complaint·June 24, 2025

Report continued from page one Some staff reported S1 held children by leaning on the child while they were on the cots therefore preventing the child from getting up. Other staff reported they did not observed staff holding down the children during nap time. During the unannounced inspections conducted by the Department on April 3, 2025, and April 17, 2025, S1 and S2 were not working in classrooms therefore the Department was unable to observed S1 and S2 interactions with the children. A second allegation was received alleging on an unknown date in the beginning of 2025, staff 2 (S2) grabbed child 1 (C1) by the arm, lifted C1 up and dragged C1 to another table. In addition, allegations were received alleging S1 pinched C2 and grabbed C2 by the shirt. Staff interviews did not corroborate the allegation. Parent interviews did not support the allegation. A review of the facility records revealed, the Center submitted an Unusual Incident Report (UIR) to the Department on April 1, 2025. According to the UIR, the Center received information alleging S2 grabbed C2 by the arm on February 19, 2025. S1 and S2 denied the allegations and expressed children are redirected when a challenging behavior is being displayed. During the unannounced inspections conducted by the Department on April 3, 2025, and April 17, 2025, S1 and S2 were not working in classrooms therefore the Department was unable to observed S1 and S2 interactions with the children. A third allegation was received alleging S1 called C2 “retarded” on an unknown date. Confidential interviews completed with children and staff did not corroborate the allegation. Parent interviews did not support the allegation. S1 denied the allegation when questioned by the Department. During the unannounced inspections conducted by the Department on April 3, 2025, and April 17, 2025, S1 was not working in a classroom, therefore the Department was unable to observed S1 and S2 interactions with the children. Based on interviews, and record review there is not enough evidence regarding the allegations alleging Staff forced child to nap, Staff handled child in an inappropriate manner, and Staff used inappropriate language toward child. Therefore, the allegations are deemed unsubstantiated at this time. 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 given and must remain posted for 30 days. An exit interview was conducted, where this report and appeal rights were reviewed with facility representative Neena Malhotra.