Ordered that the order of disposition is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Dutchess County, for a dispositional hearing in accordance herewith.
Contrary to the father's contention, the evidence presented at the fact-finding hearing established that the petitioner, Dutchess County Department of Social Services (hereinafter the agency), made diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parent-child relationship ( see Social Services Law § 384-b [a]). Upon learning his identity, the agency contacted the father, who was incarcerated, kept him advised him of the child's progress, reminded him of the need to find a resource for the care of the child, and explored the possibility of having a paternal aunt, or one of the other individuals suggested by the father, care for the child while he was incarcerated ( see Matter of Jeremy D.R., 40 AD3d 764, 765; Matter of "Female" V., 21 AD3d 1118, 1119). Moreover, the finding of permanent neglect was supported by clear and convincing evidence that the father failed provide a "realistic and feasible" plan for the child's future, as the paternal aunt, and the father's suggested alternative caregivers, proved not to be viable custodial resources (Social Services Law § 384-b [c]; see Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 NY2d 136, 143; Matter of Love Russell J., 7 AD3d 799, 800; Matter of Baby Girl C., 1 AD3d 593, 594; Matter of Dominique S., 276 AD2d 367, 368).
Nevertheless, the matter must be remitted to the Family Court, Dutchess County, for a dispositional hearing, as it was improper for the Family Court to fail to hold such a hearing in the absence of the consent of the parties ( see Family Ct Act § 625 [a]; Matter of Orange County Dept. of Social Servs. [Edward L.], 250 AD2d 853; Matter of Department of Social Servs. v Janna C., 237 AD2d 603, 605).
The father's remaining contention is not properly before this Court.