|
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: 1050754-CCC (Child Care Center) -Closed June 16, 2023 Investigator(s): Alice Percy 651-431-6569 Suspected Maltreatment Reported: It was reported that an alleged victim (AV) was left unsupervised in a classroom and the staff persons (SP1 and SP2) were unaware that the AV was missing. Date of Incident(s): April 25, 2023 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 May 16, 2023; from documentation at the facility; and through four interviews conducted with a facility administrative staff person (P1), a staff person (P2), SP1, and SP2. Attempts were made by telephone and letter to contact the AV’s family member. While the FM initially left a voice message for this investigator, s/he did not respond to a subsequent telephone call. The AV was 33 months old and enrolled in the preschool classroom at the time of the incident. The AV no longer attended the facility. The facility was a large single-story building with a large parking lot in the front of the building. The main entrance to the facility opened into a large reception area that contained a desk where the administrative staff persons sat. A hall went from the main entrance to the back of the building, where a second set of doors opened onto the facility’s playground. A second hall went from the reception area to the right. A series of doors provided access to classrooms on each side of the hall. The door to the AV’s classroom was immediately across the hall from another preschool classroom, which was unoccupied at the time of the incident. Doors to the restrooms also opened onto the hallway. The windows in the AV’s classroom looked out onto the parking lot at the front of the facility. SP1, SP2, P1, and P2, and the facility’s documentation provided the following information: · On April 25, 2023, SP1 and SP2 worked in the AV’s classroom. At approximately 5 p.m., SP1 and SP2 had 10 children in the classroom, including the AV and his/her sibling (S). They had recently entered the facility after being on the playground. SP1 stated that s/he counted the children when they entered the classroom after bringing the children inside from the playground and SP2 stated that s/he also counted the children when they entered the classroom and the AV was present. SP2 also stated that s/he recalled the AV playing with the trains, which were located near the door to the classroom. SP1 mopped the tile floor while the children played with toys on the tables and floor. SP2 went to the back area of the classroom to assist a child who was climbing on the stacked cots. SP1 stated that the classroom door was open because the children’s family members were arriving at the facility to pick up the children. SP2 believed the door was closed. · SP1 stated that s/he heard the AV say that the FM was there to pick up the AV and the S. SP2 did not hear the AV say his/her family member was there. Minutes later, the FM entered the classroom, but the AV was not there. The FM and SP1 left the classroom to look for the AV and found the AV in the empty classroom across the hall from the AV’s classroom. The FM did not talk to SP1 and SP2 about the incident, but talked to P1. The FM told P1 that s/he did not see the AV in the hallway as s/he walked from the facility’s entrance to the AV’s classroom. The FM also told P1 that the AV’s clothing was wet when they found him/her in the empty classroom. The AV was not upset or crying when s/he was found. SP1 stated that the AV was unsupervised for “not even a minute.” SP2 believed the AV was unsupervised for “less than five minutes.” The AV did not sustain any injury while s/he was unsupervised. · SP1 stated that shortly before the FM arrived at the facility to pick up the AV, SP1, SP2, and the children were on the facility’s playground. Prior to bringing the children back to their classroom, the staff persons allowed the children to drink from the drinking fountain. SP1 stated that when the AV took a drink from the fountain, water ran down the front of the AV’s clothing. · SP2 stated that s/he and SP1 continued to count each time a child was picked up by their family members. According to the facility’s Risk Reduction Plan, the children were to be supervised at all times and the staff-to-child ratios were to be maintained at all times. The staff persons were not to allow the children to transition to one area of the facility to another without the supervision of a staff person or family member. Facility documentation showed that SP1, SP2, P1, and P2 each received training on the Reporting of Maltreatment of Minors Act and on the facility’s policies prior to the incident. Relevant Rules and Statutes: Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.02, subdivision 18 and Minnesota Rules, part 9503.0045, subpart 1, item A, state that “supervision” means a program staff person is within sight and hearing of a child at all times so that the program staff person can intervene to protect the health and safety of the child; and that children are required to be supervised at all times.
Conclusion: On April 25, 2023, SP1 and SP2 worked in the AV’s classroom. After playing outside on the playground, SP1 and SP2 brought the children into the classroom and counted them and the AV was present at that time. SP1 stated that at approximately 5 p.m., s/he heard the AV say that the FM was there to pick up the AV and the S. SP2 did not hear the AV say his/her family member was there. Minutes later, the FM entered the classroom but the AV was not there. The FM and SP1 found the AV in the empty classroom across the hall from the AV’s classroom unsupervised which was a violation of Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.02, subdivision 18, and Minnesota Rules, part 9503.0045, subpart1, item A. SP1 believed the AV was unsupervised for less than one minute and SP2 believed the AV was unsupervised for less than five minutes. The AV did not sustain any injury while s/he was unsupervised. Minnesota Statutes 260E.30, subdivision 3, states that rather than making a determination of substantiated maltreatment by the individual, the commissioner of human services shall determine that a nonmaltreatment mistake was made by the individual. A nonmaltreatment mistake occurs when: (1) at the time of the incident, the individual was performing duties identified in the center’s child care program plan required under Minnesota Rules, part 9503.0045; (2) the individual has not been determined responsible for a similar incident that resulted in a finding of maltreatment for at least seven years; (3) the individual has not been determined to have committed a similar nonmaltreatment mistake under this paragraph for at least four years; (4) any injury to a child resulting from the incident, if treated, is treated only with remedies that are available over the counter, whether ordered by a medical professional or not; and (5) except for the period when the incident occurred, the facility and the individual providing services were both in compliance with all licensing requirements relevant to the incident. Although the AV was in the classroom across the hall unsupervised by SP1 and SP2, SP1’s and SP2’s actions or conduct were determined to be a nonmaltreatment mistake for the following reasons: · At the time of the incident, SP1 and SP2 were performing job-related duties as required by the child care program plan including supervising the other children, interacting with family members picking up the children, and working around the classroom; · SP1 and SP2 had not been determined responsible for any incident that resulted in a finding of maltreatment; · SP1 and SP2 had not been determined to have committed a nonmaltreatment mistake under this paragraph; · The AV did not sustain an injury; and · Except for the period when the incident occurred, the facility, SP1 and SP2 were all in compliance with all licensing requirements relevant to the incident. Although the facility failed to report the incident, SP1 and SP2 would not be responsible for maltreatment solely for the facility’s failure to report. The nonmaltreatment mistake to the AV by SP1 and SP2 was not maltreatment. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 260E.35, subdivision 6, paragraph (b), the investigative data in this report will be maintained by the Department of Human Services for a period of five years. Action Taken by Facility: The facility completed an internal review and determined that the facility’s policies were adequate, but were not followed by the staff persons. The staff persons received additional training on active supervision and on name-to-face counting of children. Action Taken by Department of Human Services, Office of Inspector General: SP1 and SP2 were not determined as perpetrators of maltreatment of the AV because the Department of Human Services found that the incident for which SP1 and SP2 were responsible met the criteria to be determined a nonmaltreatment mistake. SP1 and SP2 were notified by the Office of Inspector General that any future incident of possible neglect of an alleged victim for which SP1 or SP2 is responsible might not be considered a nonmaltreatment mistake. On July 19, 2023, the facility was issued a Correction Order for the violation outlined in this report and for failing to report maltreatment as required. 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.
|
