Department of Human Services v. S. M. H., 283 Or. App. 295

Background

Three children (ages 9, 2, and 1) were removed from mother after incidents tied to mother’s substance abuse; all three parents were incarcerated at the time of the permanency hearing.
DHS began involvement in July 2014; the court asserted jurisdiction over D and B in October 2014 and over S in spring 2015.
DHS issued letters of expectation and referrals for substance‑abuse evaluation/treatment; mother had periods of house arrest and incarceration and engaged in some treatment while incarcerated.
From spring 2015 to the March 29, 2016 permanency hearing, the family had a series of caseworkers; a part‑time caseworker (Moles) handled the case for much of the period and acknowledged delays and limited outreach.
At the permanency hearing DHS sought to change plans from reunification to guardianship; the juvenile court found DHS had made reasonable efforts and approved guardianship.
The appellate court reversed, holding the record lacked sufficient evidence that DHS made reasonable efforts to reunify with respect to mother, and remanded; the court did not reach the fathers’ challenges.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether DHS made reasonable efforts to make reunification possible under ORS 419B.476(2)(a)	Mother: DHS failed to meaningfully engage after mother’s incarceration (no contact with prison counselor until Dec 2015; delayed assistance for visits; inadequate casework), so reunification change was improper	DHS: Early efforts and later contacts with mother and counselor rendered overall efforts reasonable despite intervening lapses	Reversed: DHS did not show sufficient, sustained efforts as to mother; juvenile court’s reasonable‑efforts finding unsupported
Whether mother’s willingness to participate absolved DHS of further obligations	Mother: Her demonstrated willingness and prison participation meant additional DHS efforts could have mattered	DHS: Mother initially resisted treatment and DHS had provided referrals and options earlier in case	Held: Mother’s ongoing engagement showed DHS should have done more; lack of DHS follow‑through undermines the finding of reasonableness
Whether incarceration excuses DHS from making reasonable efforts	Mother: Incarceration does not excuse DHS; it required tailored outreach while incarcerated	DHS: Services are limited during incarceration; DHS cited contacts with counselors and referrals	Held: Incarceration is not an automatic excuse; DHS must still provide reasonable, case‑specific efforts and here it failed
Whether later short‑term increased efforts before hearing were sufficient	Mother: Late contacts did not provide a sufficient period to assess progress	DHS: Recent contacts + prior work made efforts adequate	Held: Recent efforts were insufficient to compensate for earlier prolonged inattention; court could not meaningfully assess progress

Key Cases Cited

Dept. of Human Services v. S. S., 278 Or App 725 (insufficient reasonable‑efforts finding where earlier six months of inaction undermined later efforts)
Dept. of Human Services v. T. M. S., 273 Or App 286 (standard for reviewing juvenile court factual findings)
Dept. of Human Services v. R. B., 263 Or App 735 (DHS bears burden to prove reasonable efforts and insufficient parental progress)
State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Williams, 204 Or App 496 (incarceration alone does not excuse DHS from making reasonable efforts)
Dept. of Human Services v. S. W., 267 Or App 277 (fact‑specific holding that earlier vigorous efforts supported reasonable‑efforts finding despite periods of inaction)
Dept. of Human Services v. M. K., 257 Or App 409 (reasonable‑efforts inquiry requires giving parents reasonable opportunity to demonstrate minimal parenting adequacy)
Dept. of Human Services v. N. T., 247 Or App 706 (evaluate DHS efforts against adjudicated jurisdictional bases)
Dept. of Human Services v. J. M., 275 Or App 429 (consider evidence tied to parent’s willingness/ability to participate when assessing DHS failures)
State ex rel Dept. of Human Services v. H. S. C., 218 Or App 415 (emphasis on sufficient assessment period before permanency change)
Dept. of Human Services v. R. W., 277 Or App 37 (parental resistance does not automatically excuse DHS from making meaningful efforts)