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 of 2
During the interviews with five staff, staff who had information regarding the incidents stated that the first incident, they don't believe it was a bite incident. Child # 1 (C1) was observed a red mark on the right arm after coming inside the classroom from outside playtime. Two present staff stated they were standing close to children and did not observe any biting happened to C1.
According to interviewed staff, the 2nd incident, C1 and C2 toddler were playing in the little plastic house on the playground when C1 was bitten on the shoulder by C2 toddler. According to the two staff outside, they were close by and could not prevent this incident of happening.
The two staff involved in the 3rd incident stated that C1 and C3 toddler were fighting over sitting on S3's lap when C1 was bitten on the back by C3 toddler. These 3 incidents of C1 getting hurt happened within a week.
Based on LPA’s interviews with five staff today, admitting the involved staff in the biting incidents that they could not prevent C1 of getting hurt, and reviewing incident reports of C1 getting hurt in 3 incidents within a week, it was determined the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, the allegation of "Staff did not prevent a daycare child from causing harm to another daycare child" is found to be SUBSTANTIATED.
California of Title 22 Regulations Section 101223(a)(2) Personal Rights of children is cited on 9099D next page.
A notice of site visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days.
Exit interview conducted and report was reviewed with the director, Sara Ortiz.
In the areas that were evaluated, the following deficiency was cited of the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 12 on this day.
End of report.
|