State Ex Rel. Children, Youth & Families Dep't v. Keon H. (In Re Anhayla H.), 421 P.3d 814

Infant Child suffered severe, multiple blunt-force injuries in February 2013; Child is permanently physically and mentally impaired.
The Department filed neglect/abuse proceedings; Mother and Father pled no contest in April 2013.
Court-ordered treatment plans required psychosocial, psychological, domestic violence, substance-abuse, and parenting assessments; Father failed to complete the psychosocial assessment early in the case.
Father was intermittently homeless and incarcerated during the case; contact between Father and the Department was sparse.
The Department moved to terminate parental rights in March 2014; Mother voluntarily relinquished rights; the district court terminated Father’s rights after a two-day hearing (August 2014 and February 2015), finding the Department made reasonable efforts and the conditions were unlikely to change.
The Court of Appeals reversed, holding the Department had not shown reasonable efforts; the Supreme Court granted certiorari and reversed the Court of Appeals, affirming termination.

Issue	Department's Argument	Father (Appellant) Argument	Held
Whether there was substantial evidence that the Department made "reasonable efforts" to assist Father under § 32A-4-28(B)(2)	The Department made reasonable efforts overall: created and explained a treatment plan, provided contact information, scheduled assessments, later mailed assessments and updated plan while Father was incarcerated, and Father largely failed to engage.	Father argued the Department failed to make adequate/ongoing efforts (especially while he was incarcerated) and thus termination was premature.	The Supreme Court held there was substantial evidence to support the district court’s finding that the Department made reasonable efforts and affirmed termination.

Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (due process requires clear and convincing evidence before terminating parental rights)
State ex rel. Children, Youth & Families Dep’t v. Patricia H., 132 N.M. 299, 47 P.3d 859 (N.M. Ct. App. 2002) (reasonable-efforts requirement is a statutory prerequisite to termination; consider totality of circumstances)
In re Termination of Parental Rights of Eventyr J., 120 N.M. 463, 902 P.2d 1066 (N.M. Ct. App. 1995) (standard of review for termination; appellate court must view evidence in light most favorable to petitioner)
State ex rel. Children, Youth & Families Dep’t v. Marlene C., 149 N.M. 315, 248 P.3d 863 (N.M. 2011) (parents possess a fundamental liberty interest in custody; due process protections apply)
State ex rel. Children, Youth & Families Dep’t v. Yodell B., 367 P.3d 881 (N.M. Ct. App. 2016) (distinguishes "active" vs. "passive" efforts in ICWA contexts; active efforts imply heightened responsibility)
State ex rel. Children, Youth & Families Dep’t v. William M., 141 N.M. 765, 161 P.3d 262 (N.M. Ct. App. 2007) (examples of Department meeting obligations to incarcerated parents)
State ex rel. Children, Youth & Families Dep’t v. Hector C., 144 N.M. 222, 185 P.3d 1072 (N.M. Ct. App. 2008) (Department must take extra steps to assist incarcerated parents)