rents are presumed able to visit and communicate with their children and, although incarcerated parents may be unable to visit, they are still presumed able to communicate with their children absent proof to the contrary" (Matter of Mason H. /Joseph H.], 31 N.Y.3d 1109, 1110, 80 N.Y.S.3d 211, 105 N.E.3d 350 [2018]; see Matter of Darius L. /Daniel L.], 222 A.D.3d at 1260, 202 N.Y.S.3d 542). Moreover, contrary to the suggestion of the attorney for the children, "petitioner had no obligation to exercise diligent efforts to encourage visits or communications between" the father and the children in the context of this abandonment proceeding (Matter of Christopher MM., 210 A.D.2d 767, 768, 620 N.Y.S.2d 853 [3d Dept. 1994], lv denied 85 N.Y.2d 807, 628 N.Y.S.2d 50, 651 N.E.2d 918 [1995]; see Social Services Law § 284-b [5][a], [b]; Matter of Julius P., 63 N.Y.2d 477, 481, 483 N.Y.S.2d 175, 472 N.E.2d 1003 [1984]; Matter of Anonymous, 40 N.Y.2d 96, 102, 386 N.Y.S.2d 59, 351 N.E.2d 707 [1976]; Matter of Zakariya HH. [Ahmed II.], 192 A.D.3d 1361, 1363, 143 N.Y.S.3d 744 [3d Dept. 2021], lv denied 37 N.Y.3d 905, 2021 WL 3925717 [2021]). [2] With those standards in mind, petitioner presented the hearing testimony of the paternal aunt, petitioner’s caseworker who was handling the father’s case, and one of its supervisors.

Of note, "[p]arents are presumed able to visit and communicate with their children and, although incarcerated parents may be unable to visit, they are still presumed able to communicate with their children absent proof to the contrary" (Matter of Mason H. [Joseph H.], 31 N.Y.3d 1109, 1110 [2018]; see Matter of Darius L. [Daniel L.], 192 A.D.3d at 1260). Moreover, contrary to the suggestion of the attorney for the children, "petitioner had no obligation to exercise diligent efforts to encourage visits or communications between" the father and the children in the context of this abandonment proceeding (Matter of Christopher MM., 210 A.D.2d 767, 768 [3d Dept 1994], lv denied 85 N.Y.2d 807 [1995]; see Social Services Law § 284-b [5] [a], [b]; Matter of Julius P., 63 N.Y.2d 477, 481 [1984]; Matter of Anonymous, 40 N.Y.2d 96, 102 [1976]; Matter of Zakariya HH. [Ahmed II.], 192 A.D.3d 1361, 1363 [3d Dept 2021], lv denied 37 N.Y.3d 905 [2021]).

The younger children's foster parent testified that both she and the children had no contact with respondent during the subject time frame. Therefore, Family Court correctly concluded that petitioner presented clear and convincing evidence of respondent's failure to maintain contact with the children during the statutory period (see Matter of Kihona U. [Britian MM.], 200 A.D.3d at 1426-1427; Matter of Zakariya HH. [Ahmed II.], 192 A.D.3d 1361, 1363 [3d Dept 2021], lv denied 37 N.Y.3d 905 [2021]).

Respondent further testified that she attempted to contact the child by way of text messages to the paternal relative. We find that the foregoing proof constitutes clear and convincing evidence that respondent failed to maintain contact with the child and/or petitioner during the statutory period (see Matter of Zakariya HH. [Ahmed II.], 192 A.D.3d 1361, 1363-1364 [2021], lv denied 37 N.Y.3d 905 [2021]; Matter of Dimitris J. [Sarah J.], 141 A.D.3d 768, 769-770 [2016]). Although there was conflicting testimony regarding respondent's attempts to contact petitioner via phone, we accord deference to Family Court's assessment of credibility and resolution of this issue in petitioner's favor (see Matter of Kayson R. [Christina S.], 166 A.D.3d 1346, 1347-1348 [2018]; Matter of Leon CC. [Larry CC.], 86 A.D.3d 764, 766 [2011], lv denied 17 N.Y.3d 714 [2011]; Matter of Jackie B. [Dennis B.], 75 A.D.3d at 694).

Respondent further testified that she attempted to contact the child by way of text messages to the paternal relative. We find that the foregoing proof constitutes clear and convincing evidence that respondent failed to maintain contact with the child and/or petitioner during the statutory period (seeMatter of Zakariya HH. [Ahmed II.], 192 A.D.3d 1361, 1363–1364, 143 N.Y.S.3d 744 [2021], lv denied 37 N.Y.3d 905, 2021 WL 3925717 [2021] ; Matter of Dimitris J. [Sarah J.], 141 A.D.3d 768, 769–770, 34 N.Y.S.3d 731 [2016] ). Although there was conflicting testimony regarding respondent's attempts to contact petitioner via phone, we accord deference to Family Court's assessment of credibility and resolution of this issue in petitioner's favor (seeMatter of Kayson R. [Christina S.], 166 A.D.3d 1346, 1347–1348, 88 N.Y.S.3d 626 [2018] ; Matter of Leon CC. [Larry CC.], 86 A.D.3d 764, 766, 927 N.Y.S.2d 446 [2011], lv denied 17 N.Y.3d 714, 2011 WL 5041669 [2011] ; Matter of Jackie B. [Dennis B.], 75 A.D.3d at 694, 903 N.Y.S.2d 612 ).

Respondent further indicated that, during the summer of 2019, she repeatedly, albeit unsuccessfully, attempted to contact Northeast caseworkers to exercise her scheduled visitation. Accordingly, under the circumstances, we find that Family Court should have dismissed the petition (see Matter of Mason H. [Joseph H.], 31 N.Y.3d at 1110; compare Matter of Zakariya HH. [Ahmed II.], 192 A.D.3d 1361, 1364 [2021], lv denied 37 N.Y.3d 905 [2021]). Garry, P.J., Lynch, Aarons and Reynolds Fitzgerald, JJ., concur.

Respondent further indicated that, during the summer of 2019, she repeatedly, albeit unsuccessfully, attempted to contact Northeast caseworkers to exercise her scheduled visitation. Accordingly, under the circumstances, we find that Family Court should have dismissed the petition (see Matter of Mason H. [Joseph H.], 31 N.Y.3d at 1110, 80 N.Y.S.3d 211, 105 N.E.3d 350 ; compareMatter of Zakariya HH. [Ahmed II.], 192 A.D.3d 1361, 1364, 143 N.Y.S.3d 744 [2021], lv denied 37 N.Y.3d 905, 2021 WL 3925717[2021] ). Garry, P.J., Lynch, Aarons and Reynolds Fitzgerald, JJ., concur.

Respondent further indicated that, during the summer of 2019, she repeatedly, albeit unsuccessfully, attempted to contact Northeast caseworkers to exercise her scheduled visitation. Accordingly, under the circumstances, we find that Family Court should have dismissed the petition (see Matter of Mason H. [Joseph H.], 31 N.Y.3d at 1110; compare Matter of Zakariya HH. [Ahmed II.], 192 A.D.3d 1361, 1364 [2021], lv denied 37 N.Y.3d 905 [2021]). Garry, P.J., Lynch, Aarons and Reynolds Fitzgerald, JJ., concur.