IN RE: I.C., A MINOR APPEAL OF: A.C., MOTHER IN RE: S.C., A MINOR APPEAL OF: A.C., MOTHER
Appeal from the Order Entered November 26, 2012 In the Court of Common Pleas of Lebanon County Juvenile Division at No(s): CP-38-DP-0000034-2012, CP-38-DP-0000035-2012
BEFORE: SHOGAN, J., MUNDY, J., and COLVILLE, J. [*]
Appellant, A.C. (Mother), appeals from the November 26, 2012 orders, adjudicating I.C. and S.C. (the Children) dependent. After careful review, we affirm.
The trial court summarized the relevant factual and procedural history of this case as follows.
Mother and [J.D. (Father)] are parents to [I.C], born May 31, 2002, and [S.C], born May 23, 2003. [CYS] became involved with the  family in March, 2012 due to issue [I.C] was experiencing in school. A service plan was created by CYS in June of 2012. On November 5, 2012, a [dependency [p]etition was filed in the interest of [the Children]. On November 6, 2012, Loreen Burkett, Esquire was appointed [l]aw [g]uardian to represent [the Children]. A hearing was scheduled for November 19, 2012. Prior to the hearing date, Mother removed the [C]hildren from Pennsylvania to Michigan. Th[e trial c]ourt continued the hearing until November 26, 2012 and ordered Mother to return the [C]hildren to Pennsylvania before that date.
On November 26, 2012, a dependency hearing was held. Counsel for Mother, [the] Children, and CYS appeared at the hearing. Mother was not in attendance and was found in contempt of [c]ourt. Father was not in attendance; however, he had previously informed CYS that he did not have room in his residence for the [C]hildren and could not be a resource for them. The [trial c]ourt heard testimony from CYS [c]aseworker Pamela Smith. Upon consideration of testimony presented, [the C]hildren were adjudicated dependent and custody was transferred to CYS. On December 4, 2012, Mother returned the [C]hildren to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and presented them to CYS.
Trial Court Opinion, 1/18/13, at 2-3. On December 21, 2012, Mother filed timely notices of appeal as well as a concise statements of errors complained of on appeal pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 1925(a)(2)(i). The trial court filed its Rule 1925(a) opinion on January 18, 2013.
On appeal, Mother raises two issues for our review.
1. Whether the trial court committed an error of law and/or abused its discretion in finding [CYS] established by clear and convincing evidence that [the Children] are dependent ?
2. Whether the trial court erred in placing the Children in foster care when they were in the care of a fit and willing relative?
Mother's Brief at 4.
We begin by noting our well settled standard of review. Our Supreme Court set forth our standard of review ...