Complaint·August 22, 2024

alleged that infant\342\200\231s diapers are not changed until the morning assistant arrives and children are left soiled. Confidential interviews revealed that there have not been any complaints by parents regarding their child being left in soiled diapers. Further confidential interviews disclosed that the licensee and assistant were responsible for changing diapers, and they were doing so multiple times throughout the day as needed. The Licensee admitted that that she has a sensitivity to changing diapers of older children, specifically children aged 3-5 years old, but denied allegation that the children were left in soiled diapers. Due to information gathered, LPA was unable to corroborate this allegation. Regarding the allegation that licensee inappropriately interacts with children, it was alleged that licensee yells, has made children in care cry and may have recorded a child while in care. Confidential interviews disclosed that licensee is stern and tends to raise her voice when giving directives to children but does not yell or scream at them. Further interviews disclosed that some children cried after being put on at timeout or were spoken to regarding their behavior, but was never done out of malice or to make a child feel bad. Regarding licensee recording a child while in care, licensee denied the allegation; and LPA was unable to obtain evidence or any witnesses that would confirm that the licensee was recording a video of the child. Due to information gathered, LPA was unable to corroborate this allegation. Regarding the allegation licensee forces children to nap, it was alleged licensee forces one of the older children to act like they are sleeping to get the younger children to go to sleep which may take 30-40 minutes. Confidential interviews revealed that the older children are not forced to nap and are given an option to nap if they felt the need to do so. Additional interviews disclosed that occasionally one of the older children would voluntarily go into the nap room, and would lay down to read, or play with the smaller children and then leave quietly after the smaller children fell asleep. Confidential interviews with the older child disclosed that they were not forced to sleep or act like as if they were sleeping and were not forced to do anything to ensure the younger children would fall asleep. Due to information gathered, LPA was unable to corroborate this allegation. Regarding the allegation licensee did not ensure that a child\342\200\231s dietary needs were met, it was alleged that licensee took food away from a child because they would not stay seated. Licensee denied the allegation, and LPA was unable to corroborate allegation from the interviews conducted and due to a lack of witnesses. Confidential interviews disclosed that there was a child who would not eat their food most of the time, and since they would not remain seated to eat their food, their plate was removed from the table. Additional interviews disclosed that there was an incident with another child that had their food removed from the table when they got up to use the restroom, so the Licensee thought the child was done eating, and the child did not communicate that they hadn\342\200\231t finished eating prior to leaving the table. Due to information gathered, LPA was unable to corroborate this allegation. Based on confidential interviews, the allegations licensee does not ensure that children\342\200\231s diapering needs are met, licensee inappropriately interacts with children, licensee forces children to nap and licensee did not ensure that a child\342\200\231s dietary needs were met, may have occurred, however are not supported or proven by evidence. Therefore, the allegations are unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report, appeal rights and Notice of Site Visit were provided to Licensee Nesreen Shenouda. Licensee was reminded that the Notice of Site Visit must remain posted for 30 consecutive days.