in Re Gray Minors, 338069

Children came under court jurisdiction after an FBI human-trafficking investigation in Feb 2015; petition alleged respondent failed to protect them and had limited intellectual functioning.
Petition and prior psychological evaluation (Jan 2015) put DHHS and the court on notice of respondent’s intellectual disability.
Treatment plan required parenting/independent-living skills, trauma therapy, and housing; respondent completed some parenting programs and individual therapy early on but later refused or ceased participation.
Caseworkers provided accommodated services (narrowed treatment plan, Home Again hands-on parenting, individualized therapy, referrals to trauma services, GED for cognitively impaired, housing assistance referrals), and arranged a neuropsychological evaluation completed May 2016.
From Feb–Mar 2016 onward respondent missed most visitations, medical and school appointments, stopped therapy, and by Mar 2017 had not visited in ~6 months; DHHS filed for termination and the trial court terminated respondent’s parental rights under MCL 712A.19b(3)(g).
On appeal respondent argued DHHS failed to modify services under the ADA to accommodate his disability; he did not challenge the sufficiency of evidence for statutory grounds or best interests findings.

Issue	Respondent's Argument	DHHS / Trial Court's Argument	Held
Whether DHHS failed to make reasonable modifications under the ADA to accommodate respondent’s intellectual disability, so its reunification efforts were unreasonable	DHHS did not sufficiently modify the service plan (delay in neuropsych eval; communication via text despite literacy issues)	DHHS provided targeted accommodations, narrowed plan, hands-on parenting, individualized therapy, and multiple referrals; text messaging was used with respondent’s preference	Court affirmed: DHHS made reasonable modifications and reasonable reunification efforts under the ADA

In re Fried, 266 Mich. App. 535 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005) (standard of review for reasonable-efforts findings)
In re Terry, 240 Mich. App. 14 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000) (ADA applies to DHHS, requirement to make reasonable modifications)
In re Rood, 483 Mich. 73 (Mich. 2009) (adequacy of DHHS efforts may affect termination decision)
In re Frey, 297 Mich. App. 242 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012) (parents must also participate in services offered)
In re Hicks/Brown, 893 N.W.2d 637 (Mich. 2017) (DHHS must make reasonable modifications to service plans under the ADA)