The juvenile court retained jurisdiction over visitation matters after establishing guardianship as the permanent plan. The minors had been ordered into a permanent plan of guardianship with a relative, and supervised visitation had been ordered for father. Six months later, father filed a 388 modification petition because he could not afford professionally supervised visitation services. The court found a prima facie case of a change in circumstances and set a hearing. At the hearing, however, the court found that the juvenile court was no longer the appropriate venue to modify visitation orders, dismissed the petition, and terminated dependency jurisdiction. The appellate court reversed. Because the juvenile court had established a guardianship for the children, it did not have the authority to terminate its jurisdiction and refer the matter to family court. Further, the court had previously held that a prima facie case existed when it set the matter for a hearing, and therefore it denied father his due process right to a hearing when it dismissed the petition without one.