complaint·April 19, 2022

Page 2/7 Throughout the course of the investigation, interviews were conducted with the Reporting Party (RP), two staff, and 17 parents and documentation in the form of the Child Care Facility Roster, the \342\200\234LVPPP 2021-2022 Parent Handbook,\342\200\235 seven separate email chains, notes from a meeting held on 01/25/22 with parents, and a Power Point from a meeting held on 03/22/22 with parents. -Pertaining to the allegation that \342\200\234Staff do not prevent children in daycare from being bullied\342\200\235: This allegation pertains to a child, Child #1 (C1), who allegedly punches other children in their face, kicks other children, puts other children in chokeholds, pokes other children in their eyes, has fist fights with other children, and throws things, amongst other actions, even when the child\342\200\231s parents are present (volunteering) and the teacher in the classroom does nothing. By all accounts, the child was originally in the Sunflower room and after several incidents of physical aggression, the child\342\200\231s parents were contacted in November 2021 regarding what suggestions they had, as staff weren\342\200\231t seeing enough of an improvement in \342\200\234impulse control and self-regulation.\342\200\235 As C1\342\200\231s parents had dealt with this at C1\342\200\231s previous school, they suggested that the child would do better with older children and so C1 was moved to the Lavender class, which houses the older children, as of December 2021. When interviewed, Parent 13 (P13) states that they had initially contacted Staff 1 (S1) about C1\342\200\231s aggression in November; however, no documentation was provided to support this. Thus, it is unknown whether S1 reached out to the parents of C1 on their own or whether it was triggered by P13. Page 3/7 Though there was apparently correspondence between the Director and Reporting Party in December, no action appeared to be taken regarding C1 and the physical aggression, thus triggering more urgent correspondence in January, as a result of which a meeting was held. (Again, as no documentation, such as December correspondence was provided to LPA, LPA does not know to what it was pertaining nor what possible resolution was suggested.) In January 2022, the outcome of the meeting was the following proposed actions: a \342\200\234calming down tent\342\200\235 which the teacher would send the child to for an indeterminate amount of time, sometimes accompanied by the teacher or the child\342\200\231s parent (if the parent was a volunteer); the creation of a \342\200\234How am I feeling today?\342\200\235 form, which is completed by the teacher and given to parents at pick up; the teacher could ask staff from the other classroom to assist if she feels she needs assistance until permanent assistance is hired; having the Board President and Vice-President sit in on weekly staff meetings to make sure children\342\200\231s behavior is being addressed and to provide support to the teachers due to educational background; and covering the Code of Conduct, Conflict Resolution and the Discipline policy in the classroom during the next Caregiver meeting, to be held on March 22. No further documentation for February or March 2022 was provided except for the Power Point which was presented to the parents on March 22. On page 20 of the \342\200\234Caregiver\342\200\231s Handbook,\342\200\235 it states that, \342\200\234If you (the parent) have concerns about a child, parent, or family, please inform the Teacher and/or Director.\342\200\235 As it is unclear whether any concerns were brought to staff\342\200\231s attention prior to January 2022; as supposedly, any incident/ouch/boo boo reports were verbally told to parents instead of being documented on the Brightwheel app; and thus, as the documentation provided supports that S1 reached out to the Page 4/7 parents of C1 first and as early as November; and as an email exchange between S1 and P13 dated January 13 states that S1 had been strategizing with teachers and had introduced the \342\200\234regrouping\342\200\235 or \342\200\234calm down\342\200\235 space already, documentation supports that staff were taking reactive measures to stop C1 from being physically aggressive with other children. As documentation from the file of C1 clearly shows that S1 was made aware of C1\342\200\231s tendency to get \342\200\234physically angry\342\200\235 and is \342\200\234physical,\342\200\235 and usually \342\200\234needs alone time to cool off\342\200\235, Center staff should have been more proactive earlier in that they were notified of C1\342\200\231s behavior at enrollment. However, as the email exchange between S1 and the parents of C1 in November 2021 was initiated by S1 and as measures began to be implemented as a result, documentation supports that the Center was taking preventative measures in that it was S1 who reached out to the parents, not vice-versa. Unfortunately, staff can only be so proactive in that they cannot predict situations and so situations mostly become reactive. As 12 of the 17 parents interviewed stated that they were happy with care being provided and that their child(ren) seemed happy at the Center, and as both staff interviewed stated that they feel there has been improvement in the behavior, or the reaction to the behavior of C1, the measures put in place in January 2022 seem to be making a positive impact. As there is no evidence provided to support that Center staff took no preventative measures, once informed of RP\342\200\231s concerns about C1\342\200\231s behavior, the allegation that \342\200\234Staff do not prevent children in daycare from being bullied\342\200\235 has been determined to be Unsubstantiated. This agency has investigated the complaint alleging that \342\200\234Staff do not prevent children in daycare from being bullied\342\200\235 and that there was a violation of Title 22, Division 12, Chapter 1, Article 6, Section 101223 \342\200\234Personal Rights.\342\200\235 Based upon the evidence as presented above, the allegation Page 5/7 has been determined to be Unsubstantiated. A finding of Unsubstantiated means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. No deficiencies are being cited for the allegation listed above. - Pertaining to the allegation that \342\200\234Staff not reporting incidents to children's representative\342\200\235: This allegation pertains to Child #1 (C1) who hits children and parents are allegedly not notified of the incidents unless a bruise is left on the child who was hit. According to S1, communication between staff and parents, when it comes to incidents, is mostly verbal. According to S2, parents are informed of incidents at pick up and reports are documented on the Brightwheel app only if S2 does not see the parent at pick up or if the parent was not volunteering in the classroom themselves that day. Of the 17 parents interviewed, six were not sure what was supposed to be addressed with them or how; four said they were sure they\342\200\231d be notified any which way possible if something were to occur; two stated that all communication with parents is through the Brightwheel app; one stated they would notify parents immediately if a child is injured or sick, but if it\342\200\231s not urgent, parents would be notified verbally at pick up; one stated that they are only notified verbally at pick up; two stated that the Brightwheel app is for ouchies, and the new form, \342\200\234How am I feeling today?\342\200\235 is for Page 6/7 behavioral issues; and one stated that there are a lot of emails and communication through Brightwheel, but that incidents are reported verbally at pick up. On page 23 of the \342\200\234Caregiver\342\200\231s Handbook,\342\200\235 it says that \342\200\234If a minor incident occurs in the classroom, parents will only be notified if there is physical harm done (more than a transient mark like a bruise, scratch or bite mark), or a behavior is repeatedly aggressive, harmful and/or disruptive to the class.\342\200\235 But it does not state how/the means by which the caregiver will be notified. On page 33 of the \342\200\234Caregiver\342\200\231s Handbook,\342\200\235 it states that, \342\200\234If your child is seriously injured or becomes ill, you will be contacted immediately. We will also contact you for any kind of head bump\342\200\246A minor injury will be treated with first aid and noted on an \342\200\230ouch report\342\200\231 that we will place in your family mailbox.\342\200\235 As the RP thought that a child hitting another child is \342\200\234repeatedly aggressive, harmful and/or disruptive to the class\342\200\235 and should thus be reported to the parents; but as, according to both staff and three of the parents, incidents are reported verbally at pick up, it could not be determined whether incidents were not being reported to caregivers at all or whether they was just no documentation/paper trail as to which incidents had occurred. According to S1, if a caregiver wants to know every incident which occurs with their child, they can ask and the teacher will document it in a notebook to give to the caregiver at the end of each day; if a caregiver does not request this, it is assumed that they agree with, and understand, what is to be reported as documented on pages 23 and 33 of the \342\200\234Caregiver\342\200\231s Handbook.\342\200\235 Page 7/7 This agency has investigated the complaint alleging that \342\200\234Staff not reporting incidents to children's representative\342\200\235 and that there was a violation of Title 22, Division 12, Chapter 1, Article 6, Section 101212 \342\200\234Reporting Requirements.\342\200\235 Based upon the evidence as presented above, the allegation has been determined to be Unsubstantiated. A finding of Unsubstantiated means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. No deficiencies are being cited for the allegation listed above. A Notice of Site Visit was given and must remain posted on, or immediately adjacent to, the interior side of the main door for 30 days. Failure to comply with posting requirements shall result in an immediate civil penalty of $100. Exit interview conducted and report was reviewed with Director Elizabeth Tomashefsky.