Frederic P. Schneider, New York, N.Y., for appellant. Paul B. Guttenberg, Syosset, N.Y., for respondent.
Carol Lipton, Brooklyn, N.Y., attorney for the child.
In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals (1) from a decision of the Family Court, Queens County (Stanton, Ct.Atty.Ref.), dated October 4, 2011, made after a hearing, and (2), as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the same court dated October 5, 2011, as, upon the decision, granted the mother's petition to modify the visitation provisions of an order of custody and visitation of the same court dated October 29, 2003, to the extent of requiring the father to complete eight supervised visits with the subject child before resuming unsupervised visits.
ORDERED that the appeal from the decision is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as no appeal lies from a decision ( see Schicchi v. J.A. Green Constr. Corp., 100 A.D.2d 509, 472 N.Y.S.2d 718); and it is further,
ORDERED that the order dated October 5, 2011, is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
Modification of an existing custody or visitation order is permissible only upon a showing that there has been a change in circumstances such that modification is necessary to ensure the best interests of the children ( seeFamily Ct. Act § 467[b]; Matter of Wilson v. McGlinchey, 2 N.Y.3d 375, 380, 779 N.Y.S.2d 159, 811 N.E.2d 526;Friederwitzer v. Friederwitzer, 55 N.Y.2d 89, 95, 447 N.Y.S.2d 893, 432 N.E.2d 765;Matter of DeSimone v. Delano, 94 A.D.3d 759, 941 N.Y.S.2d 267). “The determination of whether visitation should be supervised is a matter left to Family Court's sound discretion ... and its findings, to which deference is to be accorded, will not be disturbed on appeal unless they lack a sound basis in the record” (Matter of Smith v. Roberts, 67 A.D.3d 688, 689, 886 N.Y.S.2d 905 [internal quotation marks omitted] ).
Here, the Family Court's determination that a change of circumstances warranted modification of the existing order of custody*391and visitation to the extent of requiring the father to complete eight supervised visits with the child before resuming unsupervised visits had a sound basis in the record. MASTRO, J.P., BALKIN, HALL and AUSTIN, JJ., concur.