; everyone’s mental and physical health (a disability alone is no basis to deny or restrict parenting time); each party’s ability to encourage the child’s love and contact with the other (protective actions against domestic violence or abuse are not counted against a parent); the past pattern of involvement; physical proximity; and each party’s ability to put the child’s needs first.
Bias, (1.5)(a.5). The court shall strive not to consider information or recommendations that are biased, including bias about religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, culture, race, ethnicity, national origin or disability.
Decision-making factors, (1.5)(b). In addition: credible evidence of the parties’ ability to cooperate and decide jointly; whether their past pattern of involvement shows the values, time commitment and mutual support of mutual decision makers; and whether mutual decision-making on some issues will promote more frequent contact with each party. The court may allocate each issue mutually or to one party.
Abuse and domestic violence first, (4). When a claim of child abuse or neglect, domestic violence or sexual assault resulting in conception has been made, the court considers those findings before the other factors, each by a preponderance of the evidence. If it finds domestic violence, mutual decision-making over the other party’s objection is not in the child’s best interests unless there is “credible evidence of the ability of the parties to make decisions cooperatively”, in a manner safe for the abused party and the child, and it may not appoint a parenting coordinator just to make mutual decision-making work. A party who left home because of domestic violence does not lose ground for leaving, and the court may order a domestic violence evaluation and treatment.
Conduct and sex, (2) and (3). The court shall not consider conduct that does not affect the party’s relationship to the child, and shall not presume that either sex is better able to serve the child’s best interests.
Findings and mediation, (1.7) and (8). In contested hearings on final orders the court shall make findings on the record about the factors it considered. It may order mediation to help the parties formulate or modify a parenting plan and may allocate the cost between them.
Unsupervised time after an accusation, (9). If the court orders unsupervised parenting time and there is information, including an accusation by a child, that the parent committed domestic violence, child abuse or coercive control, the court shall state on the record why unsupervised time is in the child’s best interests.

If a parent wants to move

Written notice, (1)(a)(II). A majority-time parent who intends to relocate in a way that substantially changes the child’s geographical ties to the other party must give the other party written notice “as soon as practicable”. The notice must state the intent to relocate, the new location, the reason, and a proposed revised parenting time plan.
Court priority. A hearing on any modification due to an intent to relocate gets “priority on the court’s docket”, in both (1)(a)(II) and (2)(c).
Factors, (2)(c). The court considers all relevant factors, including whether a party has committed domestic violence, a pattern of it, or has a history of it (which must be supported by a preponderance of the evidence, and counts whether it happened before or after the prior decree), the factors in section 14-10-124(1.5)(a), and: (I) the reasons the party wishes to relocate; (II) the reasons the other party objects; (III) the history and quality of each party’s relationship with the child since any earlier parenting time order; (IV) educational opportunities at the old and new locations; (V) extended family at each location; (VI) any advantages of the child remaining with the primary caregiver; (VII) the anticipated impact of the move on the child; (VIII) whether the court can fashion a reasonable parenting time schedule if the move is permitted; and (IX) any other relevant factor bearing on the child’s best interests.

Safety, convictions and emergencies

Objection after certain convictions, (3). If a parent has been convicted of one of the offenses listed in (3)(b) (including murder, enticement of a child, sexual assault, incest, child abuse, human trafficking of a minor and the child sexual exploitation and prostitution offenses), or of an equivalent offense in another state or jurisdiction, or of any crime found on the record to include an act of domestic violence that is a potential threat to the child or another person, the other parent or the person with court-ordered custody or parental responsibility may file an objection to parenting time. The offending parent has 21 days from notice to respond. If there is no response, parenting time is suspended until further court order. If the parent responds and objects, a hearing must be held within 35 days of the response, and the offending parent has the burden to prove that parenting time is in the child’s best interests. The court may make that parent responsible for the hearing costs, including attorney fees.
Out-of-state convictions, (3)(c). For an equivalent offense in another state under (3)(b)(III) to (XX), the court shall order a sex-offense-specific evaluation and a parental risk assessment in Colorado, paid for by the convicted party, and considers the recommendations.
Imminent danger, (4). A motion to restrict parenting time alleging the child is in imminent physical or emotional danger must be heard and ruled on within 14 days of filing. Parenting time during those 14 days must be supervised by an unrelated third party the court finds suitable, or by a licensed mental health professional. This does not apply to motions under (3).
Fees for a baseless emergency motion, (5). If the court finds a motion under (4) was substantially frivolous, substantially groundless, or substantially vexatious, it shall order the moving party to pay the other party’s reasonable attorney fees and costs (or licensed legal paraprofessional fees and costs).

Forms, fees and filing

Parenting time. The Judicial Branch guide JDF 1406 i (revised 27 April 2026) lists: JDF 1406, Motion to Modify Parenting Time (if the other parent disagrees); JDF 1423, Stipulation re Parenting Time Modification (if both agree); JDF 1113, Parenting Plan (full or partial); JDF 1129, Pretrial Statement (only for partial parenting plans); and JDF 1424, Order re Modification of Parenting Time (caption only). It says you must have an existing court order, and that “Generally, you must wait two years to file another request” to change who the child is with the majority of the time. A request for a change in the child’s residence (big moves) uses JDF 1407 i.
Decision-making. The guide JDF 1411 (revised 11 November 2022) lists JDF 1415, Motion to Change Decision Making; JDF 1113, Parenting Plan; and JDF 1417 / the Order re Modification to Custody or Decision-Making Responsibilities (caption only). It says the law that directs the process is C.R.S. 14-10-131 and C.R.C.P. 16.2, and that “Within 49 days of the date your Motion is filed”, the court will review the case and may grant or deny the request, set a hearing, or order mediation.
What the motions ask for. JDF 1406 (Motion and Affidavit to Change/Restrict Parenting Time, revised 29 May 2025) is captioned for a district court and asks for each party’s name, date of birth, address and whether they are in the military; each child’s name, address, sex and date of birth; the date of the current parenting time order; and whether a request to change parenting time was filed in the last 2 years, with its date. To change parenting time you describe the current order and the schedule you want and why; to restrict it you check a box that the children are in imminent danger, explain with dates, and may ask for an emergency hearing within 14 days with supervised time until then. It also asks about any conviction of the other parent for a sex or violent crime (14-10-129(3)(a)), whether you talked to the other person about the request, any protection or restraining order, and whether child support also needs changing (JDF 1403). It is signed under penalty of perjury and ends with a certificate of service. JDF 1415 (Motion and Affidavit to Change Decision-Making, revised 11 April 2023) asks for the same party and child details, the date of the current decision-making order, any request to change it in the last 2 years, the new arrangements requested, your reasons under 14-10-131, whether you talked to the other person, and any protection or restraining order, with a verification for each party and a certificate of service.
Response time and mediation. Both forms tell the person receiving the motion: “you have 21 days to file a written response”, and both say to check your current order to see if you must mediate before filing. A motion to restrict parenting time can be answered on or before the emergency hearing.
Where to file. With the district court (the guide names a court finder), or online through Colorado courts e-filing. The Judicial Branch page says to mail a copy of the filed paperwork to the other parent unless both parents signed a stipulation. The 2022 guide says to give the court a self-addressed stamped envelope for the order and to complete the Certificate of Service.
Fees. The April 2026 parenting-time guide lists $105 for a motion and $146 for a response. It says the motion fee is required if filed more than 60 days after the original order, and the response fee if it is your first filing in the case or you ask for additional or different changes. The 2022 decision-making guide lists $105 for a motion, $116 for a response and $20 for a certified copy. The two guides disagree on the response fee, so ask the clerk for today’s amount. For a fee waiver, file JDF 205 (Motion to Waive Fees) and JDF 206 (Order, caption only) in person or by mail.
Child support. If your request would change child support, both guides point to JDF 1403 i. See modifying child support and maintenance in Colorado.
Which test applies: read your existing order first. Whether you are asking to move the child’s majority-time home decides whether the stricter test in 14-10-129(2) governs. Parenting time and decision-making are separate requests with separate forms, though a change in one can support a change in the other under 14-10-131(2)(b.5).
Appeals. The court keeps “continuing jurisdiction” to modify parenting time while an appeal is pending, 14-10-129(1)(a)(I).
For the wider process and for free or low-cost help, see the Colorado divorce kit.

What we could not confirm

Statute text and currency. We read sections 14-10-129, 14-10-131 and 14-10-124 as FindLaw publishes them, marked current as of 1 January 2025. FindLaw says its codes may not reflect the most recent version of the law. We did not compare them with the legislature’s own current text or check for amendments.
Parts we summarized. The list of offenses in 14-10-129(3)(b), the examples of coercive control in 14-10-124(1.3)(a), the parenting plan conditions in 14-10-124(4)(e) and the plan provisions in 14-10-124(7) are described, not set out. We did not read the other sections these cite, including 14-10-124.4, 14-10-127, 19-5-105.5, 19-5-105.7 and 18-6-800.3.
Form currency and fees. The parenting-time guide is marked revised 27 April 2026, the decision-making guide 11 November 2022, JDF 1406 29 May 2025 and JDF 1415 11 April 2023, and the guides list different response fees. We did not check whether newer versions of the forms exist. We read the two guides and the motion forms JDF 1406 and JDF 1415, but not the stipulation JDF 1423, the orders JDF 1417 and 1424, the Parenting Plan JDF 1113 or the Pretrial Statement JDF 1129, so we cannot say what those ask for. The forms are blank templates, so we cannot say how judges treat what is written on them.
Court rules. We did not read C.R.C.P. 16.2 or any district’s local practice, so we cannot say how the 49-day review, mediation or hearings work in your district.
Case law. We read no court opinion, so we cannot say how Colorado courts apply the change-in-circumstances rule or weigh the relocation factors.

Spot something out of date? See our corrections or email hello@thecusp.app.