the comparative analysis between the child’s family and the foster family, when the child has been living in a foster home, as well as A.G.’s attachment to Kory and her maternal grandmother. See NRS 128.105; NRS 128.108. The district court found that while A.G. had bonded with her maternal grandmother, A.G. still had “considerable love, affection, and emotional ties” with Kory. The court further found that Kory “has the resources, ability, and desire to care for [A.G.j’s proper physical, mental, and emotional growth and development.” We conclude that the district court’s decision is supported by substantial evidence and that termination of Kory’s parental rights is not in A.G.’s best interest. See Matter of Parental Rights as to A.J.G., 122 Nev. 1418, 1423, 148 P.3d 759, 763 (2006) (<HOLDING>). CONCLUSION We conclude that Kory had
recognizing this substantial interest in context of termination of parental rights holding that the trial courts factual findings related to alimony will be upheld on appeal if supported by   any evidence   recognizing that the district courts decision to termi nate parental rights will be upheld by this court if it is supported by substantial evidence holding that a factfinders rulings will be upheld if supported by reasonable substantial and probative evidence on the record considered as a whole holding that a district courts ruling may be upheld on an alternative ground supported by the record