Approved, SCAO þ PCS CODE: DSPTCS CODE: DSPSTATE OF MICHIGANJUDICIAL CIRCUIT - FAMILY DIVISIONCOUNTY ORDER OF DISPOSITION(CHILD PROTECTIVE PROCEEDINGS)ORDER en-US OF en-US en-USCASE NO.en-USPETITION NO.en-USCourt addressen-USCourt telephone no. 1. þ In the matter of þ en-USname(s), alias(es), DOB 2. þ Date of hearing: en-US þ Judge/Referee: en-USBar no. þ 3. þ Removal date: en-US en-US en-US(Specify for each child if different.) 4. þ An adjudication was held and the child(ren) was/were found to come within the jurisdiction of the court. þ þ 5. þ Release of the parental rights to en-USName(s) of child(ren)en-US was executed by þ en-USName(s) of parent(s)en-US pursuant to the adoption code on en-USDateen-US . þ 6. þ This hearing is being conducted under MCR 3.974(D)(1) for an Indian child who was removed from the home. The Indian child þ removal hearing þ was held with this hearing. þ was previously held. þ en-US is scheduled for en-US . þ en-USTHE COURT FINDS: þ 7. þ Notice of hearing was given as required by law. 8. þ The lawyer-guardian ad litem þ has þ has not þ complied with the requirements of MCL 712A.17d. þ 9. þ þ a. þ There is probable cause to believe the legal/putative father(s) is/are: þ (Name each child, his/her father, and whether legal or putative.) þ þ b. þ The putative father of en-US en-US is unknown and cannot be identified. þ þ c. þ The putative father was notified as required by law and failed to establish paternity within the time set by the court. þ The putative father waives all rights to further notice, including the right to notice of termination of parental rights and þ the right to an attorney. 10. þ The court has considered the case service plan and other evidence presented. The findings below are specific to this case þ and are based upon this hearing and þ þ the following report(s): en-USIdentify report(s) and date(s) of report(s) þ Specific conditions reviewed on the record as required by MCL 712A.18f(4) were þ a. þ compliance with the case service plan with respect to services provided or offered to the child and his or her parent(s), þ guardian, or legal custodian and whether the parent(s), guardian, or legal custodian complied with and benefited from þ those services. þ b. þ compliance with the case service plan with respect to parenting time with the child and whether parenting time did not þ occur or was infrequent and the reasons why. þ c. þ the extent to which the parent(s), guardian, or legal custodian complied with each provision of the case service plan, þ prior court orders, and any agreement between the parent(s), guardian, or legal custodian and the agency. þ d. þ likely harm to the child if the child continued to be separated from his or her parent(s), guardian, or legal custodian. þ e. þ likely harm to the child if the child was returned to his or her parent(s), guardian, or legal custodian. en-USNote:en-US If it comes to the court222s attention or new allegations are made during this hearing that require the removal of the child(ren), removal must be done in en-USaccordance with MCR 3.974. American LegalNet, Inc. www.FormsWorkFlow.com Order of Disposition (Child Protective Proceedings) þ (12/18) þ Page of Order of Case No. Petition No. 11. þ Return of the juvenile to his or her parent þ would þ would not þ cause a substantial risk of harm to the juvenile or þ society. þ 12. þ þ a. þ Consistent with the circumstances, reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate removal of the child(ren) from the þ þ þ home were made as determined in a prior order. þ en-USOR þ þ b. þ Consistent with the circumstances, reasonable efforts were made to prevent or eliminate removal of the child(ren) þ þ from the home. Those efforts include: (Specify below.) þ þ en-USOR þ þ c. þ The child(ren) is/are Indian, and the court finds by clear and convincing evidence and the testimony of a qualified þ þ expert witness who has knowledge about the child-rearing practices of the Indian child222s tribe, that active efforts þ þ have þ have not þ been made to provide remedial services and rehabilitative programs designed to prevent þ þ the breakup of the Indian family. These efforts have proved þ unsuccessful, þ successful, þ the continued þ þ custody of the child(ren) by the parent or Indian custodian þ is þ is not þ likely to result in serious emotional or þ physical damage to the child(ren), and the child(ren) þ should þ should not þ be removed from the home. þ þ en-US(Specify below.) þ The efforts for 12b or 12c are: (Specify the efforts from 12b or 12c here. If the child is an Indian child, specify active efforts as defined þ þ en-USby MCR 3.002[1] and MCL 712B.3[a].) þ þ d. þ Reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate removal of the child(ren) from the home were not made. þ þ e. þ Reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate removal were not required as determined in a prior order. þ þ 13. þ a. þ Reasonable efforts are not required to prevent or eliminate the child(ren)222s removal from the home due to the þ þ mother þ father þ subjecting the child(ren) to the aggravated circumstance(s) of þ en-US en-US as provided in section MCL 722.638(1) and (2), and as evidenced þ by þ en-US en-US þ en-US þ en-US en-US . þ þ mother222s þ father222s þ conviction for murder of another child of the parent. þ þ mother222s þ father222s þ conviction for voluntary manslaughter of another child of the parent. þ þ mother222s þ father222s þ conviction for aiding or abetting in the murder or manslaughter of another þ þ child of the parent, attempting to murder the child(ren) or another child of the parent, or conspiring or soliciting to þ þ commit the murder of the child(ren) or another child of the parent. þ þ mother222s þ father222s þ conviction for felony assault that resulted in serious bodily injury to the þ þ child(ren) or another child of the parent. þ þ mother222s þ father222s þ involuntary termination of parental rights to a sibling of the child(ren) and þ failure by that parent to rectify the conditions that led to that termination. þ þ mother þ father þ being required to register under the Sex Offender Registration Act. þ b. þ Reasonable efforts to preserve and reunify the family to make it possible for the child(ren) to safely return home are þ þ not required because the parent subjected the child or another child of the parent to one of the circumstances þ þ stated above. þ þ en-USOR þ þ still recommended because: þ þ (When item 13 is checked, either complete item 15 below or schedule a permanency planning hearing within 28 days of this determination.) American LegalNet, Inc. www.FormsWorkFlow.com Order of Disposition (Child Protective Proceedings) þ (12/18) þ Page of Order of Case No. Petition No. þ 14. þ þ a. þ Reasonable efforts shall be made to preserve and reunify the family to make it possible for the child(ren) to safely þ þ return home. þ þ þ b. þ Reasonable efforts shall not be made to preserve and reunify the family because it would be detrimental to the þ þ child(ren)222s health and safety. þ þ þ c. þ Reasonable efforts to preserve and reunify the family were not previously required, but due to a change in þ þ circumstances, reasonable efforts are now required. Those reasonable efforts have begun and include: en-US(Specify þ þ reasonable efforts, and if applicable, the reasons for return.) þ þ þ þ The child(ren) should be released to en-USName(s) of parent(s), guardian, or legal custodianen-US . þ 15. þ Because reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate removal or to reunite the child(ren) and family are not required, a þ permanency planning hearing was conducted. en-US(en-USUse and attach form JC 19en-US, Order Following Dispositional Review/Permanency Planning þ þ Hearing.) 16. þ Custody of the child(ren) with the parent/guardian/legal custodian þ þ a. þ presents a substantial risk of harm to the child(ren)222s life, physical health, or mental well-being. þ þ No provision of service or other arrangement except removal of the child(ren) is reasonably available to adequately þ þ safeguard the child(ren) from the risk of harm to the child(ren)222s life, physical health, or mental well-being. þ þ Conditions of custody at the p