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 | Page 2/2
LPA observed the children to be supervised at all times as well as interviews with the children revealed that the Licensee and/or assistant are present with children at all times. LPA also observed that the indoor and outdoor activity space used for children in care allows for visual supervision, which is also labeled on the Licensees facility sketch. Therefore, at this time there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did occur, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED.
Regarding the allegation, Provider speaks inappropriately to day care child. During the course of the investigation, LPA conducted interviews with 5 children and 3 adults. Interviews could not corroborate that the providers use of language is inappropriate to children in care, however when LPA conducted observations on each visit date, LPA observed that English is the licensee’s second language, which may contribute to some challenges in verbal communication with the children and could at times be perceived as overly direct or rough in tone. Additionally, while the licensee’s teaching methods appeared somewhat firm and may differ from commonly used approaches in early childhood education, no violations of regulations were observed and was not deemed as inappropriate. Therefore, at this time there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did occur, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED.
An exit interview was conducted with Licensee Syeda Imtiaz and a copy of this report and Notice of Site Visit was provide. Licensee was also reminded Notice of Site Visit must be posted for 30 days |