|
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: 800450-CCC (Child Care Center) Investigator(s): Anna Parkin 651-431-6225 Suspected Maltreatment Reported: It was reported that a staff person (SP) slapped an alleged victim (AV) across the face. Date of Incident(s): unknown Nature of Alleged Maltreatment Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 260E.03, subdivision 18, paragraph (a), and subdivision 23, paragraph (a): "Physical abuse" means any physical injury, mental injury, or threatened injury, inflicted by a person responsible for the child's care on a child other than by accidental means. "Threatened injury" means a statement, overt act, condition, or status that represents a substantial risk of physical or sexual abuse or mental injury. Summary of Findings: Pertinent information for this investigation was obtained remotely, including documentation from the facility, and law enforcement records and video; and through two interviews conducted with a supervisory staff person (P), and the AV’s family member (FM). This investigator spoke to the SP via telephone and the SP declined an interview. The SP was interviewed by law enforcement and that information was included below. According to the AV’s enrollment information, the AV was approximately three years old and enrolled in the preschool room at the time of the incident.
According to the law enforcement report: · On May 14, 2024, a staff person from a school notified law enforcement that there was a video circulating where a person, later identified as the SP, slapped a child, later identified as the AV, across the face. Law enforcement interviewed persons at the school and used social media and determined it was the SP at the facility in the video. · Law enforcement reached out to the facility who confirmed that the SP previously worked there and identified him/her in the video. · On August 16, 2024, law enforcement interviewed the SP, who said s/he previously worked at the facility. The SP did not remember which location s/he worked at or the exact dates of employment but said it was from fall 2022 to spring 2023. The SP denied creating a video and slapping the AV. · Law enforcement then showed the SP the video, and the SP confirmed it was him/her and stated that s/he was not being “malicious” in the video. The SP used three fingers to “slap” the AV and could not explain why s/he did it other than s/he was “young” and “didn’t think.” The SP took the video using his/her cell phone and “accidently” uploaded to a group chat which was how to video began circulating. · The SP was charged with felony malicious punishment of a child. Video footage showed a twelve second clip that included the AV smiling. A hand, later identified as the SP’s hand, slapped the AV across the face causing the AV’s head to turn to the side as s/he was slapped. The AV took a few steps back and said, “Ow.” The AV put his/her left hand to his/her left cheek where the SP’s hand hit the AV. The SP then said, “Sorry, I didn’t mean it.” The AV then responded, “That hurt me.” The AV continued to touch his/her left cheek and the SP then apologized again. There was no visible injury to the AV. The P stated s/he supervised the SP during the time of the incident. The P was not aware of the incident until law enforcement contacted him/her in June 2024. The P confirmed it was the SP and the AV in the video. The SP worked at the facility for approximately nine months and worked in the prekindergarten room with two other staff persons. The P did not recall seeing any injuries to the AV around that time and did not have concerns with the SP’s interactions with children. The FM stated on August 6, 2024, the FM received a phone call from the facility saying that law enforcement stopped by the facility to talk to the AV. The FM was not aware of the incident prior to this and spoke to law enforcement further and received information consistent to the report. The FM later asked the AV about the incident and the AV did not remember it. The FM also checked pictures in his/her cell phone from around the time the incident possibly occurred and did not see any injuries on the AV’s face in the pictures. According to the facility’s Employee Handbook, staff persons “respect[ed]” and “protected” children and only used positive child guidance techniques. Positive child guidance included: setting “clear” behavior expectations; being a “good role model;” and working in a “positive and cooperative way.” Unacceptable child guidance included: spanking, grabbing, pinching, or any physical punishment. Facility documentation showed that the SP and other staff persons interviewed in this investigation received training on the facility’s Employee Handbook and the Maltreatment of Minors Act, prior to the incident. Relevant Rules and/or Statutes: Minnesota Rules, part 9503.0055, subpart 3, item A, stated that the license holder must have and enforce a policy that prohibits the subjection of a child to corporal punishment. Corporal punishment includes, but is not limited to, rough handling, shoving, hair pulling, ear pulling, shaking, slapping, kicking, biting, pinching, hitting, and spanking.
Conclusion: A. Maltreatment: Video footage provided by law enforcement showed the SP slapped the AV across the face causing the AV’s head turning to the side as s/he was slapped. Although the SP initially denied to law enforcement that s/he slapped the AV, after seeing the video footage, the SP confirmed it was his/her in the video. The SP said s/he used three fingers to “slap” the AV and could not explain why s/he did it other than s/he was “young” and “didn’t think.” The SP’s actions were inconsistent with the standards of a professional caregiver in a facility licensed by the Department of Human Services and a violation of Minnesota Rules, part 9503.0055 subpart 3, item A. Although the P and the FM each said they did not remember seeing an injury on the AV’s face around the time of the incident; given the AV’s age and that the SP’s actions of hitting the AV across the face hard enough for his/her head to turn to the side, there was a preponderance of the evidence that the SP’s actions were not accidental and represented a substantial risk of injury to the AV. It was determined that physical abuse occurred ("Physical abuse" means any physical injury, mental injury, or threatened injury, inflicted by a person responsible for the child's care on a child other than by accidental means. "Threatened injury" means a statement, overt act, condition, or status that represents a substantial risk of physical or sexual abuse or mental injury). B. Responsibility pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 260E.30, subdivision 4, paragraph (a), clauses (1) and (2): When determining whether the facility or individual is the responsible party, or whether both the facility and the individual are responsible for determined maltreatment in a facility, the investigating agency shall consider at least the following mitigating factors: (1) whether the actions of the facility or the individual caregivers were according to, and followed the terms of, an erroneous physician order, prescription, individual care plan, or directive; however, this is not a mitigating factor when the facility or caregiver was responsible for the issuance of the erroneous order, prescription, individual care plan, or directive or knew or should have known of the errors and took no reasonable measures to correct the defect before administering care; (2) comparative responsibility between the facility, other caregivers, and requirements placed upon an employee, including the facility’s compliance with related regulatory standards and the adequacy of facility policies and procedures, facility training, an individual’s participation in the training, the caregiver’s supervision, and facility staffing levels and the scope of the individual employee’s authority and discretion; and (3) whether the facility or individual followed professional standards in exercising professional judgment. The SP was trained on the Employee Handbook and The Reporting of Maltreatment of Minor’s Act. The SP was responsible for maltreatment of the AV. C. Recurring and/or Serious Maltreatment: The Office of Inspector General is required to evaluate whether substantiated maltreatment by an individual meets the statutory criteria to be determined as “recurring or serious.” Individuals determined to be responsible for recurring or serious maltreatment are disqualified from providing direct contact services. Minnesota Statutes, section 245C.02, subdivision 16, states: “Recurring maltreatment” means more than one incident of maltreatment for which there is a preponderance of evidence that maltreatment occurred and that the subject was responsible for the maltreatment. Minnesota Statutes, section 245C.02, subdivision 18, states: "Serious maltreatment" means sexual abuse, maltreatment resulting in death, neglect resulting in serious injury which reasonably requires the care of a physician whether or not the care of a physician was sought, or abuse resulting in serious injury. For purposes of this definition, "care of a physician" is treatment received or ordered by a physician, physician assistant, or nurse practitioner, but does not include diagnostic testing, assessment, or observation; the application of, recommendation to use, or prescription solely for a remedy that is available over the counter without a prescription; or a prescription solely for a topical antibiotic to treat burns when there is no follow-up appointment. For purposes of this definition, "abuse resulting in serious injury" means: bruises, bites, skin laceration, or tissue damage; fractures; dislocations; evidence of internal injuries; head injuries with loss of consciousness; extensive second-degree or third-degree burns and other burns for which complications are present; extensive second-degree or third-degree frostbite and other frostbite for which complications are present; irreversible mobility or avulsion of teeth; injuries to the eyes; ingestion of foreign substances and objects that are harmful; near drowning; and heat exhaustion or sunstroke. Serious maltreatment includes neglect when it results in criminal sexual conduct against a child or vulnerable adult. It was determined that the substantiated physical abuse for which the SP was responsible did not meet statutory criteria to be determined as recurring or serious. It was a single incident and there was no in jury to the AV. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 260E.35, subdivision 6, paragraph (c) all investigative data maintained in this report will be kept by the Department of Human Services for at least ten years after the date of the final entry in the report. Action Taken by Facility: The facility completed an internal review and determined that policies and procedures were adequate but not followed. The SP no longer worked at the facility. Action Taken by Department of Human Services, Office of Inspector General: The SP was not disqualified from providing direct care services as a result of the maltreatment determination in this report. However, the SP was notified by the Office of Inspector General that any further substantiated act of maltreatment, whether or not the act meets the criteria for “serious,” will automatically meet the criteria for “recurring” and will result in the disqualification of the SP. The determination that the SP was responsible for maltreatment is subject to appeal. On November 8, 2024, the facility was issued a Correction Order for the violation 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.
|
