Special Investigation Report # 2013D0929010

RICK SNYDER
GOVERNOR
State of Michigan
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
BUREAU OF CHILDREN AND ADULT LICENSING
MAURA D. CORRIGAN
DIRECTOR
August 5, 2013
Melissa Sharp
Assumption Greek Orthodox
21800 Marter Road
St Clair Shores, MI 48080
RE: Lic./Reg. #:
Investigation #:
DC500017290
2013D0929010
Assumption Nursery School
Dear Ms. Sharp:
Attached is the Special Investigation Report for the above referenced facility. Due to
the violations identified in the report, a written corrective action plan is required. The
corrective action plan is due 15 days from the date of this letter and must include the
following:
• How compliance with each rule will be achieved.
• Who is directly responsible for implementing the corrective action for each
violation.
• Specific time frames for each violation as to when the correction will be
completed or implemented.
• How continuing compliance will be maintained once compliance is
achieved.
• The signature of the responsible party and a date.
If you desire technical assistance in addressing these issues, please feel free to contact
me. In any event, the corrective action plan is due within 15 days. Failure to submit an
acceptable corrective action plan will result in disciplinary action.
Please review the enclosed documentation for accuracy and feel free to contact me with
any questions. In the event that I am not available and you need to speak to someone
immediately, please feel free to contact the local office at (248) 975-5053.
P.O. BOX 30650 • LANSING, MICHIGAN 48909-8150
www.michigan.gov • (517) 335-6124

Per MCL 722.113g, this report and any related corrective action plans must be filed in
your licensing notebook.
Sincerely,
LaTonya Kegler, Licensing Consultant
Bureau of Children and Adult Licensing
4th Floor, Suite 4B
51111 Woodward Avenue
Pontiac, MI 48342
(586) 256-1280
Enclosure
P.O. BOX 30650 • LANSING, MICHIGAN 48909-8150
www.michigan.gov • (517) 335-6124

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
BUREAU OF CHILDREN AND ADULT LICENSING
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
I. IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
License #:
Investigation #:
DC500017290
2013D0929010
Complaint Receipt Date: 05/13/2013
Investigation Initiation Date: 05/13/2013
Report Due Date: 07/12/2013
Licensee Name:
Licensee Address:
Assumption Greek Orthodox
21800 Marter Road
St Clair Shores, MI 48080
Licensee Telephone #: (586) 772-4477
Administrator:
Licensee Designee:
Name of Facility:
Facility Address:
Melissa Sharp, Designee
Melissa Sharp, Designee
Assumption Nursery School
22150 Marter Road
Saint Clair Shores, MI 48080
Facility Telephone #: (586) 772-4477
Original Issuance Date:
License Status:
N/A
REGULAR
Effective Date: 01/30/2013
Expiration Date: 01/29/2015
Capacity: 240
Program Type:
CHILD CARE CENTER
1

II.
ALLEGATION(S)
• Child A (male, age 4) has been repeatedly hurt while in care at the center. A few
months ago Child A received a cut to his arm alleged to be from a sharp object
in the classroom.
• On 5/2/2013 Child A had a bucket of sand dumped on his head by another child.
• On 5/3/2013 Child A was observed with a red mark in between his eyes alleged
from him falling.
• On 5/6/2013 Child A was observed with a knot on his head, scratches on his
nose and his top lip alleged from him pushing a toy and the toy stopped, which
caused him to fall and hit the concrete.
III.
METHODOLOGY
05/13/2013 Special Investigation Intake
2013D0929010
05/13/2013 Special Investigation Initiated - Telephone
Interview w/ Child A's mother
05/13/2013 Contact - Telephone call made
Call to A. Lawrence, DHS supv.
05/14/2013 Inspection Completed On-site
Interview w/ director Michelle Sharp and caregivers
(12:00 p.m. - 2:45 p.m.)
05/14/2013 Contact Document received - pictures of Child A’s injuries
05/22/2013 Contact Telephone call made- vmessage left for Child A’s mother
06/03/2013 Contact Telephone call received-vmessage from Child A’s mother
06/05/2013 Contact Telephone call made- interview with Child A’s mother
07/23/2013 Contact Telephone call made-message for Ms. Sharp
07/24/2013 Exit Conference w/ Ms. Sharp via telephone
2

ALLEGATION: Child A (male, age 4) has been repeatedly hurt while in care at
the center. A few months ago Child A received a cut to his arm alleged to be
from a sharp object in the classroom.
INVESTIGATION:
On May 13, 2013, I interviewed Child A’s mother regarding this incident. She stated
that sometime in March of 2013 when she arrived at the center to pick up Child A at
3:30 p.m., she observed a linear cut near Child A’s wrist area which vertically
extended halfway up his arm. She was given an incident report which stated that at
10:15 a.m. Child A scraped his right arm on a sharp edge of a plastic container of
blocks. Child A’s mother was upset that the center did not call her to report the
injury to her child. When she questioned the caregiver about the injury and
requested to see what he cut his wrist on, she was told that they had already thrown
it out. Child A’s mother stated that his arm was not bleeding when she arrived, and
she did not seek any medical treatment for his arm, but the cut left a permanent
mark on his arm.
Child A’s mother stated that she did not question Child A about the injury and stated
that he has a speech delay and probably wouldn’t have been able to make a
complete sentence to explain what happened to him.
On May 14, 2013, I interviewed Melissa Sharp, program director, regarding the
allegation. Ms. Sharp stated that she was aware of the injury, but Child A’s
caregiver was Mary Tomlinson who could provide more detailed information
pertaining to the injury.
Ms. Sharp provided the accident report which indicated that the injury occurred on
February 19, 2013 at 10:15 a.m. The report stated Child A scraped his right arm on
a sharp edge of a plastic container holding building blocks. The scratch was
approximately 6 inches long, and the container was immediately discarded. There is
a section on the form entitled, “Parent Notification”, which was left blank. Ms. Sharp
confirmed that the parent was not verbally notified for this incident and stated that
the center has a policy to only notify parents by phone when there is an injury to the
face or head. If the injury is not severe parents are notified at pick-up time. Child A’s
mother usually arrives at 3:00 p.m.
Ms. Sharp denied any issues or concerns with the level of supervision that is
provided by Ms. Tomlinson. She denied that the center has ever had any staffing
issues that would interfere with supervision of children. Ms. Sharp stated that there
is always an extra caregiver in each room.
3

On May 14, 2013, I interviewed caregiver Ms. Tomlinson regarding the injury. Ms.
Tomlinson was unable to recall the number of children in the room during the injury
in February but stated that there is always an assistant caregiver in the room with
her at all times. Attendance records for February were not immediately available
during my onsite inspection. During my onsite inspection there were six preschoolage
children with two caregivers.
Ms. Tomlinson acknowledged that she was Child A’s caregiver when he was injured.
Child A was playing with a bucket of blocks during free play time. The bucket had a
crack in the container which had a sharp edge that Child A scraped his arm on. She
was walking around the room and was interacting with the children when the injury
occurred. She described the injury as a long vertical scrape that crossed his inner
wrist area and extended up most of his forearm area. Ms. Tomlinson cleaned up the
scrape and applied a cool cloth. She denied that the scrape ever bled. Ms.
Tomlinson stated that they were not aware that the container was cracked, but they
immediately discarded it after Child A’s injury.
Ms. Tomlinson confirmed that Child A’s mother was not verbally contacted after this
injury. I asked Ms. Tomlinson what the center’s policy is for reporting injuries to
parents. She stated that a written report must be completed and it is her
understanding that the center’s policy is to notify parents by phone only when an
injury occurs involving the face/head.
I provided technical assistance to Ms. Sharp regarding notification of injuries to
parents, and I explained that the center complied with the licensing rules. However,
it would have been a better business practice to verbally notify the parent of this
injury due to him receiving a long scrape which extended from his wrist through most
of his forearm area, which the parent viewed as a serious injury. I provided
consultation suggesting that they consider revising their verbal notification criteria for
injuries to children.
APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.5105 Supervision and ratio requirements.
ANALYSIS:
CONCLUSION:
(1) The center shall provide appropriate care and supervision of
children at all times.
The center provided appropriate care and supervision of Child A
when he scraped his arm on the container.
VIOLATION NOT ESTABLISHED
4

Allegation: On 5/2/2013 Child A had a bucket of sand dumped on his head by
by another child.
INVESTIGATION:
Child A’s mother stated that she received a phone call from Ms. Tomlinson who
reported that a new student dumped sand on Child A’s head, and she tried to wash it
out of his hair. Child A’s mother stated that the incident occurred sometime in the
afternoon. Child A’s mother was concerned with the supervision of Child A and
didn’t know why she didn’t receive an incident report regarding this situation. Child
A was only able to tell her that he got sand in his hair.
I interviewed Ms. Tomlinson regarding this incident and confirmed that the incident
occurred in the afternoon. She stated that the room was in compliance with adult to
child ratios. Attendance records confirm that there were 8 preschool-age children
present during the time of the incident.
The children were engaged in free choice activity time. Ms. Tomlinson was standing
near the sand table and was observing Child A and Child B (male, age 3) who were
both playing at the sand table. I observed the sand pail that was involved during the
incident. The pail was small, approximately pint- sized. Child A was bent over, and
Child B threw the pail which had sand inside. The sand got on the clothes and head
of Child A. Ms. Tomlinson stated that Child B was a new student to the program and
didn’t know the rules regarding appropriate behavior at the sand table. Child B was
redirected to another area while Ms. Tomlinson took Child A to the restroom to
wipe/wash the sand out of Child A’s hair with water. Child A appeared fine, and
didn’t appear to have any issues with breathing or injuries of any kind, which was the
reason an accident report was not completed. Ms. Tomlinson stated that although a
written report was not completed, she called Child A’s mother to verbally report the
incident and to let her know that she would need to shampoo Child A’s hair. Ms.
Tomlinson stated that her shift ends prior to Child A’s pick-up time and wanted to
ensure Child A’s mother was made aware of the incident.
APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.5105 Supervision and ratio requirements.
ANALYSIS:
CONCLUSION:
(1) The center shall provide appropriate care and supervision of
children at all times.
The center provided appropriate care and supervision of Child A
when he got sand in his hair.
VIOLATION NOT ESTABLISHED
5

Allegation: On 5/3/2013 Child A was observed with a red mark in between his
eyes alleged from him falling.
INVESTIGATION:
Child A’s mother stated that on May 3, 2013, at pick-up time she was given an
incident report which stated that Child A fell outside at 1:50pm. Child A’s mother
observed her child to have a bump on his head and scrapes in between his eyes
near his nose. She usually arrives between 2:30 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. and is unsure if this
is the reason they did not notify her by phone.
I interviewed Ms. Sharp regarding this injury. She was aware of the injury and
stated that Ms. Tomlinson was Child A’s caregiver during the injury. Ms. Sharp was
unable to locate the accident report for Child A during my onsite inspection and
indicated that the report was located at another office. Ms. Sharp confirmed that
Child A’s mother was not verbally notified during this injury to Child A’s face. Ms.
Sharp deemed that Child A’s injury was not serious, and according to the center’s
policy verbal and written notification is only completed for head injuries and severe
face injuries. Otherwise, parents are informed at pick-up time.
Child A’s mother provided a copy of the accident report. I reviewed the accident
report for this injury which stated that on May 3, 2013 at 1:50 p.m., Child A was
hopping from log to log when he lost his balance and fell, bumping the bridge of his
nose on the edge of the log. There was a red mark on his nose between his eyes
with some swelling to the nose despite icing the area. The parent notification
section was left blank on the accident report. The incident report does not indicate
any bump on Child A’s head which is inconsistent with information provided by Child
A’s mother.
I interviewed Ms. Tomlinson regarding the injury. She estimated that there were
seven to eight children total on the playground. Attendance records confirm that
there were eight children with Ms. Tomlinson and assistant caregiver Kristy
Poznanski. The eight children were separated into two groups. Ms. Tomlinson’s
group was playing in the natural playground area consisting of tree stumps of
various sizes. The children were going from stump to stump in a circle. Ms.
Tomlinson had her back turned to Child A as she was assisting another child with
the stump activity. She didn’t actually witness the fall but heard him crying and
assumed he lost his balance going from stump to stump. She assisted in helping
Child A stand up and began caring for him. She observed a mark located on the
bridge of his nose between his eyes. She applied ice to the area to reduce the
swelling.
I interviewed Ms. Poznanski who confirmed that she was the assistant caregiver with
Mary during this incident. There were approximately eight children outside, and they
6

were divided into two groups. Her group of children was by the cement area using
sidewalk chalk located on the opposite side of the outdoor play area. She did not
witness Child A fall, and she was unable to provide any additional information
regarding the injury.
I inspected the outdoor play area and observed the tree stumps which were sturdy
and in a circular pattern. I did not observe any areas that appeared to be hazardous
or unsafe for large muscle activities.
I reviewed Child A’s physical exam which indicated that he has been diagnosed with
a medical condition, but the medical condition would not restrict Child A from any
activities. Ms. Tomlinson described Child A’s large muscle development as not fully
coordinated and stated that at times he has erratic movements, but did not feel that
this limited his abilities to run or jump…etc. Ms. Sharp stated that Child A’s delays in
development were mostly due to his speech and not his large muscle abilities. She
described his motor development as more reserved in that he was not as active as
some of the other boys.
I interviewed Child A’s mother who denied that Child A has any coordination delays.
She stated that he runs fast and is not limited in any way physically by his medical
condition. She denied that the log activity would be something that he was unable to
do developmentally.
APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.5105 Supervision and ratio requirements.
ANALYSIS:
CONCLUSION:
(1) The center shall provide appropriate care and supervision of
children at all times.
The center provided appropriate supervision of Child A when he
fell during the tree stump activity.
VIOLATION NOT ESTABLISHED
7

Allegation: On 5/6/2013 Child A was observed with a knot on his head,
scratches on his nose and his top lip alleged from him pushing a toy and the
toy stopped, which caused him to fall and hit the concrete.
INVESTIGATION:
Child A’s mother stated that she received a telephone call from Ms. Tomlinson who
reported that Child A fell while pushing a toy. He fell and hit his face on the cement.
When Child A was picked up from the center he had scratches from the middle to
the left side of his face, scratches on his nose and surrounding the nose area, and a
bump on his forehead. She also noticed woodchips on his clothes. Child A’s mother
took him to an urgent care in Grosse Pointe Woods for treatment the same day.
They checked his vision which was fine. She was told to monitor him for 24 hours
and was told what signs to look for if a concussion has occurred. Child A’s mother
stated she met with Ms. Sharp the next day and the director appeared nonchalant
after she reported that she took Child A to urgent care. Child A’s mother stated
that she liked Ms. Tomlinson as her child’s caregiver and didn’t think that Ms.
Tomlinson was intentionally allowing things to happen to her child, but felt she could
no longer trust them to care for her child.
I interviewed Ms. Sharp regarding the injury. She stated that he was outside playing
with a bull dozer truck. The scoop at the end of the truck got caught on the cement
and the momentum pitched him forward. His face slid on the ground. She stated
that Child A didn’t appear upset. She observed that his forehead, nose and upper lip
were all scraped. She also observed a goose egg bump on his head. Ms. Sharp
was not able to locate the accident report for this injury during the onsite inspection.
Ms. Sharp confirmed that she met with Child A’s mother the following day, and she
withdrew him from the program. She was informed at the meeting that Child A was
taken to his pediatrician. I asked Ms. Sharp if she reported the injury to her
consultant Jennifer DeMunyck. She stated that she didn’t report the injury to the
consultant, “they only applied antibiotic ointment. I didn’t think this was something
that needed to be reported”. Ms. Sharp was informed that any medical treatment
that a child receives as a result of an injury that occurs while in care is considered a
serious accident.
I interviewed Ms. Tomlinson who confirmed that this accident occurred on the
outdoor playground area. She was on the playground with her assistant Ms.
Poznanski and estimated that they had approximately seven to eight preschool-age
children at the time of the incident. She was re-entering the outdoor play area after
taking a child indoors to the restroom. As she stepped out of the door she witnessed
Child A scooting/pushing a toy tow truck on the cement trike area. The tow truck
had a scooper attached to the front of it that got caught on a crack in the sidewalk.
She witnessed Child A fall over the top of the truck but was unable to get to him
before his face hit the ground.
8

Ms. Tomlinson stated that Child A had a huge abrasion on his forehead, nose, and
above his lip. She observed a “goose-egg” sized bump on his forehead. Child A
had very little bleeding according to Ms. Tomlinson. She put ice on his head and
called his mother approximately 10 to 15 minutes after the injury when she finished
caring for Child A. Ms. Tomlinson stated that she felt horrible that this injury
happened, but she understood the mother’s decision to withdraw him from the
center.
I interviewed Ms. Poznanski, who was the other caregiver on the playground when
the incident occurred. There were approximately eight to nine children on the
playground at the time of the injury. She confirmed that Ms. Tomlinson went inside
the building to get Kleenex for a child and was re-entering the outdoor play area
when the injury occurred. Ms. Poznanski stated there were a few boys including
Child A playing with the trucks in the wood chips. Child A left the wood chip area
and began pushing his truck on the cement area. As he was pushing the truck the
scoop of the truck got caught in the cement crack and he fell forward scraping his
face.
On May 14, 2013 Child A’s mother emailed pictures of Child A’s injuries, which were
consistent with his face being scraped. I observed a long and deep horizontal
scrape, which removed skin on his forehead that extended from the middle of his
forehead to the end of his left eyebrow. There was also a deep scrape that
extended vertically from the bridge of the nose and extended just above the lip area.
APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.5105 Supervision and ratio requirements.
ANALYSIS:
CONCLUSION:
(1) The center shall provide appropriate care and supervision of
children at all times.
The center provided appropriate care and supervision of Child A
when a toy he was pushing got caught on a crack in the cement,
and he fell onto the cement.
VIOLATION NOT ESTABLISHED
9

APPLICABLE RULE
R 400.5111a(1)
Accident, injury, illness, death reporting.
(1) The center shall make a verbal report to the department
within 24 hours of a serious injury, or accident, or a serious
illness or medical condition occurring while a child is in care that
results in emergency medical treatment at a health facility or
hospitalization, or death.
ANALYSIS:
CONCLUSION:
The center did not make a verbal report to the department
within 24 hours to report a serious injury to Child A’s face which
required medical treatment.
VIOLATION ESTABLISHED
R 400.5111a(2)
ANALYSIS:
CONCLUSION:
Accident, injury, illness, death reporting.
(2) The center shall submit a written report in a format provided
by the department within 72 hours of a serious injury or
accident, or a serious or medical condition which results in
emergency medical treatment at a health facility or
hospitalization, or death. A copy of the report shall be kept on
file at the center.
The center did not submit a written report to the department
within 72 hours of Child A having a serious injury while in care
that required treatment at a health facility.
VIOLATION ESTABLISHED
10

IV.
RECOMMENDATION
Upon receipt of an acceptable corrective action plan, I recommend continuation of
the current status of the license of this child care center.
LaTonya Kegler
Licensing Consultant
08/05/2013
Date
Approved By:
08/06/2013
________________________________________
Jacquelin Sharkey
Date
Area Manager
11