Dept. of Human Services v. C. W., 493 P.3d 74

B (born 2013) came under juvenile-court jurisdiction after mother’s admitted alcohol use and anger-control incidents; father’s rights were later terminated.
Mother repeatedly completed outpatient alcohol-treatment programs (about four times), participated in parenting and therapy, and reunification with B occurred twice (July 2017 and January 2019).
Mother had periodic relapses (reported April 2019; positive UAs July 2 and July 18, 2019) leading to DHS removals; after the July 2019 removal mother’s engagement with DHS and treatment waned.
At the December 2019 jurisdictional hearing the court retained jurisdiction for mother’s substance abuse (dismissed anger-control basis). Mother admitted some drinking but later testified she had been sober since December 2019 and would not re-enter the long program she had completed multiple times.
At the June 2020 permanency hearing DHS sought to change the plan from reunification to adoption, arguing mother’s progress was insufficient because she refused further treatment; DHS did not present evidence of current substance use or recent violence. Therapist and foster provider testified that mother met B’s needs, had a strong bond with him, and there were no present safety indicators. The juvenile court changed the plan to adoption. The appellate court reversed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (DHS)	Defendant's Argument (Mother)	Held
Whether DHS proved mother’s progress was "insufficient" under ORS 419B.476(2)(a) to change permanency plan	Mother stopped engaging in required treatment and would not re-engage; she must "prove" sobriety by complying	Mother had completed treatment multiple times, applied therapeutic skills, testified to sobriety since Dec 2019; burden is on DHS to prove insufficient progress	Reversed — DHS failed to prove insufficiency; court lacked authority to change plan
Whether nonparticipation in recommended treatment alone establishes the continuing parental deficit	Mother’s refusal to participate shows insufficient progress and risk to child	Prior relapse/ noncompletion does not, by itself, prove the deficit continues; DHS must show ongoing safety risk	Nonparticipation alone is insufficient; DHS must show continuing risk tied to the original jurisdictional basis
Whether evidence before the juvenile court supported changing the plan despite no current evidence of abuse or violence	Caseworker testimony that mother wasn’t meeting in‑home criteria and would not comply justified change	Therapist and foster‑provider testimony showed mother safely parented B when sober and no present indicators of danger; DHS presented no evidence of current abuse	Held for mother — evidence of present safety concerns was lacking, so DHS did not meet its burden

Dept. of Human Services v. V. A. R., 301 Or App 565 (2019) (to change permanency plan DHS must prove reasonable efforts and that parent’s progress is insufficient)
Dept. of Human Services v. G. E., 246 Or App 136 (2011) (failure to complete treatment alone does not prove the underlying parental deficit continues)
Dept. of Human Services v. E. M., 264 Or App 76 (2014) (drug or alcohol use alone does not necessarily show a nonspeculative threat to child)
Dept. of Human Services v. R. L. F., 260 Or App 166 (2013) (same: substance use without proof of risk insufficient for jurisdictional findings)
Dept. of Human Services v. R. D., 257 Or App 427 (2013) (if DHS fails to prove parent’s progress is insufficient, court lacks authority to change permanency plan)
Dept. of Human Services v. C. M. E., 278 Or App 297 (2016) (efforts and progress are evaluated against the facts that supported jurisdiction)