complaint·April 28, 2022

Confidential interviews disclosed that around the time of 2/14/22 , 2/15/22, C2 had shown private parts to C1 on at least one other occasion and C2’s teacher was witnessed verbally telling C2, “oh no, we don’t do that here.” Confidential interviews revealed the incident was reported to front office and the lead teacher. Interview with staff revealed that staff came looking for C1 and staff on the playground told staff they did not know where C1 was. Staff found C1 in the tunnel with C2 with their pants down. Confidential interviews revealed that the playground supervision is being revised so this kind of behavior does not happen again. In addition, interview with staff disclosed that C2’s previous behaviors revealed that C2 required additional supervision. Interview with S2, S3 denied that C2 has displayed inappropriate or harmful kind of behaviors before and stated that C2 has been really good lately. Another allegation was reported that due to lack of supervision the children were able to engage in harmful behaviors. Confidential interviews revealed that C1 has been bitten and hit by C2 on at least one other occasion. Other confidential interviews revealed that C2 urinated in the sand table on one of the last days of being enrolled at the facility. Interviews with multiple staff, disclosed the positions of the teachers on the playground when C1, C2 were found 03/02/22, would normally be to have a teacher in the sandbox area, however there was no confirmation that was what occurred that day. Interviews with several staff, revealed there were three staff sitting at the benches, one staff by the swings, two other staff talking on the right side of the benches and one staff talking with a parent at the door. Other confidential interviews disclosed that the staff were talking about an incident that previously occurred not related to this incident on 03/02/22. Based on confidential interviews and record review the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore. the above allegations that Child #2 (C2) engaged in inappropriate behavior with child #1 (C1) while in care and lack of supervision resulted in children engaging in harmful behaviors is substantiated. The facility is being cited for Title 22, division 12, chapter 1, article 06, continuing requirements; section 101223 Personal Rights and 101229 responsibility for providing care and supervision. Which poses a potential risk to children in care. An exit interview was conducted, A copy of this report, appeal rights and Notice of Site Visit were provided to SHaima Cormier. The facility representative was informed that the “Notice of Site Visit” must be posted for 30 consecutive days. Failure to post will result in Civil Penalties of $100.00. The “Notice of Site Visit” must be posted on or adjacent to the door. Failure to post Type A reports for 30 days will result in a Civil Penalty of $100.00 Interview with staff revealed that C1’s biological parent asked for C1 to be placed in a diaper at naptime. Based on conflicting interviews, the allegations that a child was left in a soiled diaper on more than one occasion, may have occurred, however is not supported or proven by evidence. Therefore, the allegation is unsubstantiated. A copy of this report, appeal rights and Notice of Site Visit were provided to licensee. The Notice of Site Visit was posted by the licensee prior to LPA leaving the facility and the licensee was reminded this notice must be posted for 30 days.