Department of Human Services v. M. K., 257 Or. App. 409

R (born 2007) was under DHS jurisdiction; in Feb 2012 DHS filed a new petition alleging father was incarcerated and a convicted, untreated sex offender, creating threat of harm to R.
Father was incarcerated for sexual contact with a minor; expected release Nov 2013; had completed some prison programs and sent limited letters to R.
DHS made a psychosexual evaluation a prerequisite for any visitation with R and viewed that evaluation as a “key element” to reunification.
One provider would perform the in-prison psychosexual evaluation but quoted about $5,000; DHS usually paid under $1,000 for such evaluations and declined to authorize the $5,000 expense while searching for other providers.
Juvenile court found DHS’s efforts reasonable (declining to require payment of $5,000) and found father had not made sufficient progress; court extended the reunification plan six months.
On appeal the court reversed the reasonable-efforts determination because the juvenile court did not assess the totality of circumstances, specifically failing to weigh potential benefit of prompt in-prison evaluation against the cost.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether DHS made "reasonable efforts" to reunify	Father: DHS should have arranged psychosexual evaluation while he was incarcerated and not delay evaluation due to cost because timing was critical to progress	DHS: Postponement was reasonable because the only available in-prison provider demanded ~ $5,000, far above DHS’s usual cost, so DHS searched for cheaper alternatives	Reversed: juvenile court erred — it failed to consider totality (cost vs. likely benefit); record lacks evidence supporting a reasonable-efforts finding based solely on cost
Whether father made "sufficient progress" toward reunification	Father: (claimed progress would have followed prompt evaluation)	DHS: Father remained incarcerated and unevaluated, so insufficient progress	Not reached (dispositive reversal on reasonable-efforts issue)

Dept. of Human Services v. J. F. D., 255 Or App 742 (2013) (standard of review for reasonable-efforts determinations)
Dept. of Human Services v. T. C. A., 251 Or App 407 (2012) (review of reasonable-efforts under ORS 419B.476)
Dept. of Human Services v. N. S., 246 Or App 341 (2011) (court’s factual findings reviewed for any supporting evidence)
Dept. of Human Services v. S. N., 250 Or App 708 (2012) (DHS may decline services likely to be low yield)
State ex rel Dept. of Human Services v. J. A. C., 216 Or App 268 (2007) (DHS permitted to stop services lacking evidence of benefit)
State ex rel SOSCF v. Frazier, 152 Or App 568 (1998) (reasonableness of efforts depends on particular circumstances)
State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Williams, 204 Or App 496 (2006) (DHS must attempt to engage incarcerated parents in most cases)
State ex rel Dept. of Human Services v. Shugars, 208 Or App 694 (2006) (parents must be given reasonable opportunity to adjust conduct)
State ex rel SOSCF v. Burke, 164 Or App 178 (1999) (unreasonable for DHS to decline to fund reunification-essential treatment when cost is an insurmountable barrier)
Dept. of Human Services v. A. D., 255 Or App 567 (2013) (DHS not required to fund every conceivable service; totality of circumstances controls)