Although there is no shortage of literature on why mediators should be allowed to give evaluations and why parties in dispute allegedly want and need evaluations, there is a relative lack of empirical literature on the subject of what exactly qualifies as competent evaluative mediation practice. The author reviews existing literature to formulate a description of the behaviors that would be considered competent in evaluative mediation practice, and to open a discussion of the implications of these findings for such contemporary fieldwide conversations as defining quality mediation, establishing performance-based competency standards, distinguishing among approaches to practice, and exploring the relationship between underlying values and practice approaches.