Not for Publication – Rule 111(c), Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court
Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. JD19535 The Honorable Joan M. Sinclair, Judge
David W. Bell Attorney at Law, David W. Bell Counsel for Appellant
Arizona Attorney General's Office, Amanda Holguin Counsel for Appellee ADES
Judge Kenton D. Jones and Judge Sally Schneider Duncan joined.
Peter B. Swann, Presiding Judge
¶1 Randi B. ("Mother") appeals the juvenile court's order severing her parental rights. We affirm because the court's findings are supported by reasonable evidence.
FACTS  AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
¶2 Mother is the biological parent of D.B., E.G., J.G., and R.G., born in 1997, 2006, 2009, and 2011, respectively. Robert G. ("Father"), who is not a party to this appeal, is the biological father of E.G., J.G., and R.G.
¶3 In July 2009, Oklahoma Child Protective Services ("CPS") removed D.B., E.G., and J.G. from Mother's care and placed them with Father after Mother was arrested for child neglect. As a condition of the children's placement with Father, Mother, a reported methamphetamine user, was required to participate in random drug testing. She did not do so, and absconded with Father and the children to Colorado. Colorado CPS made contact with the family when the children enrolled in school in that state. Soon thereafter, the family moved to Arizona.
¶4 In September 2010, Arizona CPS removed the children from Mother and Father's care after receiving reports that Mother and Father had separated, that D.B., E.G., and J.G. were staying with Mother in a dirty home, and that Mother was regularly using methamphetamine. The Arizona Department of Economic Security ("DES") then filed a dependency petition alleging abuse and neglect related to Mother and Father's drug use and history of domestic violence. In December 2010, the juvenile court found that the children were dependent and ordered that Mother and Father be offered reunification services consisting of substance-abuse treatment, random drug testing, psychological evaluations, couples and domestic violence counseling, and visitation with the children and a parent aide.
¶5 Mother and Father did not fully participate in the reunification services until after R.G. was born and removed from their care in March 2011. Thereafter, they completed every service offered to them, and the children were returned to their care in September and October 2011. By April 2012, the family reunification teams assisting in the transition had completed their services. Accordingly, on ADES's motion, the juvenile court dismissed the dependency petitions for E.G., J.G., and R.G. in May 2012.
¶6 Two months later, CPS received reports that Mother and Father had become homeless, were abusing drugs, were not attending to the children's hygiene, and had left E.G., J.G., and R.G. overnight at a daycare facility on multiple occasions. CPS removed the children from Mother and Father's care and DES filed a new dependency petition alleging neglect related to Mother and Father's drug use, history of domestic violence, and failure to provide the children with necessities. In October 2012, the juvenile court found that D.B. was dependent as to Mother and that E.G., J.G., and R.G. were dependent as to Mother and Father. The court ordered that the children's case plan was severance and adoption. DES thereafter moved to sever Mother's parental relationship with D.B., E.G., and J.G. under A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(8)(a) and (B)(11), and moved to sever her relationship with R.G. under A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(8)(b) and (B)(11). DES also moved to sever Father's parental relationship with E.G., J.G., and R.G.
¶7 Mother and Father were offered substance-abuse treatment, random drug testing, and visitation with the children and a case aide. They were also given bus passes to allow them to travel to treatment and testing appointments. But though both parents regularly attended visitation, they did not meaningfully participate in the other services offered to them and did not maintain consistent contact with the case manager. Mother missed all but one of her drug tests and Father missed all but four of his drug tests. And despite multiple referrals to a substance-abuse treatment provider, Father did not complete his ...