The Issue Whether Florida Administrative Code Rules 65C- 22.009(2)(b)1. and 3., are invalid exercises of delegated legislative authority and whether a statement in a Gold Seal Quality Care Program Fact Sheet constitutes an unadopted rule in violation of section 120.54(1)(a), Florida Statutes.
Findings Of Fact The Department of Children and Families (DCF or Department) is the agency of the State of Florida that regulates child care facilities, large family child care homes, and family day care homes within the state to protect the health and welfare of the children in care. Petitioner RCMA is a child care facility licensed by the Department and located in Arcadia, Florida. RCMA's current child care facility license #CI2DE0009, is effective January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2012. Child care facilities, large family child care homes, and family day care homes in Florida that meet criteria demonstrating that they exceed the minimum licensing requirements and promote quality child care are eligible for Gold Seal Quality Care designation by DCF. Designation indicates a facility providing a higher standard of care. Gold Seal Quality Care designation has no bearing on licensure as a child care facility, large family child care home, or family day care home. A Gold Seal Quality Care designation is an authorization required by law in order for a facility to receive certain tax benefits and enhanced school readiness program reimbursement from the Early Learning Coalition. Issuance of a Gold Seal Quality Care designation is not merely a ministerial act and it is not a license required primarily for revenue purposes. Gold Seal Quality Care designation is a license. DCF granted RCMA Gold Seal designation on March 31, 2008. On December 29, 2011, DCF issued an Administrative Complaint alleging that RCMA committed a Class I licensing violation. The Administrative Complaint sought to impose sanctions against RCMA's child care facility license and to revoke RCMA's Gold Seal designation. On or before April 27, 2012, RCMA's accrediting association, the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), revoked RCMA's accreditation. There was no evidence at hearing as to whether its action was based solely upon DCF's allegations in the Administrative Complaint that RCMA had committed a Class I licensing violation.1/ On or about May 24, 2012, RCMA was notified of the Department's intended action to revoke its Gold Seal designation because NAEYC had revoked RCMA's accreditation. The notification letter advised RCMA of its right to request a hearing, but was not in the form of an Administrative Complaint. It was stipulated by the parties that Petitioner is substantially affected by rules 65C-22.009(2)(b)1. and 3. On August 6, 2012, Administrative Law Judge R. Bruce McKibben issued a Recommended Order on the Administrative Complaint in DOAH Case No. 12-750, concluding that DCF had failed to prove the Class I licensing violation and recommending that the Administrative Complaint and Revocation of Gold Seal Quality Care Designation be dismissed. On August 27, 2012, DCF entered a Final Order rescinding the Administrative Complaint. Ms. Sherrie Quevedo was the Child Care licensing Supervisor for the geographic area including Arcadia, Florida, at the time of the formal hearing on the Administrative Complaint against RCMA's child care facility license. Ms. Quevedo was a supervisor called by Respondent and her statements as to policies of DCF were regarding matters within the scope of her employment. Ms. Quevedo did not work in the policy-making arm of DCF, and she could not speak authoritatively as to the Department's interpretation of statutes implemented by DCF. Ms. Deborah Russo is the Director of Child Care Regulation Office at DCF, where she is responsible, in conjunction with Department leadership and the General Counsel's Office, for establishing Department policies and implementing statutes setting out legislative policies. The Department terminates the Gold Seal designation for a facility when its accreditation expires or when it is revoked by the accrediting organization. Ms. Russo testified that it is DCF's interpretation of section 402.281, Florida Statutes, that the Department does not have discretion not to terminate a child care facility's Gold Seal designation if that facility's accrediting association revokes the provider's accreditation. The Gold Seal Quality Care Program Fact Sheet contains the statement that "section 402.281(3), Florida Statutes, requires that the Department deny or revoke a child care provider's Gold Seal Quality Care designation" if the provider has a Class I violation within a two-year period (the Statement). The fact sheet was distributed to Gold Seal child care facilities throughout the State of Florida in 2009 and the Statement is of general applicability to all child care facilities designated as Gold Seal Quality Care providers. The Statement, or a substantially similar statement reflecting the Department's interpretation of the statute, has not been adopted as a rule under chapter 120, Florida Statutes. RCMA has committed no licensing violations defined by DCF rule as a Class I violation during the two years preceding the rule challenge petition in this case.
The Issue The issue in this case is whether Respondent's designation as a Gold Seal Quality Care Program provider should be revoked pursuant to section 402.281, Florida Statutes (2010).1/
Findings Of Fact Gold Star is a child care facility which is licensed by the Brevard County Health Department, Brevard County, Florida (Brevard County), pursuant to section 402.308(4). The Department designated Gold Star as a Gold Seal Quality Care Program provider. As a Gold Seal Quality Care Program provider, Gold Star receives certain benefits which include sales tax exemptions, increased reimbursement rates for children participating in school readiness, and participation in the Voluntary Prekindergarten. Additionally, the designation is a positive marketing tool. In 2009, the Department sent a notice to providers who were designated as Gold Seal Quality Care Program providers, advising them that the Department would revoke designations of providers who had a Class I violation within a two-year period. The Department received an acknowledgement dated June 20, 2009, and signed by Donna Krinop, who was the director of Gold Star, acknowledging that Gold Star had received notice that the Department would revoke the designation of a provider who had a Class I violation within a two-year period. Class I violations are the most serious in nature and pose an imminent threat to a child, which has resulted, or may have resulted, in death or serious harm to the health, safety, or well-being of a child. Fla. Admin. Code R. 65C-20.012(1)(d). By letter dated September 15, 2010, Brevard County notified Gold Star that Gold Star was in violation of rule 65C-22.001(5), by failing to adequately supervise children which resulted in a child obtaining and throwing scalding water on another child. The violation is a Class I violation. In addition to the incident with the scalding water, Brevard County noted that on an inspection conducted on June 30, 2010, the inspector noted that a maintenance worker was teaching four-year-old children and that after-school children were given a battery-operated leaf blower to blow off the sidewalk as a form of punishment. The letter also provided the following instructions for requesting an administrative hearing to contest the disciplinary action: WHEREFORE, pursuant to Section 402.310, Florida Statutes and Section Ordinance 26-70 thru 77 Brevard County Code, the Brevard County Health Department, Environmental Public Health Services is fining childcare license 07B881 $500.00. You are hereby notified that pursuant to Section 120.57, Florida Statutes, you are entitled to an administrative hearing. Please be advised that a hearing will not be automatically scheduled. In the event that you wish to contest the fine, you must submit a written request for an administrative hearing pursuant to Section 402.310(2), Florida Statutes. Environmental Public Health Services must receive your request for an administrative hearing within 15 days for [sic] receipt of the formal administrative complaint at the following address: Melissa L. Brock, R.E.H.P., Environmental Manager Environmental Public Health Services Brevard County Health Department Brevard County Government Center 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Building A116 Viera, Florida 32940-6682 Upon timely receipt of your written request, an administrative hearing to determine whether your license will be fined will be expeditiously scheduled. Failure to request a hearing in writing within 15 days of receipt of the administrative complaint shall be deemed a waiver of any right to a hearing under Section 120.57 Florida Statutes, and the administrative fine of your license will be final. Section 402.310(2), Florida Statutes. Payment is due at the time the fine becomes final. In the event you request an administrative hearing, you have the right to be represented by counsel, to take testimony, to call and cross-examine witnesses and to have a [sic] subpoenas or subpoenas duces tecum issued on your behalf, Rule 28-106.212, Florida Administrative Code. Donna Krinop wrote Ms. Brock on September 17, 2010, stating: "Nothing in this letter was true and we would like to meet with you to discuss this situation." Nothing in the letter indicated that Gold Star was seeking an administrative hearing. A meeting was scheduled for September 28, 2010, for Gold Star to discuss the administrative action with Brevard County staff. By letter dated September 27, 2010, Gold Star advised Brevard County that Gold Star did not think that the findings in the administrative action letter were true, but that Gold Star was complying with corrective actions. Enclosed with the letter was a check for $500.00 and a list of Gold Star staff who had received refresher training on supervision. On September 28, 2010, a meeting was held with Mr. Buchanan, who was an environmental supervisor for Brevard County, and Gold Star staff, including Ms. Krinop. Mr. Buchanan did not tell any Gold Star staff that if the fine was not paid that Gold Star would lose its license. The meeting consisted generally of Gold Star staff stating why they felt that the punishment was too harsh. Ms. Krinop and Ms. Khemwatti Kalikapersaud contend that the letter that was sent by Gold Star on September 17, 2010, was meant as a request for an administrative hearing and that they thought that the meeting on September 28, 2010, was the due process hearing. Their testimony is not credited. On October 21, 2010, the Department sent an Administrative Complaint to Gold Star stating that the Department intended to revoke Gold Star's designation as a Gold Seal Quality Care Program provider based on the Class I violation issued by Brevard County. The Administrative Complaint stated the following: IF YOU BELIEVE THE DEPARTMENT'S DECISION IS IN ERROR, YOU MAY REQUEST AN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING TO CONTEST THE DECISION. YOUR REQUEST FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE DEPARTMENT WITHIN 21 DAYS OF YOUR RECEIPT OF THIS NOTICE. FAILURE TO REQUEST AN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING WITHIN THE 21 DAYS PROVIDED SHALL CONSTITUTE A WAIVER OF THE RIGHT TO A HEARING. By letter dated November 17, 2010, Ms. Krinop wrote to the Department to "request an administrative hearing to review the decision of the Health Department [Brevard County]." Gold Star admitted that the incident with the scalding water had occurred and stated: We are dismayed by this unfortunate incident and view it with the utmost seriousness. Further, we do not contest that it resulted in the minor injury of one child, having been unintentionally inflicted by another child. However, we believe that the Health Department may inadvertently be in possession of erroneous information concerning the matter and this has resulted in disproportionate punitive action against GSA [Gold Star]. Specifically, we wish to contest: The extent of the injury as reported in the notification, which is cited as greater than that observed by the responding officer. The qualifications of the supervising staff, who is reported in the notification to be solely a maintenance man and unapproved to supervise, which is incorrect. A child was operating battery powered leaf blower as punishment, which is incorrect. Due to the fact that the incident did occur, GSA understands that the fine imposed by the Health Department is right and fair. However, due to the misunderstanding of facts as outlined above, we do not believe that the revocation of GSA's Gold Seal Quality Care Program Provider Designation is appropriate. Gold Star did not state in its November 17, 2010, letter to the Department that Gold Star had requested an administrative hearing and that Brevard County had failed to give it an administrative hearing.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that a final order be entered finding that Gold Star committed a Class I violation and revoking its designation as a Gold Seal Quality Care Program provider. DONE AND ENTERED this 11th day of May, 2011, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S SUSAN B. HARRELL Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 11th day of May, 2011.
The Issue Whether Respondent, a licensed child care facility, committed two Class I violations as alleged in the Administrative Complaint; and, if so, the appropriate penalty, including whether Petitioner may terminate Respondent's participation in the Gold Seal Quality Care program.
Findings Of Fact The Department is the state agency responsible for licensing and regulating child care facilities in the state in Florida. StarChild is a licensed child care facility located in Apopka, Florida. StarChild is designated as a Gold Seal Provider and has a contract with the Early Learning Coalition to provide school readiness services. As a designated Gold Seal Quality Care Provider, StarChild is subject to the provisions of section 402.281, Florida Statutes. In order to obtain and maintain a designation as a Gold Seal Quality Care provider, a child care facility must not have had any Class I violations, as defined by rule, within the two years preceding its application for designation as a Gold Seal Quality Care provider. § 402.281(4)(a), Fla. Stat. "Commission of a Class I violation shall be grounds for termination of the designation as a Gold Seal Quality Care provider until the provider has no Class I violations for a period of two years." § 402.281(4)(a), Fla. Stat. 1 By agreeing to an extended deadline for post-hearing submissions beyond ten days after the filing of the transcript, the parties waived the 30-day timeframe for issuance of the Recommended Order. See Fla. Admin. Code R. 28-106.216. As of the date of the final hearing, StarChild had never had a Class I violation. The May 5, 2020, Incident At all times relevant to this case, CJ was a two-year-old boy who attended StarChild. On May 5, 2020, CJ, along with several other children and two teachers, were in a two-year-old classroom at StarChild. The actions of the children and a teacher, Ms. Crisman, were recorded by a surveillance camera mounted in the room. The factual allegations in the Administrative Complaint are primarily based on an incident captured on video. In the video, CJ is seen interacting with other children in the room. The children are all engaged in different activities; some are standing while others are sitting on the floor. CJ stood near a group of children who were sitting on the floor in close proximity to Ms. Crisman, who also sat on the floor. CJ walked up behind another child who sat in front of Ms. Crisman. CJ placed his hands on the other child's shoulders. The other child turned his torso toward CJ, while still sitting, and pushed CJ away from him. This was by no means a hard push. CJ stumbled into a seated position and then immediately thereafter laid on his back. CJ remained laying on his back for approximately five to ten seconds, during which he playfully kicked his feet. Ms. Crisman stood up from her seated position, walked over to CJ, and stood over him. She then grabbed CJ by both wrists and forcefully yanked him off the ground. It is clear from the video that Ms. Crisman used great force when she pulled CJ off the floor—CJ's feet flew up in the air and his head flew back. Ms. Crisman then pulled CJ, by his wrists, approximately ten feet across the room, and placed him in a corner in timeout. CJ sat in the corner clutching his arm. Zuleika Martinez (Ms. Martinez) was one of the two teachers assigned to CJ's classroom. She was not present during the incident, but came back to see CJ sitting in timeout. Ms. Martinez noticed that CJ was favoring one hand over the other. Approximately 30 minutes after noticing this, Ms. Martinez notified Deborah Files (Ms. Files). Ms. Files has been employed by StarChild since March 2005, and has been serving as the Director of StarChild since April 2020. Ms. Files walked over to the classroom to check on CJ and speak to Ms. Martinez. She learned that CJ was holding his arm and he would not use it for play or to eat. Ms. Files brought CJ into StarChild's front-desk area—the area typically used for children who are not feeling well. Ms. Files iced CJ's arm. Shortly thereafter, Ms. Files contacted Shelby Feinberg (Ms. Feinberg). At the time of the incident, Ms. Feinberg was the Executive Director of StarChild. Ms. Feinberg was working remotely and, therefore, not at StarChild's facility. Ms. Files explained to Ms. Feinberg that CJ appeared to be having difficulty utilizing one of his arms. Ms. Feinberg advised Ms. Files to contact CJ's parents. Ms. Files contacted CJ's mother, Meghan Jones, at approximately 11:00 a.m. Ms. Files reported to the mother that CJ was favoring one arm, and that he was not using the other arm at all. Ms. Files encouraged Ms. Jones to pick CJ up. At approximately 12:30 p.m., CJ's father, Kurt Jones (Mr. Jones), arrived at StarChild to pick CJ up. Mr. Jones found CJ in the classroom, lying on the floor. He told CJ to get up. CJ attempted to push himself up off the floor but was unable to do so. CJ appeared to be in pain and unable to support his body weight on his arm. It was clear to Mr. Jones that his son was in pain. Mr. Jones had difficulty getting CJ strapped into his car seat. Mr. Jones drove CJ to their home, which was five minutes away. When at home, Mr. Jones noticed that CJ still appeared to be in pain. Mr. Jones noticed that CJ would not move or touch his arm. He was holding his arm as if it was in a sling. CJ would periodically cry. Mr. Jones grew worried as his son still appeared to be in pain and did not seem to be getting better as time passed. Mr. Jones considered taking CJ to the emergency room but decided against it because of concerns related to the COVID-19 pandemic. He could not take CJ to his primary care pediatrician as there were scheduling difficulties also tied to the COVID-19 pandemic. The family's usual after-hours urgent care pediatrics office did not open until 4:00 p.m. At approximately three or four hours after picking CJ up from StarChild, Mr. Jones, with few options, searched for help on the internet. He researched possible causes of CJ's pain and why he was holding his arm like a sling. After watching several videos, he came across a YouTube video made by a nurse who described a condition called "nursemaid elbow." A nursemaid elbow is a dislocated elbow. The symptoms matched what CJ was experiencing and Mr. Jones determined CJ had dislocated his elbow. The video provided instructions on how to correct the nursemaid elbow. Desperate to help his son who was still in pain, he attempted the procedure to put CJ's elbow back in place. Mr. Jones followed the instructions. He heard a "pop" noise, which was to be expected per the instructions in the video. CJ cried for ten to 15 seconds. Thereafter, CJ regained full mobility of his arm and no longer appeared to be in pain. CJ began acting like his typical self. The next day, Mr. and Mrs. Jones took CJ to his pediatrician. CJ was diagnosed with nursemaid elbow. They were advised that the procedure that Mr. Jones conducted the previous day was the correct one. The Department conducted an investigation of the incident. As part of its investigation, the Department scheduled an examination of CJ by its Child Protective Team (CPT). Margarita Diaz (Nurse Diaz) is a pediatric nurse practitioner who works for CPT. She has been with CPT for three years. She has received extensive training in child abuse. On May 7, 2020, she did a complete head- to-toe examination of CJ. She reviewed the history of CJ's injury provided by CJ's parents and collateral information which included the video of the incident. She diagnosed CJ as having suffered a nursemaid elbow due to child abuse. Nurse Diaz described a nursemaid elbow as a condition that occurs when the ligament in the elbow gets trapped between two bones. When a child's arm is pulled away, the tendon slips down. When the arm goes back into place, the tendon gets stuck between the humerus and the radial bones. When this condition happens, it is usually very painful for the child. The child often presents as protective of the arm and will not move it. Nurse Diaz further testified that the most common mechanism of injury is when a child is pulled. Other mechanisms for injury include swinging or lifting a child by the arm. She testified that a nursemaid elbow is easy to correct and once corrected, a child is back to normal in five to ten minutes. Nurse Diaz testified that her finding of child abuse was based on her observations of the actions of the teacher as shown in the video. She confirmed that the actions of the teacher in the video were consistent with the infliction of a nursemaid elbow injury on CJ. StarChild's Response to Incident When Ms. Martinez reported CJ's injury, StarChild took immediate action to address the situation. They removed CJ from the classroom, tended to his injuries, promptly contacted his parents, and set out to find out the cause of the injury. StarChild administrators watched video footage of the activity leading up to CJ's change in behavior. In reviewing the video, StarChild determined that Ms. Crisman used improper form by lifting CJ by his wrists when moving CJ to the timeout corner. By noon on the same day of the incident, StarChild terminated Ms. Crisman's employment. StarChild then contacted the Department to report the incident. Mr. Jones made a request to review video footage of the incident. Danny King, the owner of StarChild, reached out to Mr. Jones personally and agreed to meet with him and Mrs. Jones to review the video together in person. The parents were informed that Ms. Crisman was terminated. Following the incident, StarChild developed a self-imposed Corrective Action Plan, that included re-training its entire staff. Ms. Feinberg met with all members of the staff and conducted in-person training in small class settings. All staff members were provided StarChild's discipline policy and child interaction policies. Staff members were also required to take a child abuse and training course. StarChild re-wrote its staff handbook to include stronger and clearer language about how children are to be moved and repositioned in the classroom. Additionally, StarChild implemented permanent policy changes which required discussions during weekly staff meetings about behavior and how staff members should positively deal with behavior in the classroom. All staff members were also provided with information on nursemaid elbow, specifically. StarChild has current plans to bring in guest speakers, such as a behavior management professional and a CPT speaker, to further educate their staff members. StarChild acted commendably in response to the incident. It took immediate and comprehensive action to try to reduce the probability of an incident like that occurring again. It must be noted that complete prevention is an impossibility. CJ continued to attend StarChild after the incident. Indeed, he attended StarChild the day after the incident and appeared to be in good spirits. CJ's younger sister was also enrolled at StarChild after the incident, when she was three-and-a-half months old.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Children and Families impose a fine of $100.00 against StarChild and revoke its designation as a Gold Seal Quality Care provider. DONE AND ENTERED this 19th day of May, 2021, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. COPIES FURNISHED: Brian Christopher Meola, Assistant General Counsel Department of Children and Families Suite S-1129 400 West Robinson Street Orlando, Florida 32801 Lacey Kantor, Agency Clerk Department of Children and Families Building 2, Room 204Z 1317 Winewood Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0700 S JODI-ANN V. LIVINGSTONE Administrative Law Judge 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 19th day of May, 2021. Lucia C. Pineiro, Esquire Lucia C. Pineiro & Associates, P.A. Suite 309 717 Ponce de Leon Boulevard Coral Gables, Florida 33134 Javier A. Enriquez, General Counsel Department of Children and Families Building 2, Room 204F 1317 Winewood Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0700
The Issue Should the Gold Seal Quality Care designation of Respondent, Wonderland Day Care, Inc. (Wonderland), be terminated under the authority of section 402.281(4)(a), Florida Statutes (2015)1/ on account of a “class I violation?”
Findings Of Fact Wonderland is a child care facility licensed by Hillsborough County. Ms. Wilson owns and operates Wonderland. The Department awarded Wonderland a Gold Seal Quality Care designation effective May 9, 2011. The Department’s letter advising Wonderland that it had been awarded the Gold Seal designation also advised Wonderland that to maintain the Gold Seal it must not have a “class I violation.” (Ex. 2). Wonderland’s application for a sales and use tax exemption, signed by Ms. Wilson, stated that to qualify for the exemption the application must hold a “current Gold Seal Quality Care designation as provided in s. 402.281, F.S. ” (Ex. 3). Section 402.281(4)(a) states that a child care provider must not have any “class I violations” in order to maintain its Gold Seal designation. Ms. Wilson knew, or should have known, that a “class I violation” would result in the loss of Wonderland’s Gold Seal designation. On April 20, 2015, Hillsborough County’s Children and Youth Services issued an Administrative Complaint (Complaint) against Wonderland proposing to administer a “class I violation” based upon a determination that Wonderland did not provide adequate supervision for the children. Specifically, the Complaint charged that on March 5, 2015, a four-year-old child left the facility and walked across the street without the staff’s knowledge. The Complaint told Ms. Wilson that Wonderland had a right to request an administrative hearing to challenge the Complaint. Ms. Wilson chose not to challenge the Complaint. She elected for Wonderland to pay the proposed $250.00 fine. Ms. Wilson did not think of the effect accepting the Complaint would have upon Wonderland’s Gold Seal Quality Care designation. The Complaint did not advise of this collateral consequence. But, as found above, Ms. Wilson and Wonderland knew or should have known of it.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that Petitioner, Department of Children and Families, terminate the Gold Seal Quality Care designation of Respondent, Wonderland Day Care, Inc. DONE AND ENTERED this 9th day of March, 2016, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S JOHN D. C. NEWTON, II Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 9th day of March, 2016.
The Issue The issues are whether Respondent allowed a person without background screening, unaccompanied by another screened adult, to supervise a class of three-year-old children; and, if so, the penalty, including whether Petitioner may terminate Respondent's participation in the Gold Seal Quality Care program.
Findings Of Fact Respondent is a licensed child care facility. Respondent has not previously been guilty of any Class I or II violations for a period of time of not less than two years. In response to a complaint involving the use of an unscreened person to supervise children, Petitioner's inspector visited the facility and checked each of the classrooms. She found that the three-year-old classroom was supervised by Marly Pachon with no other adult present in the room. After examining the personnel records and other sources, the inspector correctly determined that Ms. Pachon had not undergone background screening. The inspector brought this violation to the attention of the director, who promptly remedied the violation by assuming responsibility herself to supervise the class, as the director has successfully completed background screening. After discussing her findings with her supervisor, Ms. Pachon cited Respondent for a violation of Standard 4-18, which, as described below, is a Class I violation. After considering the statutory factors listed below, Petitioner imposed a $100 fine, which resulted in the termination of Respondent from the Gold Seal Quality Care program. Respondent's defenses are that Ms. Pachon was a volunteer, not an employee, and the subject children were not alone with Ms. Pachon because, in an adjoining room, a screened teacher was supervising her four-year-old class. However, the physical dividers between the classes were sufficient to require the designation of each area as a separate classroom, which was how Respondent was using the space.
Recommendation It is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Children and Families enter a final order finding Respondent guilty of a Class I violation for allowing an unscreened person to be alone with children in care; imposing a $100 fine; and terminating Respondent's participation in the Gold Seal Quality Care program until Respondent requalifies for this designation. DONE AND ENTERED this 7th day of August, 2018, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S ROBERT E. MEALE Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 7th day of August, 2018. COPIES FURNISHED: Juan Mendez Babani, Esquire Mendez Babani Law 11900 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 289 North Miami, Florida 33181 (eServed) Patricia E. Salman, Esquire Department of Children and Families 401 Northwest 2nd Avenue, Suite N-1014 Miami, Florida 33128 (eServed) Lacey Kantor, Agency Clerk Department of Children and Families Building 2, Room 204Z 1317 Winewood Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0700 (eServed) John Jackson, Acting General Counsel Department of Children and Families Building 2, Room 204F 1317 Winewood Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0700 (eServed) Mike Carroll, Secretary Department of Children and Families Building 1, Room 202 1317 Winewood Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0700 (eServed)
