|
June 11, 2024 Christi Anderson, Authorized Agent Magical Minds Childcare & Learning Center 6740 Stillwater Blvd. N. Stillwater, MN 55082 License Number: 1078046 (Child Care Center) Program Location: 6740 Stillwater Blvd. N, Stillwater, MN 55082-5440
Dear Christi Anderson: On May 2, 2024, the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS), Division of Licensing, received your request for reconsideration of the citations in the Correction Order (Attachment A) issued to you by the Department of Human Services on February 12, 2024. SUMMARY OF CITATIONS AND RECONSIDERATION DETERMINATION:
Citation 1: Violation: The required staff-to-child ratios were not maintained. Based on observation and conversations with staff persons, the DHS licensor determined that one toddler and four infants were present in the Honeybee infant classroom with one staff person for approximately 15 minutes. Request for Reconsideration. You indicate in your request for reconsideration that you were not aware of the violations until more than five months after the visit when you saw the correction order posted. You are requesting that all violations be dismissed because you were not timely notified of the violations. Applicable Law. Minnesota Rules, part 9503.0040, subpart 1 provides minimally acceptable staff-to-child ratios and maximum group sizes within each age category. Reconsideration Determination. During the exit interview on November 8, 2023, the DHS licensor indicated the Honeybee infant classroom was not within the required ratio, and the violation was acknowledged. After you became aware of the citation, you had the opportunity to request reconsideration and provide any supporting documentation in support of your request. Although you indicate you disagree with the citation because you did not receive timely notification, you did not provide any substantive information related to the violation or indicate why the violation was incorrect. As such, there is sufficient evidence to support the citation, and it is affirmed. Citation 2: Violation: During the program’s regular hours of operation, infants were mixed with other age categories. Based on observation and conversations with staff persons, the DHS licensor determined that one toddler and four infants were mixed in the Honeybee infant classroom for approximately 15 minutes during the program’s regular hours of operation. Request for Reconsideration. You indicate in your request for reconsideration that you were not aware of the violations until more than five months after the visit when you saw the correction order posted. You are requesting that all violations be dismissed because you were not timely notified of the violations. Applicable Law. Minnesota Rules, part 9503.0040, subpart 3, item B(1), provides that during the center’s regular hours of operation, children in different age categories may be mixed with a group if infants are not grouped with children of other age categories. Reconsideration Determination. During the exit interview on November 8, 2023, the DHS licensor indicated the program was in violation of the applicable rule because the Honeybee infant classroom contained infants and a toddler, and the violation was acknowledged. After you became aware of the citation, you had the opportunity to request reconsideration and provide any supporting documentation in support of your request. Although you indicate you disagree with the citation because you did not receive timely notification, you did not provide any substantive information related to the violation or indicate why the violation was incorrect. As such, there is sufficient evidence to support the citation, and it is affirmed. Citation 3: Violation: The program’s policy on preventing and responding to allergies did not include procedures that state at least once each calendar year or following any changes made to allergy-related information in the child’s record, the license holder must update the child’s individual childcare program plan and inform each staff person who is responsible for carrying out the individual child care program plan of the change. The license holder must keep on site documentation that a staff person was informed of a change. Request for Reconsideration. You indicate in your request for reconsideration that you were not aware of the violations until more than five months after the visit when you saw the correction order posted. You are requesting that all violations be dismissed because you were not timely notified of the violations. Applicable Law. Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.41, subdivision 1, requires that if a child has a known allergy, the license holder must develop an individual child care program plan. Additionally, at least once each calendar year or following any changes made to allergy-related information in the child’s record, the license holder must update the child’s individual child care program plan and inform each staff person who is responsible for carrying out the individual child care program plan of the change. The license holder must keep on site documentation that a staff person was informed of a change. Reconsideration Determination. During the exit interview on November 8, 2023, the DHS licensor indicated required information was missing from the program’s policy, and the violation was acknowledged. After you became aware of the citation, you had the opportunity to request reconsideration and provide any supporting documentation in support of your request. Although you indicate you disagree with the citation because you did not receive timely notification, you did not provide any substantive information related to the violation or indicate why the violation was incorrect. As such, there is sufficient evidence to support the citation, and it is affirmed. Citation 4: Violation: The program did not provide the children access to interest areas on a daily basis. Children were not provided daily access to a sensory stimulation activities interest area. Request for Reconsideration. You indicate in your request for reconsideration that you were not aware of the violations until more than five months after the visit when you saw the correction order posted. You are requesting that all violations be dismissed because you were not timely notified of the violations. Applicable Law. Under Minnesota Rules, part 9503.0045, subpart 2, a child care program that operates for more than three hours a day must provide daily access to interest areas of the center that are supplied with the equipment and materials needed to care out specified activities, including sensory stimulation activities. Reconsideration Determination. During the exit interview on November 8, 2023, the DHS licensor indicated the program was in violation of the applicable rule because staff indicated that sensory stimulation activities were provided once a month rather than daily, and the violation was acknowledged. After you became aware of the citation, you had the opportunity to request reconsideration and provide any supporting documentation in support of your request. Although you indicate you disagree with the citation because you did not receive timely notification, you did not provide any substantive information related to the violation or indicate why the violation was incorrect. As such, there is sufficient evidence to support the citation, and it is affirmed. Citation 5: Violation: The program violated the behavior guidance policy prohibiting certain disciplinary actions. Based on observation and conversations with staff persons, the DHS licensor determined that one toddler was present in the Honeybee infant classroom as a means of separation for behavior guidance. Request for Reconsideration. You indicate in your request for reconsideration that you were not aware of the violations until more than five months after the visit when you saw the correction order posted. You are requesting that all violations be dismissed because you were not timely notified of the violations. Applicable Law. Under Minnesota Rules, part 9503.0055, subpart 3, the license holder must have and enforce a policy that prohibits the separation of a child from the group, except as otherwise provided, by or at the direction of a staff person. Reconsideration Determination. During the exit interview on November 8, 2023, the DHS licensor indicated the program was in violation of the applicable rule because a toddler was separated from the group due to “screaming” and “being too loud,” and the violation was acknowledged. After you became aware of the citation, you had the opportunity to request reconsideration and provide any supporting documentation in support of your request. Although you indicate you disagree with the citation because you did not receive timely notification, you did not provide any substantive information related to the violation or indicate why the violation was incorrect. As such, there is sufficient evidence to support the citation, and it is affirmed. Citation 6: Violation: The program did not comply with the requirements for naps and rest. Cots were not placed with clear aisles and unimpeded access for both adults and children on at least one side. Request for Reconsideration. You indicate in your request for reconsideration that you were not aware of the violations until more than five months after the visit when you saw the correction order posted. You are requesting that all violations be dismissed because you were not timely notified of the violations. Applicable Law. Under Minnesota Rules, part 9503.0050, subpart 4, naps and rest must be provided in a quiet are that is physically separated from children who are engaged in activity that will disrupt a napping or resting child. Cribs, cots, beds and mats must be placed so there are clear aisles and unimpeded access for both adults and children on at least one side of each piece of napping and resting equipment. Cribs, cots, beds, and mats must be placed directly on the floor and must not be stacked when in use. Reconsideration Determination. During the exit interview on November 8, 2023, the DHS licensor indicated the program was in violation of the applicable rule because a cot did not have a clear aisle with unimpeded access, and the violation was acknowledged. After you became aware of the citation, you had the opportunity to request reconsideration and provide any supporting documentation in support of your request. Although you indicate you disagree with the citation because you did not receive timely notification, you did not provide any substantive information related to the violation or indicate why the violation was incorrect. As such, there is sufficient evidence to support the citation, and it is affirmed. Citation 7: Violation: The center did not submit a background study request for 1 of 9 (SP9) individuals (director, staff persons, substitutes, or unsupervised volunteers) with an expired study. Request for Reconsideration. You indicate in your request for reconsideration that while a background study was expired, the program immediately ran the background study and it came back approved within a few hours. Applicable Law. Under Minnesota Statutes, section 245C.04, subdivision 1, paragraph (b), the commissioner shall conduct a background study of an individual required to be studied, including a child care background study subject, in a licensed child care center on a schedule determined by the commissioner. Reconsideration Determination. During the exit interview on November 8, 2023, the DHS licensor indicated that a background study was needed for a staff person, and the violation was acknowledged. You acknowledged in your reconsideration request that a required background study was expired. As such, 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
|
