it please the court counsel the trial court's finding of unfitness and the star is against the manifest fleet of the evidence according to the relevant statute if a service brand has been established as required under section eight point two of the abused and neglected child reporting act to correct the conditions that were the basis for the removal of the child from the parent and if those services were available then for the purposes of this act failure to make reasonable progress toward the return of the child to the parties to the parent i'm sorry includes the parents failure to substantially fulfill his or her obligations under the service plan the evidence in this case as stablished through the testimony caseworker is that she did not know what services were available to the father nor did she make any effort to determine what was available or what he had to complete  there was no evidence that the services required under the plan were available as such failure to substantially fulfill his obligations under the service plan does not necessarily equate to failure to make reasonable progress failed to meet the burden of proof as to the father's unfitness and the trial for eric and finding him unfit with regard to the second argument the trial court holding the father to a standard of substantial progress is not harmless as the state t set forth the statute requires reasonable progress the difference between the two standards is not minor with reasonable being defined as moderate or there and substantial is considerable and quantity significantly great the court did not find the father failed to make reasonable progress but instead that he failed to make substantial progress the court failed to make a finding on the lesser strict of standard the correct standard to be pursuant to the statute which resulted in an error while the state argues there was evidence the father failed to make any progress the evidence actually shows the caseworker did not know what progress have been made as such the father had not presented other than anecdotal statements that he had related to me and the kidding he had to purchase a pita and in a twelve step program during his incarceration he had purchased appeared and parenting education classes she had no desire to attempt to contact the father it was there was no way to contact him although i found that i was able to contact him by phone and i know he attempted to contact her which she admitted to during her testimony as with regard to presenting any other evidence i was not able to obtain any kind of certificates as for the on a fitness finding this wasn't the most stansell amount of evidence i've seen in one of these terminations proceedings however the only testimony at this proceeding was the caseworker she testified that she rated the service plan for responded on satisfactory respondent was incarcerated for the whole nine month period able to thousand sixteen through january two thousand and seventeen responding failed to complete or even inquire how to start any of this service plan goals and at the very least although there was not much contact with caseworkers and responded to his incarceration at the very least the caseworker testified that she not only mailed him the service plan to the prison but also talked to him at least once regarding the service plan and its service plan goals so responder was well aware of the goals that he needed to complete well aware of the consequences of not participating with the service plan most importantly he knew who to contact he knew to contact his caseworker there's not even evidence of a call saying i would love to participate in this in the service plan i don't know how to go about it or anything like that there was literally no communication or expression of participation with this service plan and of course the state only had approved by preponderance of the evidence not the usual standard i deal with rick beyond reasonable doubt they only had to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that respondent was unfit by at least one of these allegations in the petition i would have i would submit this the trial court's findings language used by the trial court that the statute fifty's slash one d m to says that a parent's unfit fails to make reasonable progress toward the return of the child during a nine month period and the petition both use the word substantial progress this issue is clearly forfeited there was no raising this at any time during the proceedings and in the trial court first was on this appeal and it clearly does not rise to the level plain air the definition of reasonable progress in that same statute includes the parent's failure to quote substantially fulfill his or her obligations under the service plan so the word substantial while not  ideal word for the trial court to use here was not error and clearly not playing there the it wasn't even doesn't even rise to the level of non harmless error because the the undisputed testimony was that respondent failed to complete any make any progress on the surface playing ball so matter what the language used by the trial court whether it was reasonable progress substantial progress or even any progress the undisputed evidence in this case showed the great honor as the state mentioned this is not the case with the most substantial evidence this is a very important right that parents have to raise their children and i think it's important that more evidence than what was presented in this case the require prior to terminations of the parents rights additionally of the state and the kid had no communication was had between the case worker and the father but he did not make any attempt to communicate the testimony of the caseworker was different the testimony was not she had received her assignments from him she did not respond in fact she admitted that he had such difficulty contacting her that he had his mother contact her this is not a case where the father simply wrote off what he was required to do he attempted to communicate