|
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: 1106266-CCC (Child Care Center) Investigator(s): Anna Parkin 651-431-6225 Suspected Maltreatment Reported: It was reported that an alleged victim (AV) was left alone in a stairwell for approximately four to five minutes. Date of Incident(s): July 12, 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 July 25, 2023; from documentation at the facility; and through six interviews conducted with two supervisory staff persons (P1 and P2), three facility staff persons (P3, SP1, and SP2), and the AV’s family member (FM). According to the AV’s enrollment information, the AV was 30 months old and enrolled in the preschool A room at the time of the incident. The facility was two floors and had a preschool A room located on the upper floor of the facility. The lower floor included a laundry room and the door to the playground. The facility had a stairwell and an elevator connecting the two floors. The stairwell had doors on each floor and had a landing halfway between the floors. According to the attendance form, SP1 and SP2 had nine children including the AV in the preschool A room at the time of the incident. SP1 provided information that there was a tenth child from the preschool B room with them at the time of the incident. P3 stated on July 12, 2023, s/he was in the laundry room and went to the stairs to walk upstairs, when s/he saw the AV standing at the bottom of the stairs. The AV asked P3 to help with his/her shoe. While P3 helped the AV, P3 asked where SP1 was and the AV responded that s/he was outside. P3 then brought the AV outside to the playground where SP1 was with the other children. P3 asked SP1 if the AV was supposed to be outside and SP1 stated, “Yes.” P3 then left the AV with SP1. Approximately four or five minutes prior, when P3 previously walked downstairs to the laundry room, the stairwell was empty. SP1 provided the following information: · On July 12, 2023, at approximately 3:15 p.m., SP1 and SP2 decided to go outside with the preschool A children and one child from the preschool B room. Prior to leaving the preschool A room, SP1 and SP2 each counted the children including the AV. SP1 was at the front of the line and SP2 was at the back on the line. · SP1 and SP2 also had the children including the AV line up while in the stairwell and SP1 counted the children including the AV. SP1 saw the AV begin to walk down the remaining stairs and once SP1 got to the bottom of the stairwell, SP1 stood at the door to outside. SP1 counted heads of children but did not recall if the AV went outside or not. SP2 then told SP1 s/he was going to go back to the preschool A room to get his/her bag. SP1 then had the children sit down and gave out their snacks. · Approximately four to five minutes after SP1 went outside with the children, P3 came outside with the AV. P3 told SP1 that s/he found the AV inside the stairwell. The AV did not have any injuries. At some point, SP2 came out to the playground and SP1 told SP2 that the AV had been alone in the stairwell. SP2 provided the following information: · SP2 provided consistent information to SP1 about what took place inside the preschool A room prior to leaving for outside. SP2 stated that prior to going into the stairwell, s/he did a name to face of the children including the AV and documented it on the facility app. SP1 and SP2 then brought the children including the AV down the stairwell. Once they got to the door outside, SP1 told SP2 that s/he “got everyone” and SP2 assumed that SP1 completed the name to face since SP1 had his/her cell phone in his/her hand. SP2 was unsure if SP1 counted the children or entered them in the app in the stairwell. SP2 saw the AV and another child next to SP1 at the door. SP2 told SP1 s/he needed to go back to the preschool A room to take medication and SP1 headed outside with the children. · SP2 walked back upstairs, used the bathroom, took his/her medication, and got his/her bag. SP2 began walking down the stairwell to the playground when s/he came across P3 who said s/he just brought the AV outside to SP because the AV was left in the stairwell. P2 stated shortly after 3 p.m., SP1 came to P2 and said that the AV had been left alone in the stairwell. SP1 had already messaged the FM and notified him/her of the incident. The next day, P2 told P1 about the incident. P1 stated it was “not typical” for staff persons to leave in the middle of a transition. According to the Risk Reduction Plan: · Children were supervised “at all times.” Staff persons were required to know the number of children and the location of each child “at all times.” When two staff persons were present, one staff person led the group and one staff person followed. · Staff persons conducted a name to face attendance before and after every room transition to account for all children. If a child was missing, staff persons notified a supervisory staff person “immediately.”
Facility documentation showed that staff persons, including SP1 and SP2, received training on the facility’s Risk Reduction Plan and Maltreatment of Minor’s Act 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, stated that a child must have supervision at all times and that supervision was defined as occurring when a program staff person was 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. Minnesota Rules part 9503.0155, subpart 15, stated that kitchen, stairs and other hazardous areas must be inaccessible to children except during periods of supervised use. Conclusion: Information was consistent that on July 12, 2023, the AV was in the stairwell without the knowledge or supervision of a staff person for approximately four to five minutes as the AV’s class transitioned from the preschool A room to the playground, which was a violation of Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.02, subdivision 18, and Minnesota Rules, part 9503.0045, subpart 1, item A; and Minnesota Rules part 9503.0155, subpart 15. Minnesota Statutes, section 260E. 30, subdivision 3 states that rather than making a determination of substantiated maltreatment by an 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; (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. At the time of the incident, SP1 and SP2 were still in the process of transitioning from the preschool A room to the playground. SP1’s and SP2’s actions or conduct was determined to be a nonmaltreatment mistake for the following reasons: (1) At the time of the incident, SP1 and SP2 were performing job related duties, as required by the facility’s policies, by supervising children as they transitioned. SP1 counted the children as they went outside and after SP1 got to the playground, SP1 was interacting with the children and passing out snacks. (2) SP1 and SP2 had not been determined responsible for any previous incident that resulted in a finding of maltreatment. (3) SP1 and SP2 had not been determined to have committed a nonmaltreatment mistake under this paragraph. (4) The AV was uninjured and did not require medical care after the incident; and (5) Except for the period when the incident occurred, the facility and SP1 and SP2 were each in compliance with all licensing requirements relevant to the incident. 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 policies and procedures were adequate but not followed. All staff persons received additional reminders about the importance of name to face attendance. Action Taken by Department of Human Services, Office of Inspector General: SP1 and SP2 were not determined as a perpetrator of maltreatment of the AV because the Department of Human Services found that the incident for which each was 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 either is responsible might not be considered a nonmaltreatment mistake. On September 20, 2023, 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.
|
