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 | LS claimed the facility normally notified parents of injuries or incident(s) involving their child by notifying a parent(s) via telephone and providing a written incident report which staff were required to complete. LS claimed staff did not kick any child(ren) in care and if any staff violated a child’s personal rights, the facility would initiate disciplinary action(s) against the involved staff which may include notifying the appropriate authorities and possible termination of employment. In addition, LS was adamant about staff always checking the names of the children with allergies on the allergy list posted in the classroom(s); and staff never served children any foods they were allergic to.
Statements provided by staff, adults, and parents did not report any information to corroborate any of the allegations. Multiple staff and adults claimed they had not witnessed any child being consistently hurt by another child and parents confirmed their child’s personal rights had not been violated. There were reports of staff using verbal prompts, separation, redirection, modelled behavior(s), and encouraged the child(ren) to use his/her word to express among the methods as a tool to manage a child(ren) challenging behavior(s). The statements noted parents were notified of incident(s) involving their child(ren) by methods of telephone or written report, and interviews did not corroborate claims about staff kicking a child or staff not following a child’s special diet. The facility did however submit an incident report on 03/02/22 which did report C1 was on the playground in close proximity to a staff who turned around and accidentally ran into C1 which resulted in C1 falling over on 01/17/22.
Based on this investigation, there is not enough evidence to support claims about staff not preventing a child from hurting another child (C1) or a parent was not notified of an injury to their child, as well as staff kicked a child and/or staff did not follow a child’s special diet; and therefore the allegations are unsubstantiated. Exit interview conducted and report was reviewed with the Center Director, Jennifer Hansen. A notice of site visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days. Failure to comply with posting requirements shall result in an immediate civil penalty of $100. There were no California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 12, Chapter 1, Article 6 violations cited during today’s visit. Appeal Rights were provided. |