DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the amended order is affirmed, with costs.
The petitioner did not meet its burden of establishing that the subject children should remain in its custody (see, Matter of Hiram V., 162 A.D.2d 453, 454 ; Besharov, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 29A, Family Ct Act § 1028, at 42-45). The evidence adduced at the hearing did not establish an imminent risk of harm to the children (see, Family Ct Act § 1028[b]; Matter of Hiram V., supra). Under these circumstances the Family Court providently exercised its discretion.