1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32 | Though, there are some corroborated details in the clogged toilet incident, including the involvement of Staff #2 and Child #1, the account of the situation from both sides of the incident are inconsistent. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation(s) did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated.
Information from Reporting party also indicates that Staff #2 used “treats” as way to have Child #1 not get the staff member in trouble.
During interviews, it was determined that “treats” are not given to children in care. Staff do, however, provide items such as stickers, happy faces, or stamps. Parent #2 and #3 confirm that stickers and pencils are given to children, with mentions of a “treasure box.” Child #5 also disclosed that they have been given “happy faces’ on their hand.
LPA reviewed email documents regarding the situation. There was report of Staff #2 telling Child #1, “Why did you get me in trouble, why did you tell mom, now I’m not going to give you a treat but I will give your friend a treat instead.” Facility noted that they would be checking with other staff and children to verify the incident’s validity.
In interview with Staff #4, they stated that there were no witnesses to verify that anything like that was said. Staff #2 stated “C1 said that I was going to give a friend a candy. But we only give stickers or pencils for doing their work or helping a friend.” When LPA asked S2 about candy and if there was something that would have made C1 think that, they responded, “I think so but I don't know what. [They] mistakenly told her mom.”
Though there seems to have been a verbal interaction between Staff #2 and Child #1, there was no corroborating evidence to verify what was said. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation(s) did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated.
LPA discussed with Program Director continued monitoring of Staff #2 and the documentation of the training sessions being conducted with Staff #4. Facility will continue to work to ensure safety for children in care.
At this time, no deficiencies are being cited in accordance with Title 22 regulations.
A notice of site visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days.
Exit interview conducted and report was reviewed with Program Director Rachel Cordova, at 12:45am. Copy of Report provided. END OF REPORT PAGE 3 of 3
|