1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32 | Page 9099C
On 03/22/2021 a complaint was filed with the Licensing Office. Complainant alleged that the facility is always short staffed. (1) On 03/22/21 at 10:15am, 13 children with one staff in the 3-year-old room, also (2) 36 children with two staff were observed on the playground around 9:30am for the past three weeks.
During the investigation LPA conducted 2 physical inspections, interviewed 7 staff members, 2 children, obtained staff timecard, children’s sign in/out and a copy of the children's roster. All staff interviewed denied of operating out of ratio. Staff in 3-year-old classroom stated normal numbers of children is 14 with 2 staff since classroom is with the younger children. 3-year-old staff denied ever been out of ratio. When questioned about the outdoor ratio, staff stated normal numbers of children is 30, but it depends on the days, however, never have more than 36 children in the yard at any given time. Staff stated there is at least 3 or 4 staff outside depending on the number of children. Staff denied ever being out of ratio and that the ratio of 1:12 applies to inside or outside of the classroom.
LPA completed a review of staff timecards and children’s sign-in/out sheets for the week of 03/22/21 to 03/26/21. After a thorough review, the documentation doesn’t support the allegation.
Based on the records reviewed, there appeared to be enough staff present to maintain ratio with the number of children signed in. However, there is no way to determine where the staff were stationed within the facility.
All parents interviewed stated the facility is great. Due to COVID-19 the facility is not allowing parents inside. The children are currently being drop off at the front gate of the school. No parent expressed any concerns about the facility being out of ratio. Children interviewed stated there is usually three staff outside with them.
Based on LPA observations, interviews which were conducted and record reviews, the preponderance of evidence was not met, therefore the above allegation is found to be UNSUBSTANTIATED. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation(s) did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED.
Continued on Page 9099C
|