IN RE: ANKHENATEN AMEN–RA C. (Anonymous). (2019)

DECISION & ORDER

ORDERED that the orders of fact-finding and disposition are affirmed, without costs or disbursement.

The petitioner, Forestdale, Inc., commenced these proceedings to terminate the mother's parental rights with respect to the three subject children.  After fact-finding and dispositional hearings, the Family Court determined that the mother permanently neglected the children by failing to substantially plan for their future, terminated her parental rights, and transferred custody and guardianship of the children to the petitioner and the Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York for the purpose of adoption.  The mother appeals.

The petitioner established, by clear and convincing evidence, that it exercised diligent efforts to strengthen the parent-child relationship by creating a service plan for the mother, which included submitting to a mental health evaluation and complying with recommendations, engaging in individual therapy, completing a parenting skills program, planning for the children separate from their father, enforcing the court's orders against the father as to the children, and maintaining consistent visitation.  Moreover, the petitioner repeatedly counseled the mother as to the need to comply with the service plan, referred her to mental health services, paid for those services, referred her to an agency to assist her with her immigration status, and assisted her with housing applications (see Matter of Mercedes R.B. [Heather C.], 130 A.D.3d 1022, 12 N.Y.S.3d 909;  Matter of Angel M.R.J. [Rachel R.], 124 A.D.3d 657, 1 N.Y.S.3d 347;  Matter of Dianelys T.W. [Malik W.], 121 A.D.3d 801, 994 N.Y.S.2d 181;  Matter of Tamara F.J. [Jaineen J.], 108 A.D.3d 543, 543–544, 969 N.Y.S.2d 119;  Matter of John M. [Raymond K.], 82 A.D.3d 1100, 919 N.Y.S.2d 346).  Despite these efforts, the mother failed to plan for the return of the children.  Specifically, the mother failed to complete individual counseling, to keep the agency informed of where she was living, to plan independently from the father for return of the children, to enforce the court's orders against the father as to the children, and to timely attend scheduled visitation (see Matter of Vaughn M.S. [Patricia C.S.], 144 A.D.3d 811, 40 N.Y.S.3d 533;  Matter of Joseph P. [Edwin P.], 143 A.D.3d 529, 39 N.Y.S.3d 142;  Matter of Tracy B. [Carlton B.], 143 A.D.3d 499, 38 N.Y.S.3d 558;  Matter of Angel M.R.J. [Rachel R.], 124 A.D.3d 657, 1 N.Y.S.3d 347;  Matter of Jonathan B. [Linda S], 84 A.D.3d 1078, 923 N.Y.S.2d 638;  Matter of David O.C., 57 A.D.3d 775, 870 N.Y.S.2d 389;  Matter of Jonathan P., 283 A.D.2d 675, 724 N.Y.S.2d 213;  see also Matter of Daniella C.G., 25 A.D.3d 494, 808 N.Y.S.2d 213).  Although the mother completed a parenting skills workshop, the mother's partial compliance with the court-ordered programs was insufficient to preclude a finding of permanent neglect (see Matter of Mercedes R.B. [Heather C.], 130 A.D.3d 1022, 12 N.Y.S.3d 909;  Matter of Kayla S.-G. [David G.], 125 A.D.3d 980, 4 N.Y.S.3d 289;  Matter of Tamara F.J. [Jaineen J.], 108 A.D.3d 543, 969 N.Y.S.2d 119).  Accordingly, we agree with the Family Court's determination that the mother permanently neglected the children, and we further agree that it was in their best interest to terminate her parental rights (see Matter of Mercedes R.B. [Heather C.], 130 A.D.3d 1022, 12 N.Y.S.3d 909;  Matter of Tamara F.J. [Jaineen J.], 108 A.D.3d 543, 969 N.Y.S.2d 119).

LEVENTHAL, J.P., HINDS–RADIX, BARROS and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.