Cited by

Sec., ¶¶ 13-14 (App. 2014) (stating that a parent may preserve her failure-to- make-a-diligent-effort argument “in a variety of ways,” including “at a termination hearing”).

Sec., -79, ¶ 16 (App. 2014) (finding that a parent who fails to “voice their concerns about services to the juvenile court in a timely matter,” is precluded from challenging the court’s finding that DCS made reasonable efforts to provide reunification services).

Sec., –79, ¶ 16 (App. 2014) (“[A] parent’s failure to assert legitimate complaints in the juvenile court about the adequacy of services needlessly injects uncertainty and potential delay into the proceedings, when important rights and interests are at stake and timeliness is critical.”).

Sec., -79, ¶¶ 16-18 (App. 2014) (any claim that DCS is failing to provide appropriate reunification services must be timely raised in the superior court or the issue is waived).

Sec., -79, ¶¶ 16-18 (App. 2014) (any claim that DCS is failing to provide appropriate reunification services must be timely raised in the superior court or the issue is waived).

Sec., –79, ¶¶ 16, 18 (App. 2014).

Sec., ¶ 18 (App. 2014), we address his argument and conclude that the evidence supports a finding that DCS provided adequate reunification services.

Sec., ¶ 16 (App. 2014) (parents must “voice their concerns about services to the juvenile court in a timely manner”).

Sec., -79, ¶¶ 16-18 (App. 2014) (any claim that DCS is failing to provide appropriate reunification services must be timely raised in the superior court or the issue is waived).

¶27 We have previously explained that “[i]n determining whether the grounds for termination have been satisfied, the juvenile court is in a much better position than this court to evaluate the effectiveness and impact of the services provided, as credibility determinations may be required to weigh the evidence presented.” ¶ 15 (App. 2014).

Sec., ¶ 14 (App. 2014) (listing times when a parent may preserve a challenge to DCS’s reasonable efforts).

Sec., –79, ¶ 16 (App. 2014) (explaining that “a parent’s failure to assert legitimate complaints in the juvenile court about the adequacy of services needlessly injects uncertainty and potential delay into the proceedings, when important rights and interests are at stake and timeliness is critical”).

Sec., -78, ¶ 12 (App. 2014) (citing Mary Ellen C. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.