## Facts

- After the maternal grandmother died, a police officer found four children in her home in unsanitary, derelict conditions.
- The officer and a Department of Human Services (DHS) social worker visited the parents’ home the same day and reported a strong stench, trash throughout, holes in floors and ceilings, and one mattress used by all four children.
- DHS filed neglect petitions the next day under D.C. Code § 16-2301(9)(B) and (F), alleging failure to provide adequate care not attributable to lack of financial means.
- The court ordered the children removed to DHS custody and placed in foster care.
- DHS did not conduct additional home visits or develop evidence about the parents’ finances, available assistance, or whether conditions persisted before the fact-finding hearing held nearly a year later.
- The trial court found the children neglected and committed them to DHS, relying primarily on the conditions observed during the single visit.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support findings of neglect under D.C. Code § 16-2301(9)(B) and (F).
2. Whether the government proved that the deprivation of adequate care and housing was not due to the parents’ lack of financial means, as required by the statute.

## Decision

- The District of Columbia Court of Appeals reversed the neglect adjudications and the commitment order.
- The court held the evidence was legally insufficient because the government did not prove the statutory element that the deprivation was not caused by lack of financial means.
- The matter was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

## Legal Principles

- Under D.C. Code § 16-2301(9)(B) and (F), the government must prove not only inadequate parental care or harmful deprivation, but also that the failure is not due to the parent’s lack of financial means.
- Substandard or unsanitary housing conditions, without evidence distinguishing parental neglect from poverty, are insufficient to sustain a neglect finding under statutes that exclude poverty-based deprivation.
- The government bears the burden of producing evidence on the “not due to lack of financial means” element; reliance on conditions observed during a single visit, without investigation into finances and remedial options, may be insufficient as a matter of law.
- Absence of evidence of acute physical harm (such as serious malnutrition or medical emergency) may reinforce the conclusion that the record does not establish neglect beyond poverty-related hardship.

## Conclusion

The court reversed neglect findings because the government relied largely on one-day observations of severe housing conditions but failed to prove the statutory requirement that the deprivation was not the product of the parents’ lack of financial means.


In re T.G., 684 A.2d 786 (D.C. 1996)