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 | On or about May 19, 2021, Licensee made a decision to terminate child care services because a child(ren) required more attention than other child care children. Licensee disclosed she tried to work with the family and attempted to practice the same interventions, the child’s authorized representative was practicing at home, however Licensee stated she was not able to meet the specific needs the child’s authorized representative was requesting. Licensee disclosed, the child’s authorized representative requested to sleep their child(ren) in equipment, which is not in compliance with Title 22 Regulation, 102425 Infant Safe Sleep. Therefore, Licensee advised the child's authorized representative that she could not sleep their child(ren) in equipment that is not in compliance with regulations.
According to Licensee, the downstairs bedroom is used for napping infants. Licensee sleeps infants in the back bedroom in a play pen, and conducts a physical check on the children every 15 to 20 minutes. During the initial inspection, Licensee admitted she does not document the 15 minute sleep checks (An Advisory Note-Technical Violation was issued during this inspection). Licensee stated she also has a baby monitor video camera which is a tool to assist with supervising the sleeping infants. Licensee stated if children do not want to nap, she will place him/her at a child's table which is located between the kitchen and living room. Licensee will give the child a quiet activity to occupy themselves while other children are sleeping. If a child is disrupting the napping children, Licensee will try to soothe the child by holding him/her, attempting to calm the child down. Licensee stated she does not force children to nap, if they do not want to nap, and Licensee stated she does not force children to stay in the nap room for a long period of time.
After interviewing pertinent parties and reviewing facility records, at this time there is conflicting information on whether Licensee forced a child(ren) to sleep in the napping room. Although Licensee admitted infant children nap in the back bedroom, there is conflicting evidence to prove that child care children are forced to nap, are forced to stay awake, or are forced to stay in the designated sleeping area. Due to conflicting information found throughout this investigation, the department has determined that although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is no preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED.
LPA Hogue conducted an exit interview with Licensee, Chelsey Ortiz. Licensee understands that a copy of this report must be made available to the public, upon their request, for the next three years. LPA Hogue issued a Notice of Site Visit and verified it was posted in a prominent location at the facility before ending the inspection. Licensee understands that the Notice of Site Visit must remain posted for the next 30 days. No deficiencies were cited during this inspection. |