complaint·January 6, 2025

According to the CD, the facility\342\200\231s discipline policy as outlined in the Parent Handbook is to redirect, praise, correct, and ask the child if they knew of a better choice to make. If the same behavior occurred, the child would be placed in time out for three to four minutes, but the child would never be left alone. CD denied that any staff ever singled out any child and that the discipline policy was applied equally to all children. CD further claimed that they really did not have any children with behavioral problems but would talk to parents about discipline if necessary. Other staff (S1-S3) reiterated the various steps of the facility\342\200\231s discipline policy and talked of explaining the situation to the child and trying to redirect or calm them down. If a child continued to cry or repeat the behavior, they may be put in time out or take a walk to calm them. All denied the allegation stating no child is singled out or discriminated against and the discipline policy is applied similarly. S3 stated that children are not singled out in a mean or degrading way whereas S1 stated some children were given a lot more chances if they were in trouble. S2 stated that there were not a lot of disciplinary issues and attributed it to a more structured environment. Parent and children\342\200\231s interviews did not reveal any concerns with the facility. Parents did not observe any inappropriate discipline or red flags and were aware of the discipline policy in the Parent Handbook. P2 did state that staff were gentle but firm and P5 conveyed a time when the whole class missed recess due to the children not listening. P4 further related a time when they were notified of their child crying for 10 straight minutes but that they catered to the child and there was no inappropriate discipline. Children stated that they liked the facility, felt safe, and that no teacher was mean or yelled except C2 stated teachers would yell at them if they got in trouble. They were also aware of children being put on time out when in trouble. 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. Exit interview was conducted with Paula Rowland. There were no violations of the California Code of Regulations, Title 22; Division 12 & Chapter 1, cited at this time. A Notice of Site Visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days. Failure to comply with posting requirements shall result in a $100 civil penalty. Appeal Rights were provided.