Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
We agree with the Family Court that the petitioner foster mother does not have standing to initiate a custody proceeding (see, Matter of Minella v Amhrein, 131 A.D.2d 578, 579; Matter of Michael W., 120 A.D.2d 87, 92; Katie B. v Miriam H., 116 A.D.2d 545, 546; Little Flower Children's Servs. v Andrew C., 144 Misc.2d 671, 676). Social Services Law § 383 (3) provides only that "[f]oster parents having had continuous care of a child, for more than twelve months * * * shall be permitted * * * to intervene in any proceeding involving * * * custody" (emphasis supplied). Contrary to the petitioner's contention, her informal agreement with the natural mother prior to formally assuming the role of a foster parent does not afford standing (cf., Matter of Anonymous v Olson, 112 A.D.2d 299).
We have examined the petitioner's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, P.J., Lawrence, Rosenblatt and O'Brien, JJ., concur.