Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The determination by the Family Court that the appellant father had sexually abused his daughter is supported by a preponderance of the evidence ( see, Family Ct Act § 1046 [b]; Matter of Nicole V., 71 NY2d 112). The child's out-of-court statements to her mother, two social workers, a psychiatrist, and a Department of Social Services caseworker concerning her identification of her father as her abuser and the acts committed by him were sufficiently corroborated, inter alia, by her reenactment of the sexual abuse incidents with dolls ( see, Matter of Josephine G., 218 AD2d 656; Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. of City of N.Y. [Joanne W.] v Edyth W., 210 AD2d 328; see also, Matter of Nassau County Dept. of Social Servs [Erika K.] v Steven K., 176 AD2d 326, 328). Additionally, the father failed to come forward with satisfactory evidence to rebut the petitioner's case ( see, Matter of New York City Dept. of Social Servs [Anna Marie A.] v Elena A., 194 AD2d 608). Therefore, where, as here, the hearing court was confronted primarily with issues of credibility, its factual findings must be accorded great weight ( see, Matter of Josephine G., supra). On this record, we find no basis upon which to disturb the Family Court's determination.
The appellant's remaining contentions are without merit.