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 2***
During this time Staff #4 (S4) asked for additional assistance due to S4 being bit by C1, and C1 refusing to get up off the ground. Staff #2 (S2) reported providing assistance to child by bending down to help by speaking with C1 and extending a hand. C1 started to get up, then threw her body back down toward the ground, at which time S2 released the child’s arm to potentially avoid an injury. Staff S2 then picked up C1 and carried C1 into the class by holding C1 under the arms. S2 denied ever handling C1 in an aggressive rough manner, however, added that C1 could have sustained injury when C1 dropped her body back down to the ground while S2 was attempting to help C1 up from the ground. Other staff present denied ever seeing S2 handle or treat any child in a harmful manner. Staff interviewed reported that throughout the day, after the incident, the child continued to participate in the class activities, did not complain about any discomfort, and never appeared to be injured.
During children interviews, C1 reported being hurt by a teacher due to arm being grabbed. C1 proceeded to demonstrate by pulling on own arm to show LPA. C1 could not identify the teacher. After C1 was picked up by parent, medical attention was sought due to child’s complaint to parent about arm hurting. It was determined that child did have joint pain in the arm. Parent was initially informed by staff during pick up of child’s challenges during transition into the classroom. There was no mention of any injury to the parent.
Other children interviewed reported that time out and redirection is used when children are not listening to the teacher and added that children are not hurt by staff. It was noted that all the children had transitioned into the class during the alleged incident, and no other children were present on the playground. Additional parents interviewed were satisfied with the care and supervision being provided to the children and had no concerns.
This agency has investigated the complaint alleging that a day care child was injured while in care due to personal rights. We have found that the complaint was unsubstantiated. Due to conflicting statements, C1 dropping to the ground in a hard manner, and C1 not being able to identify any staff, there is no way to determine how or when the injury may have occurred. While the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur
***continued on page 3***. |