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 | (Continued from LIC9099)
Furthermore, LS & AS stated LS is present at the facility during the hours of operation; ending LS’s day at roughly 3:00PM to 5:00PM. LS & AS further stated that LS does often run errands for the facility, however there are at least one and/or two lead staff members that will substitute when LS is not present. Staff interviews (S1 – S4) stated that LS is present during the hours of operation. Staff (S1 & S2) state that LS does leave roughly close to the end of the day and S2 stated that a substitute lead is present when LS is not present corroborating with LS and AS’s statements. Also, S3 stated there were a few times when LS was observed leaving the facility for a small amount of time.
LS, AS & Staff (S1-S3) stated that a plan was in the process of being created where C1 would be moved to a different classroom, however, was never confirmed. LS & AS further stated the plan was to benefit C1 and C1 was scheduled to test out a different classroom, however, did not occur due to C1 not returning to the facility. LS, AS and Staff (S1-S3) stated that C1 was never moved to a different classroom.
According to children’s interviews, C1 did not disclose any information regarding the allegations, and no corroborating evidence was revealed. Interviews conducted by children (C2 – C6) stated to have never been pinched by staff. Interviews from Adults; A1 stated that there were past incidents where staff inappropriately handled children in a rough matter. Also, Adult (A2 & A3) stated when present at the facility they would not observe LS on site. Interviews conducted by Adults (A1 – A4) and Children (C2 – C6) did not have any concerns with the allegation filed against the facility.
Based on the information gathered during this investigation, although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove that the allegations occurred and therefore are determined to be unsubstantiated. There were no Title 22 deficiencies cited. This report was reviewed and discussed with Licensee, Zoe Teeter. Appeal rights were provided. Notice of Site Visit shall be posted for 30 days from today's visit.
|