complaint·July 15, 2024

Page 2 of 3 punishment on a child in care by taking the food away from child\342\200\235 and \342\200\234staff used an unusual punishment on a child in care by sending child to bathroom as a way of discipline. Reporting Party (RP) stated staff # 1 did not allow child # 1 to eat lunch, because child # 1 refused to sit at a table and requested to sit by themselves. Reporting party also stated another incident when staff # 2 told child # 2 to go sit in the bathroom when child # 2 said a bathroom word. Reporting party could not remember the exact dates of the reported incidents. However, it was reported the incidents happened in February or March of 2024. During the course of investigation, LPA interviewed 11 staff working at the facility, including staff # 1 and 2, interviewed 9 qualified children, and contacted 10 parents of whom one parent responded. Regarding the allegation of \342\200\234staff used an unusual punishment on a child in care by taking the food away from child\342\200\235, LPA interviewed 11 staff including staff # 1. Staff denied taking away children\342\200\231s food. Staff states they are aware of personal rights of children. They don\342\200\231t force children to eat. They have not observed any staff to take away food from any child as a way of discipline. Staff # 1 stated on one occasion, child # 1 insisted to sit alone and did not want to sit with another child during lunch time. The tables in the classrooms are set with 2 chairs for siting of 2 children. Each child can sit wherever they want. Child # 1 wanted to sit alone. There were 12 children in the classroom with 6 tables and 12 chairs. There was only one spot left for child # 1 whom child refused to sit. Children do not have an assigned seat. Staff # 1 stated staff tried to encourage the child to sit and eat but child # 1 did not let staff # 1 to open their lunch bag. Child stated they were not hungry. Staff # 1 stated they did not want to force the child to eat. Staff # 1 stated they made sure child ate later. The management stated they communicated with the child\342\200\231 representative. LPA interviewed 10 children including child # 1 who did not disclose anything to LPA related to the above incident. Regarding the allegation of \342\200\234staff used an unusual punishment on a child in care by sending child to bathroom as a way of discipline, LPA interviewed 11 staff including the alleged staff # 2. Staff denied punishing any child by sending the child to the bathroom. Staff stated they talk to children if they do not listen. They do not use any time out. LPA interviewed staff # 2. Staff # 2 stated their discipline policy is to talk to children with reasoning. Staff # 2 denied sending any children to the bathroom as a way of disciplining them. Staff # 2 stated they have heard children use bathroom words a lot. Continued on page 3 Page 3 of 3 They have told children those words are bathroom words, and they are used in the bathroom. If one child says it, the others learn and like to repeat it. Staff # 2 stated they tell children they don't think those words are appropriate words to use them in the classroom. Those words are appropriate for bathroom. If they want to say those words, we tell them bathroom is an appropriate place for those words. Staff # 2 stated they have not sent any child to the bathroom because of saying bathroom words. Children say the bathroom words and they think is funny. LPA interviewed 10 children including attempting interviewing child # 2. Child # 6 stated child # 2 uses bathroom words and staff # 2 tells child # 2 those are bathroom words. Child # 8 stated children say bathroom words and staff # 2 reminds them those are bathroom words and not classroom words. Child # 9 stated child # 7 uses bathroom words and staff # 2 keeps saying we use those words in the bathroom. Child # 10 stated some children use bathroom words in the classroom and staff # 2 tell them we use those words in the bathroom. Children did not disclose to LPA that any child is sent to the bathroom as a way of discipline for saying the bathroom words. During the course of interviews with 11 staff, 10 children, and 10 parents of whom one parent responded with positive feedback, there is not enough proof or evidence to support the above allegations occurred or did not occur. This agency has investigated the complaint alleging \342\200\234Staff used an unusual punishment on a child in care by taking the food away from child\342\200\235 and \342\200\234Staff used an unusual punishment on a child in care by sending child to bathroom as a way of discipline\342\200\235; although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove, the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. Notice of Site Visit was posted. The notice of site visit must be posted for 30 consecutive days. Failure to post will result in civil penalties of $100. In the areas which were investigated, no deficiency was cited today. The staff in charge, Jabeena Farukhi , was provided a copy of their appeal rights (LIC 9058 1/16) and their signature on this form acknowledges receipt of these rights. Exit interview was conducted with staff in charge, Jabeena Farukhi. This report ends here.