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 | Regarding the blanket being thrown at a day care child; It was determined that this was not done with malicious intent. The licensee stated she was telling a parent that their child likes to be comforted while holding a blanket and dropped the blanket down to the child who was sitting up on the floor below her. Regarding the plush toy being thrown at the child, the licensee has no recollection of this event. The Licensee stated that she plays games with the toddler children during circle time where pillows and balls are thrown as part of a game. After further investigation, it was also determined that this was not done with any malicious intent. Although it is being determined that these events were don't without any malicious intent, LPA Schnell is unable to determine if a child's person rights were violated as a result of the observed interactions between the licensee and child.
Regarding the failure to meet a child's needs; this allegation involved Mary not being open to understanding and trying different ways to provide comfort to a child in her during periods when the child is upset and crying. LPA Schnell discussed with Mary ways that she comforts children. Mary stated that she had one child in care that was sometimes comforted by holding a blanket, and sometimes needed to be held. Mary stated that other times, she holds children to comfort them and/or if they are older children finds toys and activities that might interest them. During both inspections of the home as part of this complaint investigation, LPA Schnell observed Mary actively engaged with the children, and meeting their needs for care and supervision as well as comfort.
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 allegations are unsubstantiated. |