With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". circumstances” as articulated in Vodvarka are guided by the best interest factors in MCL 722.23(a) through (Z), and do not take into account the parenting time factors in MCL 722.27a(6)(a) through (i). We discern nothing in the Vodvarka opinion that requires the standards used to determine the existence of proper cause or change of circumstances for custody determinations to apply to determinations regarding parenting time, absent a conclusion that a change in parenting time will result in a change in an established custodial environment. Vodvarka, 259 Mich App at 509. If a change in parenting time results in a change in the established custodial environment, then the Vodvarka framework is appropriate. See id. at 509; see also Powery v Wells, 278 Mich App 526, 528; 752 NW2d 47 (2008) (<HOLDING>). In this case, however, the trial court’s

A: holding that parties inability to agree on which private high school child would attend constituted substantial change in circumstances warranting modification of parenting plan
B: holding that a custodial parents move to a foreign state without more is not a substantial change of circumstances that would support a modification of custody
C: holding that a hearing is required when a modification of parenting time would change the established custodial environment
D: holding that change of circumstances is not prerequisite to additional   3583e2 modification
C.