Reasonable reunification efforts; Accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

The court held that “respondent-father failed to engage in, and benefit from, the services offered by the DHHS.” There was no indication he “would have fared better if the DHHS had offered other services, additional services, or additional accommodations.” Thus, the court found that “the trial court did not err when it determined that the DHHS made reasonable efforts to promote reunification.” Respondent contended that the DHHS “failed to make reasonable accommodations or provide him with transportation assistance.” Further, he claimed that the DHHS did not accommodate him under the ADA. The record established “that the DHHS made reasonable efforts to accommodate [father’s] anger-management issues based on the recommendations of his psychological evaluation.” The record further revealed that he “failed to adequately participate in, or benefit from, the services provided to him.” He did “not argue that the services the DHHS provided in response to his psychological evaluation were unreasonable, nor [did] he explain how any different services would have better accommodated him.” Because respondent merely asserted “that the services offered to him were not sufficient because of his disability, without identifying how they were insufficient or identifying any services that would have been appropriate when considering that disability, he has not identified plain error affecting substantial rights.” As to his “claim that the DHHS failed to accommodate his work schedule, the record reveals the exact opposite.” Respondent also argued “that the DHHS did not provide him with proper bus passes.” Although it appeared that he “did not receive proper bus passes, that does not amount to clear error affecting the trial court’s finding that reasonable efforts at reunification were made.” The DHHS accommodated him “by arranging for transportation to parenting-time visits and permitting him to complete a different version of anger management, but [he] did not benefit from any of those services provided to him.” Affirmed.