|
April 9, 2024 Ivan Wijetunge, Authorized Agent Edgcumbe Montessori & Daycare 2149 Edgcumbe Road Saint Paul, MN 55116 License Number: 1077401 (Child Care Ctr) Program Location: 2149 Edgcumbe Road, Saint Paul, MN 55116 Dear Ivan Wijetunge: The Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS), Division of Licensing, received your request for reconsideration of Citations 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 23 from the Correction Order issued by the DHS on October 25, 2023. You did not request reconsideration of any other citations, therefore, those citations are final and not subject to review. SUMMARY OF CITATIONS AND RECONSIDERATION DETERMINATION: Citation 3. Food allergy information was not readily available to staff where food is prepared and served. Your Response. You state that Citations 3, 4, and 22 are duplicative, and should be reconsidered. Applicable Law. Under Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.41, subdivision 1(d), a child’s allergy information must be available at all times, including on site, on field trips, or during transportation. A child’s food allergy information must be readily available to a staff person in the area where food is prepared and served to the child. Reconsideration Determination. A child at the center (C5) had known allergies. The center was aware of C5’s allergies, as evidenced by one of the staff persons stating this fact to the licensor and showing him/her an Epi-Pen kept in the classroom for C5’s use. There was no allergy action plan or an individual child care program plan (“ICCPP”) with the appropriate allergy information available in the toddler room, where C5 was served with food. You do not dispute this fact, only asserting that Citations 3, 4, and 22 are duplicative. As explained further for Citation 22 below, while Citations 3, 4, and 22 may all relate to allergy information, they each address separate and distinct requirements with which the center failed to comply. Citation 3 is affirmed. Citation 4. The program’s policy on preventing and responding to allergies did not include procedures that state a child’s allergy information must be available at all times including on site, when on field trips, or during transportation. A child’s food allergy information must be readily available to a staff person in the area where food is prepared and served to the child. Your Response. You state that Citations 3, 4, and 22 are duplicative, and should be reconsidered. Applicable Law. Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.41, subdivision 1, sets forth a licensed child care center’s responsibilities in caring for a child with known allergies. Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.04, subdivision 14(a), requires the license holder to develop program policies and procedures necessary to maintain compliance with licensing requirements under Minnesota Statutes and Rules. Reconsideration Determination. Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.41, subdivision 1, sets forth the documentation and day-to-day responsibilities of a licensed child care center when caring for a child with known allergies. Under section 245A.04, subdivision 14(a), the center also has a separate, administrative duty to develop policies and procedures necessary to maintain compliance with the various licensing requirements under law, including those related to allergy prevention and response. Here, the center’s “Policies and Procedures for Allergy Prevention and Response,” reviewed by the licensor, did not sufficiently capture the center’s full responsibilities under section 245A.41, subdivision 1. The “Policies” state that “allergy logs will be posted in each classroom along with a copy of ICCPP,” but the full procedure required under the statute is for the center to make a child’s allergy information available not only in the classrooms on site, but on field trips, during transportation, and wherever food is prepared and served to the child. Additionally, as explained further for Citation 22 below, while Citations 3, 4, and 22 may all relate to allergy information, they each address separate and distinct requirements with which the center failed to comply. Citation 4 is affirmed. Citation 7. The licensor observed that hazardous objects were accessible to children. Specifically, an electrical pencil sharpener was accessible to the children in the preschool classroom. Your Response. You state that the violation has been corrected, and so the citation should be reconsidered. Applicable Law. Under Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.66, subdivision 2(e), a licensed child care center must develop and comply with a plan that prohibits the accessibility of hazardous items to children. Minnesota Rule 9503.0140, subpart 17, requires hazardous objects, including sharp objects, to be stored out of reach of children. Reconsideration Determination. The licensor issued this citation based on his/her observations during the site visit. You do not dispute that the electrical pencil sharpener was accessible to the children, or whether the sharpener should be considered as a hazardous object. License holders in receipt of a correction order may request reconsideration of the parts of the order that they believe were made in error. See Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.06, subdivision 2(a). That you have since corrected the violation does not provide sufficient basis to amend or rescind the original citation. Citation 7 is affirmed. Citation 8. Areas used by the children were not in good repair. Specifically, the blue tumble mat in the infant room was ripped in several spots exposing the foam padding inside. Your Response. You state that the violation has been corrected, and so the citation should be reconsidered. Applicable Law. Minnesota Rule 9503.0140, subpart 20, specifies that rugs in areas used by children must have a nonskid backing or be firmly fastened to the floor, and be free from tears, curled or frayed edges, and hazardous wrinkles. Reconsideration Determination. The licensor issued this citation based on his/her observations during the site visit. You do not disagree with the description of the mat’s condition at the time, or that the mat was in an area used by the children. License holders in receipt of a correction order may request reconsideration of the parts of the order that they believe were made in error. See Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.06, subdivision 2(a). That you have since corrected the violation does not provide sufficient basis to amend or rescind the original citation. Citation 8 is affirmed. Citation 9. Areas used by the children were not in good repair. A rug in the preschool classroom was curled and frayed on three of the four sides, causing a tripping hazard. Your Response. You state that the violation has been corrected, and so the citation should be reconsidered. Applicable Law. Minnesota Rule 9503.0140, subpart 20, specifies that rugs in areas used by children must have a nonskid backing or be firmly fastened to the floor, and be free from tears, curled or frayed edges, and hazardous wrinkles. Reconsideration Determination. The licensor issued this citation based on his/her observations during the site visit. You do not disagree with the description of the rug’s condition at the time, or that the rug was in an area used by the children. License holders in receipt of a correction order may request reconsideration of the parts of the order that they believe were made in error. See Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.06, subdivision 2(a). That you have since corrected the violation does not provide sufficient basis to amend or rescind the original citation. Citation 9 is affirmed. Citation 10. Electrical outlets were not tamper-proof or shielded. A power strip with six exposed outlets were within reach of the children in the preschool classroom. Your Response. You state that the violation has been corrected, and so the citation should be reconsidered. Applicable Law. Under Minnesota Rule 9503.0155, subpart 11, except in a center that only serves school-aged children, electrical outlets must be tamper-proof or shielded when not in use. Reconsideration Determination. The licensor issued this citation based on his/her observations during the site visit. You do not dispute there was an unshielded power strip at the center, within reach of the children in the preschool room. License holders in receipt of a correction order may request reconsideration of the parts of the order that they believe were made in error. See Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.06, subdivision 2(a). That you have since corrected the violation does not provide sufficient basis to amend or rescind the original citation. Citation 10 is affirmed. Citation 11. All crib brand names and model numbers were not checked annually against the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission website listing of unsafe cribs. Crib brand names and model numbers were not checked in 2022. Your Response. You state that the citation should be reconsidered, but did not provide a reason. Applicable Law. Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.146, subdivision 3, requires the license holder to check all cribs’ brand names and model numbers against the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission website listing of unsafe cribs, annually from the date printed on the license. The license holder must maintain written documentation of the review on site. Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.02, subdivision 2b, defines “annual” or “annually” as “prior to or within the same month of the subsequent calendar year.” Reconsideration Determination. You have not provided any reason for why this citation should be amended or rescinded. License Holders must maintain written documentation of the annual crib reviews on site. No documentation of the annual crib review was made available to the licensor when requested during the site visit. The Owner/Authorized Agent stated during the visit that the documentation for the center’s annual crib review was not available on site. Citation 11 is affirmed. Citation 12. The required crib safety inspections were not completed on a monthly basis. Crib safety inspections were not completed in January–December 2022. Your Response. You state that the citation should be reconsidered, but did not provide a reason. Applicable Law. Under Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.146, subdivision 4, a license holder must perform, on a monthly basis, safety inspections of every crib used by or is accessible to any child in care. The license holder must document the inspections and maintain the documentation on site. Reconsideration Determination. You have not provided any reason for why this citation should be amended or rescinded. License holders must maintain documentation of monthly crib safety inspections on site. No documentation of monthly crib safety inspections was made available to the licensor when requested during the site visit. The Owner/Authorized Agent stated during the visit that the documentation for the center’s monthly crib inspection was not available on site. Citation 12 is affirmed. Citation 14. Personnel record was not maintained at the program for each staff person (SP3 and SP8). Your Response. You state that the citation should be reconsidered, but did not provide a reason. Applicable Law. Minnesota Rules 9503.0115, item B, and 9503.0120 require the license holder to maintain personnel records on site at the center, and make those records available for inspection at the request of the Commissioner. Reconsideration Determination. You have not provided any reason for why this citation should be amended or rescinded. Personnel records must be maintained on site. Personnel records for SP3 and SP8 were not available at the center during the site visit. The Owner/Authorized Agent stated during the site visit that the personnel records for SP3 and SP8 were not available on site, but were at his/her home. Citation 14 is affirmed. Citation 15. A staff person (SP8), who had their background study submitted after September 30, 2019, was working in the program before the program received a notice from the Commissioner stating that the individual was not disqualified or that the background study needed more time to be completed. As background, SP8’s Personnel Information File (“PIF”) shows his/her first date of direct contact as September 25, 2023. The Commissioner did not issue a clearance notice for SP8 until September 26, 2023. Your Response. You contend that the citation should be reconsidered, because, in actuality, SP8 did not provide direct contact services to the children until September 26, 2023, and the center simply entered the wrong first date of direct contact on his/her PIF. Applicable Law. Under Minnesota Statutes, section 245C.13, subdivision 2, the subject of a background study may not perform any activity requiring a background study, until the Commissioner has issued an appropriate notice. For licensed child care centers, prohibited activities prior to receipt of an appropriate notice include providing direct contact services to the children in the program. Reconsideration Determination. DHS relies on the license holders to maintain accurate records of personnel information, including when the staff person first provided direct contact services to the children in the program. The record supports the citation. Citation 15 is affirmed. Citation 16. Documentation was not available on site to verify that three staff persons (SP3, SP5, and SP8) received the required orientation training before starting their assigned duties. Your Response. You state that the citation should be reconsidered, but did not provide a reason. Applicable Law. Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.40, subdivision 1, requires staff persons at a licensed child care center to complete the enumerated orientation trainings before starting their assigned duties. Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.04, subdivision 14(b), requires the license holder to provide those trainings and document the provision of those trainings. Minnesota Rule 9503.0120, item C, requires the license holder to maintain on site at the center–as part of necessary personnel records—documentation showing that each staff person has completed the required orientation trainings. Reconsideration Determination. You have not provided any reason for why this citation should be amended or rescinded. Documentation of orientation training must be maintained on site. None of the cited training documentation was available on site. The Owner/Authorized Agent stated during the visit that the orientation training records for SP3, SP5, and SP8 were not available on site, but were at his/her home. Citation 16 is affirmed. Citation 17. Five staff persons (SP2, SP3, SP5, SP6, and SP7) did not complete the required in-service trainings for the previous concluded calendar year. Your Response. You state that the citation should be reconsidered, but did not provide a reason. Applicable Law. Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.40, subdivision 7, requires a license holder to ensure that the staff persons complete their in-service trainings each calendar year. Minnesota Rule 9503.0120, item E, requires the license holder to maintain on site at the center–as part of necessary personnel records—documentation showing that each staff person has completed the required in-service trainings. Reconsideration Determination. You have not provided any reason for why this citation should be amended or rescinded. In-service training records must be maintained on site. None of the cited training documentation was available on site. The Owner/Authorized Agent stated during the visit that the in-service training records for SP2, SP3, SP5, SP6, and SP7 were not available on site, but were at his/her home. Citation 17 is affirmed. Citation 18. The program did not comply with cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training requirements. Documentation was not available on site to show that three staff persons (SP3, SP5, and SP8) had satisfactorily completed the required pediatric CPR training: before having unsupervised contact with a child and within 90 days of the start of work; or within the previous two years. Your Response. You state that the citation should be reconsidered, but did not provide a reason. Applicable Law. Under Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.40, subdivision 4, unless training was completed within the previous two years, staff persons at a licensed child care center must satisfactorily complete pediatric CPR training prior to having unsupervised direct contact with a child, but not to exceed the first 90 days of employment. Minnesota Rule 9503.0120, item D, requires a license holder to maintain on site at the center—as part of necessary personnel records—documentation showing that each staff person has completed the required pediatric CPR training. Reconsideration Determination. You have not provided any reason for why this citation should be amended or rescinded. None of the cited training documentation was available on site. The Owner/Authorized Agent indicated during the visit that the pediatric CPR training records for SP3, SP5, and SP8 were not available on site, but were at his/her home. Citation 18 is affirmed. Citation 19. The program did not comply with first aid training requirements. Documentation was not available on site to show that three staff persons (SP3, SP5, and SP8) had satisfactorily completed the required pediatric first aid training: before having unsupervised contact with a child and within 90 days of the start of work; or within the previous two years. Your Response. You state that the citation should be reconsidered, but did not provide a reason. Applicable Law. Under Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.40, subdivision 3, unless training was completed within the previous two years, staff persons at a licensed child care center must satisfactorily complete pediatric first aid training prior to having unsupervised direct contact with a child, but not to exceed the first 90 days of employment. Minnesota Rule 9503.0120, item D, requires a license holder to maintain on site at the center—as part of necessary personnel records—documentation showing that each staff person has completed the required pediatric first aid training. Reconsideration Determination. You have not provided any reason for why this citation should be amended or rescinded. None of the cited training documentation was available on site. The Owner/Authorized Agent indicated during the visit that the pediatric first aid training records for SP3, SP5, and SP8 were not available on site, but were at his/her home. Citation 19 is affirmed. Citation 20. The program did not comply with child development and learning training requirements. Documentation was not available on site to show that five staff persons had completed the trainings: at least every second calendar year (SP2, SP6, and SP7); and within 90 days of employment (SP3 and SP5). Your Response. You state that the citation should be reconsidered, but did not provide a reason. Applicable Law. Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.40, subdivision 2, requires staff persons at a licensed child care center to complete child development and learning training within the first 90 days of employment. Directors and staff persons, not including substitutes, must then complete at least two hours of child development and learning training every second calendar year. Under section 245A.40, subdivision 10, all training must be documented and maintained on site in each personnel record. Reconsideration Determination. You have not provided any reason for why this citation should be amended or rescinded. The licensor reviewed child development and learning training records for SP2, SP6, and SP7, dating back to April and June 2021. The licensor did not see any more recent training records for SP2, SP6, and SP7, and none for SP3 and SP5. The Owner/Authorized Agent stated during the visit that the relevant training records were not available on site, but were at his/her home. Citation 20 is affirmed. Citation 21. A record had not been maintained at the program for each child. There was no record for three children (C2, C3, and C5). Your Response. You state that the citation should be reconsidered, but did not provide a reason. Applicable Law. Under Minnesota Rule 9503.0125, at the time of enrollment in the center, a license holder must ensure that a record is maintained on each child. The rule further specifies the information that must be included with each child’s record. Minnesota Rule 9503.0115, item C, requires the license holder to maintain the children’s records on site at the center, and to make those records available for inspection at the request of the Commissioner. Reconsideration Determination. You have not provided any reason for why this citation should be amended or rescinded. The Owner/Authorized Agent stated during the visit that the records for C2, C3, and C5 were not available on site, but were at his/her home. The records for the three children were not maintained on site as required. Citation 21 is affirmed. Citation 22. The individual child care program plan (“ICCPP”) for a child with a known allergy (C5) did not contain: a description of the allergy; specific triggers; avoidance techniques; symptom of allergic reaction; and procedures for responding to an allergic reaction, including medication, dosage, and doctor contact information. Your Response. You state that citations 3, 4, and 22 are duplicative, and should be reconsidered. Applicable Law. Under Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.41, subdivision 1(a), a center caring for a child with any known allergy must develop an ICCPP, and the ICCPP must include the above-listed information. Under Minnesota Rules 9503.0115 and 9503.0125, item L, the center must maintain a child’s ICCPP on site. Reconsideration Determination. As discussed in connection to Citation 3 above, the center was aware of C5’s allergies. Consequently, under the applicable statute and rules, the center was required to develop an ICCPP for C5 with the above-listed information, and to maintain that record on site. According to the licensor, the Owner/Authorized Agent stated during the visit that C5’s ICCPP was not available on site. The licensor, therefore, could not review for whether the ICCPP complied with the substantive requirements, or whether one was developed at all. Lastly, although they all involve the topic of allergy prevention and response, Citations 3, 4, and 22 are not duplicative to one another. Citation 4 determines whether the center complied with its administrative requirement to develop adequate policies and procedures regarding allergy prevention and response. Citations 3 and 22 both examine whether the center properly carried out its various operational responsibilities on the subject, as enumerated in section 245A.41, subdivision 1. But Citation 22 evaluates whether the center satisfied the ICCPP component of the responsibilities, while Citation 3 looks at the physical availability of the child’s allergy information where s/he is served food. Based on the above, Citation 22 is affirmed. Citation 23. The program did not comply with allergy prevention requirements. Before admitting a child with a known allergy (C5), the program did not obtain documentation from the child’s parent of medical source. Your Response. You challenge the citation, arguing that C5 did not have allergies when admitted. Applicable Law. Under Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.41, subdivision 1(a), before admitting a child for care, the license holder must obtain documentation of any known allergy from the child’s parent, legal guardian, or the child’s source of medical care. Reconsideration Determination. As discussed in connection to Citations 21 and 22, the center did not have C5’s records available on site. The licensor, therefore, could not assess whether the center satisfied its documentation requirements for C5 at the time of his/her enrollment. Citation 23 is affirmed. Disposition: The Commissioner has reviewed the relevant laws and all of the information you submitted in response to the Correction Order. Citations 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 23 are affirmed. This is a final agency decision. Previously Ordered Corrective Action: In the Correction Order issued on October 25, 2023, you were ordered to correct the violations cited, and submit documentation of such action to your licensor. A request for reconsideration does not stay any provisions or requirements of the correction order. Minnesota Statutes, 245A.06, subdivision 2(a). If you have not done so already, please immediately comply with the previously ordered corrective actions for all uncontested and affirmed violations. The Commissioner appreciates your response and encourages you to continue to work cooperatively with your licensor to ensure the safety and well-being of the children you serve. Sincerely,
So Yeon Woo-Bockman, Attorney Legal Counsel’s Office Office of Inspector General
|
