What this page is — and isn't
This is a review dataset, not a study. We collected every public review we could find of the four agencies we partner with, read them, averaged the star ratings, coded the themes by hand, and scored each agency on eight dimensions. It covers four agencies, not the industry.
It does not include national cycle counts, success rates, or how many surrogacy journeys happen in each state. For those, the primary sources are the CDC's Assisted Reproductive Technology reports and the SART clinic reporting system; we'll add a sourced summary here when we've checked their latest release. Nothing on this page should be cited as an industry-wide statistic.
What "public review" means here
Earlier versions of this page called these "verified surrogate reviews." That overstated what we did, so we've retired the word. Here is exactly what a review in this dataset is:
- Public. It was posted where anyone can read it: a Google Business Profile, Facebook page, agency website testimonial page, OVU.com, Surrogacy Advisor, Expecting.ai, or Surrogacy Network.
- Source-linked. We keep the URL of the original post for all 152 entries. We can share the list with journalists and researchers on request.
- Not identity-verified. We did not confirm who wrote each review or that they completed a journey. Reviewer role is whatever the reviewer said: 37 entries self-identify as surrogates or gestational carriers (2 of them as both surrogate and intended parent), 19 as intended parents, 2 as industry professionals, 6 are unclear, and 88 don't state a role.
- Written 2017–2026. Reviews carry their original post dates where the platform shows one; 36 entries (mostly website testimonials) are undated. "Collected January–May 2026" describes when we gathered them, not when they were written.
Ratings by agency
The average is computed over reviews that carry a star rating. Website testimonials don't, so each agency's rated count is lower than its total. Hatched bars mark small samples.
| Agency | Avg rating | Rated reviews | All reviews | 5-star share of rated | Platforms |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Family Makers Surrogacy | 4.8 / 5 | 46 | 55 | 95.7% (44 of 46) | Google 33, Facebook 13, agency website 6, OVU.com 3 |
| Family Tree Surrogacy Center | 4.9 / 5 | 56 | 56 | 98.2% (55 of 56) | Google 52, agency website 4 |
| Simple Surrogacy † | 5.0 / 5 | 15 | 32 | 100% (15 of 15) | Google 15, agency website 14, Surrogacy Advisor 3 |
| NewGen Families † | 5.0 / 5 | 4 | 9 | 100% (4 of 4) | Agency website 3, Google 2, Expecting.ai 2, Surrogacy Network 2 |
| All four combined | 4.9 / 5 | 121 | 152 | 97.5% (118 of 121) | Google 102, agency website 27, Facebook 13, OVU.com 3, Surrogacy Advisor 3, Expecting.ai 2, Surrogacy Network 2 |
What reviewers said
Positive themes, by agency
One reader coded each review for recurring themes. Counts are mentions; the percentage is mentions divided by all reviews collected for that agency (rated and unrated). The coding sheet is on file and not yet published — treat these as a reading of the reviews, not a measurement.
| Agency | Theme | Mentions | Share of all reviews |
|---|---|---|---|
| Family Makers (55) | Full journey support | 19 | 35% |
| Knowledgeable team | 19 | 35% | |
| Communication and responsiveness | 17 | 31% | |
| Good match / first-timer friendly | 15 each | 27% | |
| Family Tree (56) | Communication and responsiveness | 13 | 23% |
| Full journey support | 13 | 23% | |
| Family-like atmosphere | 10 | 18% | |
| Simple Surrogacy (32) | Full journey support | 8 | 25% |
| Successful delivery | 5 | 16% | |
| Financial / escrow management | 5 | 16% | |
| NewGen Families (9) † | Knowledgeable team | 4 | 44% |
| Successful delivery / escrow / LGBTQ+ inclusive | 1 each | 11% |
Concerns and negative reviews
Three of the 121 star-rated reviews are one-star: two at Family Makers, one at Family Tree. No rated review falls between 1 and 5 stars. We have not yet coded negative themes across the set, so we can't report what share of reviews raise a specific concern — that's listed under limitations. The one-star reviews are included in every average on this page and their source links are on file.
Compensation at the four agencies (2026)
Base pay is guaranteed once the contract's trigger (usually a confirmed heartbeat) is met. Everything on top of base — allowances, transfer fees, bonuses, reimbursements — is contingent and only paid if the trigger happens. The bars show base in teal and the contingent portion of each agency's stated total in sage.
| Agency | First-time base | First-time total | Experienced base | Experienced total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Family Makers Surrogacy | $60,000 | $95,000 | $70,000+ | $105,000+ |
| Family Tree Surrogacy Center | $60,000 + $1,000 first-timer bonus | $80,000+ | $75,000–$85,000 | $90,000–$105,000 |
| Simple Surrogacy | $58,000–$63,000 (varies by insurance and location) | $73,000 | $68,000+ | $89,000 |
| NewGen Families | $60,000 | $72,000+ (bonuses may apply) | $80,000+ | $92,000 |
For what goes into each line, see our packages explained guide; for the national picture, the compensation guide.
8-dimension scores
We score each agency from 0 to 20 on eight dimensions, using the reviews above, the agency's published rate sheet, and the details it gave us in its onboarding form. These are the same scores our quiz uses; nothing is hidden. Dimensions are weighted equally, and a flat 15-point state-affinity bonus is added when a surrogate lives in an agency's primary service region.
Family Makers Surrogacy
Family Tree Surrogacy Center
Simple Surrogacy
NewGen Families
| Dimension | Family Makers | Family Tree | Simple Surrogacy | NewGen | What it measures |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compensation | 18 | 17 | 15 | 20 | How competitive the published package is, base first |
| Communication | 20 | 18 | 16 | 14 | Response time, check-in frequency, after-hours access |
| Community | 10 | 20 | 14 | 12 | Surrogate groups, events, peer connection |
| LGBTQ+ support | 12 | 12 | 20 | 16 | Share of LGBTQ+ intended parents, explicit inclusion |
| Helper/empath fit | 20 | 16 | 18 | 18 | Support for surrogates motivated by helping |
| Flexibility | 14 | 14 | 18 | 16 | How adaptable the process is to a surrogate's life |
| First-timer support | 10 | 10 | 8 | 6 | Onboarding and hand-holding for first journeys |
| Experienced support | 5 | 8 | 6 | 10 | Returning surrogates, sibling journeys, experienced pay |
| Total (of 160) | 109 | 115 | 115 | 112 | Unweighted sum. The quiz only sums the dimensions a surrogate says matter to her, so her ranking will differ. |
Methodology
Collection
Between January and May 2026 we searched each agency's Google Business Profile, Facebook page, and website testimonial page, plus OVU.com, Surrogacy Advisor, Expecting.ai, and Surrogacy Network, and captured every review we found: 102 from Google, 27 agency website testimonials, 13 from Facebook, 3 each from OVU.com and Surrogacy Advisor, and 2 each from Expecting.ai and Surrogacy Network. Community forums were read for context but no forum posts are counted. No agency supplied reviews to us directly.
Sample and de-duplication
One entry per source URL. On re-checking in August 2026 we found three Family Tree entries on Google that appear to be the same review captured twice under slightly different names, and five reviews that appear on two platforms (for example, the same text on Google and on OVU.com). All remain in the 152 count for now; removing them would not change any agency's average by more than a tenth of a point. We'll remove them in the next revision and note the change here.
Ratings
The average rating is the plain mean of star ratings over entries that have one (121 of 152). Ratings are used regardless of reviewer role: a rating from an intended parent counts the same as one from a surrogate. "5-star share" is the number of 5-star entries divided by rated entries.
Sentiment scoring
61 of the 152 reviews were also run through an automated sentiment tool (0–1 scale) as a second opinion on the text: 58 scored above 0.9 ("very positive"), 3 scored 0.7–0.9 ("positive"), none below 0.7. Per-agency means ranged from 0.92 to 0.95. The remaining 91 reviews were read but not machine-scored. Sentiment scores do not feed the averages above.
Themes
One reader coded each review for recurring themes (support, communication, team knowledge, matching, community, escrow and finances, delivery). Counts are mentions per agency; a review can carry more than one theme. Negative themes have not been coded yet.
Compensation
Figures come from each agency's published rate sheet and intake materials and are rendered from a single dataset that every page on this site shares. Status: published, not yet confirmed with the agencies. Base and total are always shown separately.
8-dimension scores
Scores were assigned by the editorial team from the reviews, the rate sheet, and each agency's onboarding form, on a 0–20 scale per dimension. They are judgments, not measurements, and we publish them so they can be argued with.
Independence and how we're paid
Agencies do not pay for inclusion, rankings, or scores, and we don't run agency advertising. We earn a flat referral fee for surrogates we refer — the same at any of the four. The four agencies in this dataset are our four partners, so this is not an arm's-length industry survey; treat it as a partner review set with the method shown. Full disclosure of how we're paid is on our about page, and the agency hub compares the four side by side.
Limitations
- Four partner agencies only. Nothing here describes agencies we don't work with, or the industry.
- Public-review selection bias. People who post reviews are not a random sample of surrogates, and agencies often invite happy clients to post. Expect the averages to run high.
- Reviewer role is self-reported and often missing. 88 of 152 entries don't state whether the writer was a surrogate, an intended parent, or someone else. Earlier copy calling these "surrogate reviews" was wrong; only 37 entries self-identify that way.
- Website testimonials are agency-curated. 27 entries come from agency websites, are unrated, and were chosen by the agency. They count toward review totals and themes but not toward star averages.
- Small samples. NewGen has 4 rated reviews and Simple Surrogacy has 15. A single new 1-star review would move NewGen's average from 5.0 to 4.2.
- Possible duplicates. Up to 8 entries may be the same review counted twice (see de-duplication).
- Themes are one reader's coding, unpublished, with no second coder. Negative themes are uncoded.
- Sentiment scores cover 61 of 152 reviews and come from an automated tool that reads enthusiasm, not accuracy.
- Compensation figures are unconfirmed with the agencies and change when agencies change their rate sheets.
- We are paid by these agencies on placement. We've published the method and the raw counts so you can weigh that for yourself.
How to cite this page
Journalists, researchers, and other sites are welcome to cite this page. Please link to it and include the date you accessed it, since the numbers are re-checked and updated.
Suggested citation
Real Talk Surrogacy. (2026). Surrogacy Statistics 2026: Agency Review Data. https://www.realtalksurrogacy.com/surrogacy-data/ — published May 4, 2026; last updated Aug 26, 2026; accessed [your date].
Journalists and researchers: email us for the source list (152 review URLs with platform and date), for a comment, or to challenge a number.
Email for the source listSources
- Real Talk Surrogacy review dataset: 152 public reviews with source URLs, collected 2026-01 to 2026-05 from Google Business Profiles, Facebook, agency websites, OVU.com, Surrogacy Advisor, Expecting.ai, and Surrogacy Network. Re-checked 2026-08-26.
- Partner agency published rate sheets and intake materials, rendered from the site's shared compensation dataset. Checked 2026-08. Status: published, not confirmed with agencies.
- Real Talk Surrogacy 8-dimension scoring file (the same values the eligibility quiz uses), as of 2026-08-26.
- For national ART and gestational-carrier statistics, not covered here: CDC Assisted Reproductive Technology reports and SART national summary reports.