|
MALTREATMENT INVESTIGATION MEMORANDUM Minnesota Statutes, section 260E.01, paragraph (a), “The legislature hereby declares that the public policy of this state is to protect children whose health or welfare may be jeopardized through maltreatment.”
License Number and Program Type: 1002181-CCC (Child Care Center) Investigator(s): Danielle Morrison Suspected Maltreatment Reported: It was reported that a staff person (SP) brought a preschool classroom inside from a facility playground and an alleged victim (AV) was left unsupervised on the playground for approximately three minutes. Date of Incident(s): September 26, 2022 Nature of Alleged Maltreatment Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 260E.03, subdivision 15, paragraph (a), clauses (1) and (2): Failure by a person responsible for a child's care to supply a child with necessary food, clothing, shelter, health, medical, or other care required for the child's physical or mental health when reasonably able to do so. Failure to protect a child from conditions or actions that seriously endanger the child's physical or mental health when reasonably able to do so. Summary of Findings: Pertinent information was obtained during a site visit conducted on October 11, 2022; from documentation at the facility; and through three interviews conducted with a supervisor staff person (P), the SP, and the AV’s family member (FM). The AV was 33 months old at the time of the incident and was enrolled in the Preschool 1 classroom. This investigator met with the AV, but due to his/her age, s/he was not able to provide pertinent information. The facility was located on the corner of the intersection of two streets and was surrounded by other businesses and housing. The playground was located at the back of the building along one of the streets. On the opposite side of the playground from the building was an alley and then housing. There was on street parking where cars faced towards the facility and the playground. The playground was surrounded on three sides by chain link fencing and was visible to persons passing by or parking near the facility. Though this investigator did not see a posted Speed Limit sign, the City of Bird Island Ordinance 58 Section 2 stated: that the speed limit was no more than 30 miles per hour. The P provided the following information: · On September 26, 2022, around 10:50 a.m., the P was working in Preschool 2 when s/he saw the AV through the window outside on the playground running from a slide to a tricycle carousal apparatus. The P did a double take, asked a teacher who was in the hallway to stand in his/her classroom, and then went outside through the hallway door that led to the playground. When the P walked onto the playground, the AV initially laughed, but then seemed “shocked” when the P told him/her that s/he was not to be out there. · The P then brought the AV to the Preschool 1 classroom and asked the SP if s/he was missing any kids. The SP was “surprised” and “quickly overwhelmed” when the P and the AV came into Preschool 1. The P then left to get back to the classroom s/he was working in. · The P stated that the policy for bringing children inside the building was to line the children up at the doors, count the children, have a classroom counter with them (a flip chart with numbers of how many children were in attendance), and check the playground to make sure no one was left outside. The SP told the P s/he did not have his/her classroom counter outside on that day. · The FM told the P s/he was “not surprised” the AV was hiding out and made it seem like the AV did that sort of thing when at a park with the FM. The FM stated that the AV played one sided hide and seek at home. The AV hid and giggled when the FM called for him/her. The FM said the facility called right away to let him/her know what happened. The FM was not upset and said the SP was “amazing.” The SP provided the following information: · On September 26, 2022, the SP took his/her classroom of ten children outside before lunch time. The SP said s/he forgot the counter in Preschool 1 when s/he took the children outside. Around 10:45 a.m., the SP lined the children up to return inside, remembered “mentally counting” the children, and then watched them walk in front of him/her to Preschool 1. · Once inside the classroom, the SP helped the children take off their sweatshirts, then line up to wash their hands, and sit down. About five minutes later, the P brought the AV into Preschool 1. The AV did not seem to know what was going on, but ran to the SP. The SP “fell to the floor and started crying” when the AV ran to him/her. The AV started to cry when s/he saw the SP’s reaction. · The SP spoke with the FM and said the FM was “very understanding” and stated that the AV did that a lot when they went to the park. · The SP said that the policy for transitioning the children from the playground to the classroom included lining the children up, “mentally looking over all of them,” and then leading them inside. The SP stated that s/he did not have “direct training” on the topic of supervision, but s/he had taken several classes that talked about it and discussed different ways to make those transition times easier and to make sure everybody was accounted for. The facility’s Risk Reduction Plan stated that “staff will have a number counter to keep an accurate count of children in their care pertaining to supervision during outdoor play,” and that “staff will be aware of the children in their care at all times during a transition.” The facility’s Program Plan stated that “children are always under adult supervision.” According to Weather Underground (Bird Island, MN Weather History | Weather Underground (wunderground.com), on September 26, 2022, the temperature at 10:53 a.m. was 55 degrees Fahrenheit and conditions were fair. The P and the SP were trained on the Reporting of Maltreatment of Minors Act, the facility’s Risk Reduction Plan, and Program Plan prior to the incident. Conclusion: A. Maltreatment: Information was consistent that on September 26, 2022, at approximately 10:50 a.m., the AV was left outside on the playground without the supervision or knowledge of staff persons for approximately five minutes, which was a violation of Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.02, subdivision 18, and Minnesota Rules, part 9503.0045, subpart 1, item A. When the P noticed the AV and went outside to get the AV, the AV initially laughed but then appeared “shocked” and only cried when s/he saw the SP’s reaction of crying. Given that the AV was outside without the knowledge or supervision of staff person on a playground that was open and visible to passersby, the AV was exposed to community dangers. Therefore, there was a preponderance of the evidence that there was a failure to supply care the AV with necessary care and a failure to protect the AV from conditions that seriously endangered his/her physical or mental health when reasonably able to do so. It was determined that neglect occurred (failure by a person responsible for a child's care to supply a child with necessary food, clothing, shelter, health, medical, or other care required for the child's physical or mental health when reasonably able to do so; and/or failure to protect a child from conditions or actions that seriously endanger the child's physical or mental health when reasonably able to do so). B. Responsibility pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 260E.30, subdivision 4, paragraph (a), clauses (1) and (2): When determining whether the facility or individual is the responsible party, or whether both the facility and the individual are responsible for determined maltreatment in a facility, the investigating agency shall consider at least the following mitigating factors: (1) whether the actions of the facility or the individual caregivers were according to, and followed the terms of, an erroneous physician order, prescription, individual care plan, or directive; however, this is not a mitigating factor when the facility or caregiver was responsible for the issuance of the erroneous order, prescription, individual care plan, or directive or knew or should have known of the errors and took no reasonable measures to correct the defect before administering care; (2) comparative responsibility between the facility, other caregivers, and requirements placed upon an employee, including the facility’s compliance with related regulatory standards and the adequacy of facility policies and procedures, facility training, an individual’s participation in the training, the caregiver’s supervision, and facility staffing levels and the scope of the individual employee’s authority and discretion; and (3) whether the facility or individual followed professional standards in exercising professional judgment. The SP stated that s/he did not have “direct training” on the topic of supervision, but s/he had taken several classes that talked about it and discussed different ways to make those transition times easier and to make sure everybody was accounted for. In addition, the SP was trained on the Reporting of Maltreatment of Minors Act, the facility’s Risk Reduction Plan and the facility’s Program Plan. The SP was responsible for the care and supervision of the AV when s/he left the AV unsupervised on the playground. Therefore the SP was responsible for the maltreatment of the AV. C. Recurring and/or Serious Maltreatment: The Office of Inspector General is required to evaluate whether substantiated maltreatment by an individual meets the statutory criteria to be determined as “recurring or serious.” Individuals determined to be responsible for recurring or serious maltreatment are disqualified from providing direct contact services. Minnesota Statutes, section 245C.02, subdivision 16, states: “Recurring maltreatment” means more than one incident of maltreatment for which there is a preponderance of evidence that maltreatment occurred and that the subject was responsible for the maltreatment. Minnesota Statutes, section 245C.02, subdivision 18, states: "Serious maltreatment" means sexual abuse, maltreatment resulting in death, neglect resulting in serious injury which reasonably requires the care of a physician whether or not the care of a physician was sought, or abuse resulting in serious injury. For purposes of this definition, "care of a physician" is treatment received or ordered by a physician, physician assistant, or nurse practitioner, but does not include diagnostic testing, assessment, or observation; the application of, recommendation to use, or prescription solely for a remedy that is available over the counter without a prescription; or a prescription solely for a topical antibiotic to treat burns when there is no follow-up appointment. For purposes of this definition, "abuse resulting in serious injury" means: bruises, bites, skin laceration, or tissue damage; fractures; dislocations; evidence of internal injuries; head injuries with loss of consciousness; extensive second-degree or third-degree burns and other burns for which complications are present; extensive second-degree or third-degree frostbite and other frostbite for which complications are present; irreversible mobility or avulsion of teeth; injuries to the eyes; ingestion of foreign substances and objects that are harmful; near drowning; and heat exhaustion or sunstroke. Serious maltreatment includes neglect when it results in criminal sexual conduct against a child or vulnerable adult. It was determined that the substantiated neglect for which the SP was responsible did not meet statutory criteria to be determined as recurring or serious. It was a single incident and the AV did not sustain any injury or require the care of a physician. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 260E.35, subdivision 6, paragraph (c) all investigative data maintained in this report will be kept by the Department of Human Services for at least ten years after the date of the final entry in the report. Action Taken by Facility: The facility conducted an Internal Review and found their policies and procedures were adequate, but not followed by the SP. The facility held a staff meeting the evening of September 26, 2022, to retrain staff on transitioning children to and from the playground. The SP created a sign to hang on his/her classroom door with a reminder to grab his/her classroom counter before heading outside. Action Taken by Department of Human Services, Office of Inspector General: The SP was not disqualified from providing direct care services as a result of the maltreatment determination in this report. However, the SP was notified by the Office of Inspector General that any further substantiated act of maltreatment, whether or not the act meets the criteria for “serious,” will automatically meet the criteria for “recurring” and will result in the disqualification of the SP. The determination that the SP was responsible for maltreatment is subject to appeal. On November 18, 2022, the facility was issued a Correction Order for the violations outlined in this report. Certification: The information collection procedures followed in this investigation were pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 260E.30, subdivision 6, paragraph (c). All individuals that are subjects of data in this investigation have the right to obtain private data on themselves which was collected, created, or maintained by the Department of Human Services.
|
