|
May 2, 2024 Anthony Riccardi, Authorized Agent Red Balloon Childcare 12325 Highway 55 Plymouth, MN 55441 License Number: 1111725 (Child Care Center) Program Location: 12601 Birch Avenue, Becker, MN 55308-8809
Dear Anthony Riccardi: On April 9, 2024, the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS), Division of Licensing, received your request for reconsideration of citations 1, 2, 11, 12 and 14 in the Correction Order (Attachment A) issued to you by the Department of Human Services on April 4, 2024. You did not request reconsideration of the remaining citations, and those citations are therefore final and not within the scope of this review. SUMMARY OF CITATION AND RECONSIDERATION DETERMINATION:
Citation 1: Violation: Staff distribution requirements were not maintained. Specifically, a teacher or assistant teacher did not directly supervise an aide. The program submitted a variance request for SP1 to be considered a teacher while gaining the required experience hours. The variance had not yet been approved, and SP1 was considered an aide. On the day of the site visit, SP1 was working alone with nine children in the Preschool 3 classroom. Request for Reconsideration. You indicate in your reconsideration request that SP1 was hired on March 18, 2024, and completed orientation training on March 22, 2024. You indicate SP1 qualified as a lead teacher and that a variance for experience hours was submitted on March 19, 2024. You indicate the variance was approved on the day of the licensing visit while the licensor was on site but that it could “have easily” been approved prior to the visit. Applicable Law. Under Minnesota Rules, part 9503.0034, subpart 1, and “aide” is a staff person who carries out child care program activities under the supervision of a teacher or assistant teacher. Minnesota Rules, part 9503.0040, subpart 2, item D, requires the first staff person needed to meet the required staff-to-child ratio must be a teacher. Reconsideration Determination. Records show the variance request was submitted on March 19, 2024, and the licensor requested additional educational documentation from you early on March 27, 2024. The variance had not yet been approved when the licensor later observed the staff person supervising nine children in the classroom. The variance was approved during the visit after the required documentation was obtained. However, because SP1 was considered an aide at the time s/he was observed supervising the nine children, there is sufficient evidence to support the citation and it is affirmed. Citation 2: Violation: The license holder did not comply with all terms of the Order of Conditional License. Specifically, monthly staffing patterns were not completed at the beginning of the month, as required by term three. Request for Reconsideration. You indicate in your reconsideration request that staffing patterns were updated and obtained on a monthly basis. You also indicate staffing patterns changed as needed to meet the new staffing in the building, but the staffing patterns were maintained on a monthly basis. Applicable Law. Under Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.06, subdivision 1, paragraph (a), clause (4), a conditional order must state the length and terms of the conditional license, and the reasons for making the license conditional. Subdivision 3 allows reconsideration of correction orders. Reconsideration Determination. Information obtained from the licensor indicates staffing patterns for February and March were dated February 21, 2024, and March 22, 2024. The Order of Conditional License requires in term three that monthly staffing patterns be completed at the beginning of each month and made immediately available to the Commissioner upon request. Because the program completed the February staffing patterns shortly after a phone call on February 15, 2024, with the licensor to discuss the conditional license, no citation was issued for the February violation. However, because staffing patterns for March were not completed at the beginning of the month as required, there is sufficient evidence to support the citation, and it is affirmed. Citation 11: Violation: The program allowed an infant under six months of age who independently rolled onto his/her stomach after being placed to sleep in his/her back to remain sleeping on his/her stomach and did not have a signed statement from the parent indicating that the infant regularly rolls over at home. Specifically, it was determined through conversations with a staff person that if a child under six months rolled onto their stomach while sleeping that the staff person would allow them to remain on their stomach even if the program did not have a signed statement from the parent indicating that the infant regularly rolls over at home. Request for Reconsideration. You indicate in your reconsideration request that there were no children under the age of 6 months in the program’s care at the time of the licensing visit. You also indicate the staff person involved in the conversation responded under the assumption that the parent had signed a rollover consent form. Applicable Law. Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.1435, paragraph (a) requires a license holder to place an infant on the infant’s back when they are being placed to sleep. An infant who independently rolls onto its stomach after being placed to sleep on its back may be allowed to remain sleeping on its stomach if the infant is at least six months of age or the license holder has a signed statement from the parent indicating the infant regularly rolls over at home. Reconsideration Determination. Although you indicate there were no infants under the age of six months in care at the time of the licensing visit, a staff person indicated during a conversation with the licensor that s/he would allow an infant under the age of six months who rolled on their stomach while sleeping to remain on their stomach in violation of the applicable statute. The staff person did not indicate that practice would occur only if there was a signed statement from a parent. The licensor indicated during the exit interview that the staff person was told during the conversation it was okay to allow the infant to remain on their stomach if there was a parent permission form but that otherwise the infant would need to be rolled back onto their back. There is therefore sufficient evidence to support the citation, and it is affirmed. Citation 12: Violation: The program did not comply with the requirements for reducing the risk of sudden unexpected infant death. The program did not place each infant to sleep in a crib directly on a firm mattress with a fitted crib sheet that fits tightly on the mattress and overlaps the mattress so it cannot be dislodged by pulling on the corner with reasonable effort. Specifically, there were hazardous wrinkles on a crib sheet in one crib in the infant classroom. Request for Reconsideration. You indicate in your reconsideration request that the crib sheet described in the violation was being used by a child who had just woken up. You indicate the wrinkles were from the child’s hand holding the crib sheet as a staff member picked the child up from the crib. You also indicate the sheet was immediately fixed after the child was removed from the crib. Applicable Law. Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.1435, paragraph (b) requires that the license holder place an infant directly on a firm mattress with a fitted sheet that is appropriate to mattress size, that fits tightly on the mattress, and overlaps the underside of the mattress so that it cannot be dislodged by pulling on the corner of the sheet with reasonable effort. Reconsideration Determination. During the licensing visit, the licensor observed the crib sheet had multiple wrinkles and a photograph of the sheet shows multiple, deep wrinkles throughout the sheet which could have posed a breathing hazard to an infant. The wrinkles indicate the sheet did not fit tightly to the mattress so that it could not be dislodged by pulling on the corner with reasonable effort. As such, there is sufficient evidence to support the citation, and it is affirmed. Citation 14: Violation: The program did not have documentation on site to show that 1 of 3 (SP1) staff persons met the experience requirements of the teacher job classification for which the staff person was employed. Specifically, the program submitted a variance for SP1 to be considered a teacher while gaining the required experience hours, but the variance had not yet been approved. SP1 was working in the capacity of teacher in the Preschool 3 classroom on the day of the site visit. Request for Reconsideration. You indicate in your reconsideration request that SP1 was hired on March 18, 2024, and completed orientation training on March 22, 2024. You indicate SP1 qualified as a lead teacher and that a variance for experience hours was submitted on March 19, 2024. You indicate the variance was approved on the day of the licensing visit while the licensor was on site but that it could “have easily” been approved prior to the visit. Applicable Law. Minnesota Rules, part 9503.0032, subpart 2 sets out the requirements for teacher education and experience requirements. Under Minnesota Rules, part 9503.0120, item B, the license holder must ensure that a personnel record for each staff person is maintained at the center. The record for each staff person must contain the staff person’s documentation indicating that the staff person meets the requirements of the staff person’s job description and specified education and experience requirements. Reconsideration Determination. Records show the licensor indicates that the variance request was submitted on March 19, 2024, and the licensor requested additional educational documentation from you early on March 27, 2024. The variance had not yet been approved when the licensor later observed the staff person supervising nine children in the classroom. The variance was approved during the visit after the required documentation was obtained. However, because SP1 was considered an aide at the time s/he was observed but was working in the capacity of a teacher, there is sufficient evidence to support the citation and it is affirmed. Disposition: The Commissioner has reviewed the request for reconsideration and all the information submitted in response to the correction order. The Commissioner finds there is sufficient evidence to support the citations, and they are affirmed. This is a final agency decision. 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,
Frances Simon Standing, Attorney Legal Counsel’s Office Office of Inspector General
|
