Home › MI › Portage › Little Tykes Learning Center
Little Tykes Learning Center
8125 Valleywood Lane, Portage MI 49024 · License #DC390402559 · Center
Contact
- Phone
- (269) 598-0715
- Website
- Add via profile claim
- Address
- 8125 Valleywood Lane, Portage MI 49024 · Directions
Hours
Care & schedule
When they operate
Ages served
- Licensed for 30 children
How this facility compares
Violations per inspection, 3-yrInspection history & violations
Source: Michigan MiLEAP, Child Care Licensing Bureau- Violation
- Violation
- Violation
- Violation
- Violation
On 04124/2023, and I a complaint regarding Child Care Staff em r (CCSM) and I contacted the complainant via telephone and interviewed her on he complainant reported that "back in November" she and CCSM 4 had witnessed CCSM 1 place Child A into the table in the infant room at a time Child A could not hold her head up, causing Child A to CCSM 1 sen*a phhoottoo that she had taken in November of 2022 when Child A was approximately showing Child A sitting in the infant room table. The table is a large table, our cut out areas where a child seat drops in for the child to sit. Child A can be seen sitting up in the chair and holding up her head however she is slouching a little. The complainant reported that CCSM 4 brought her concerns to Program Director Paula Sherman, however "she did not do anything about it." On 04/25/2023. and I conducted an onsite inspection and interviewed Licensee Paula Mathieu, CCSM 1, CCSM 2 and CCSM 3. We contacted Program Director Paula Sherman via telephone while onsite. Ms. Mathieu reported that she has had no concerns with CCSM 1 and has received no parent reports of concern regarding CCSM 1. Ms. Mathieu reported that she felt this complaint was made in retaliation for a prior investigation. Ms. Mathieu added that she does not regularly work at this child care center location, so she was not aware of Child A's care or Child A sitting in the infant table in November of 2022. CCSM 1 was upset by the allegations that had been made regarding her and w*Opp% became emotional talking about them. CCSM 1 felt that the complaint was made in retaliation of another complaint stating that there was no truth to the allegations. CCSM 1 explained that Child A started at the child care center in approximately October 2022 when she ild A was and had regular , so CCSM ame regular communication with Child A's tummy time and sitting up to help strengthen her neck and head muscles. CCSM 1 provided pictures that had been sent to Child A's Mother on both 11,'812022 and 11/10/2022 showing Child A sitting in the infant table. In both photos, Child A is observed sitting up at the infant table and holding her head up well. Child A shows no signs that she could not hold her head up unassisted, or that she had hit her head on the table at any time. CCSM 2 has worked in the infant room with CCSM 1, as well as worked in the toddler room located within view of the infant room. CCSM 2 reported no concerns with CCSM 1 as a staff member and was not aware of any parent concerns regarding the care in the infant room. CCSM 2 could not recall a time that Child A was placed at the table, and she hit her head or appeared to not be able to hold her head up at the table. CCSM 3 has not worked with CCSM 1, however because the center is one large room divided into smaller rooms, she is able to hear and see into the infant room throughout the day. CCSM 3 reported that she has no concerns with CCSM 1 and is not aware of any parent's concerns. CCSM 3 was not at the child care center in November of 2022 when Child A was younger, however she added that she has never seen children that are too small in the table, stating that CCSM 1 will place them in a boppy chair or hold and feed them if they cannot sit in the table. CCSM 3 added that she felt that staff members that had recently been terminated were calling in the complaint against CCSM 1 as a retaliation for a prior complaint. Program Director Paula Sherman was out of the child care center on the day of the inspection, so and I contacted and interviewed her via telephone. Ms. Sherman reported aCCSM 4 had come to her with concerns about Child A sitting in the infant table, however Ms. Sherman reported that Child A had been sitting well unassisted and was actively in . Ms. Sherman added that she has never had concerns with , nor have any parents brought any concerns regarding CCSM 1's care of children. and I conducted telephone interviews with Child A's Mother, Child B's other Child C's Mother and Chil
- Violation
On 04/24/2023, and I interviewed the complainant via telephone. The complainant reported that st week" CCSM 1 "held Child B's "to get Child B to fall asleep. Reporting that both complainant and CCSM 4 had pictures of the incident. Additionally, CCSM 1 would place mats around Child B's crib and blocked the view of Child B so no one could see into his crib and "just leave him there." The complainant and me photos of CCSM 1 taken on 04/20/2023. There were sseixn pt"hOottoossof what appeared to be CCSM 1 putting Child B down for a nap in his crib with a blanket. The photos are zoomed in and difficult to make out what is happening in them. In one photo, Child B's head is visible and uncovered. There are no mats surrounding the crib in any of the photos and CCSM 1's hands are not on Child B's head in any photo. While onsite at the child care center on 04/25/2023, and I interviewed Licensee Paula Mathieu, CCSM 1, CCSM 2 and CCSM 3. We contacted and interviewed Program Director Paula Sherman via telephone. Ms. Mathieu reported that she has no concerns with CCSM 1, and feels the allegations are completely fabricated. Ms. Mathieu reported that Child B had issues taking naps at the child care center, and CCSM 1 and Child B's Mother had a number of conversations about various options that they could try to help Child B adjust to napping. Child B's Mother requested they block off an area, so he was not distracted at the center because at home they simply place him in a dark room and wait for him to fall asleep. Ms. Mathieu was aware of a short time frame that CCSM 1 placed a mat far from Child B's crib to block off his sight of the rest of the center, however it was removed when he fell asleep and CCSM 1 could maintain eyesight of Child B. When 5 Child B turned one year old on 03/24/2023, Child B's Mother requested that they bring a blanket to try to help comfort Child B. and I observed the infant room and where Child B's crib was located. There was no mat up at the time of the inspection. The entire child care center is one large room split into well-defined spaces by half walls and shelves making the entire space visible from anywhere in the center. CCSM 1 became emotional when asked about the allegations, stating that she "loves every one of her kids and would never hurt them." CCSM 1 explained that there was a period where Child B would not nap, would become overly tired and struggled at home. Child B's Mother explained that at home they create a dark space for Child B and simply place him down and not engage with him. CCSM 1 used a tumbling mat from the preschool room and placed it on its side to block Child B's view of the rest of the center. CCSM 1 explained that this was for "a few weeks or so," when Child B could roll both ways, pull himself up and stand in the crib. CCSM 1 sat at the table where she could maintain eyesight of Child B and hear him, but he could not see her. As soon as Child B fell asleep, she would remove the mat. CCSM 1 provided a photo that she had sent to Child B's Mother that was taken on 3/23/2023. In the photo there is a mat that is approximately two feet high on its side placed approximately five to six feet from Child B's crib. The photo was taken by CCSM 1 from a table that is placed at the end of the mat where Child B is visible in the crib. There are no blankets in the crib with Child B on the date the photo was taken. When Child B turned one, CCSM 1 suggested they try to use a blanket to help Child B self soothe and help him fall asleep. CCSM 1 was aware of a photo that a former staff member had taken of her on 04/20/2023, where she is "bent over Child B's crib." When the photo was taken, CCSM 1 explained that she had a blanket on Child B's back and she was patting him to sleep. CCSM 1 never had Child B's head covered, and never had her hands on Child B's head. CCSM 1 provided and I with two photos of Child B taken in the afternoon of 4/20/2023 at approximately 2:00 PM after nap time. In both photos Ch
- Violation
When CCSM 1 placed a mat on its side five to six feet from Child B's crib, CCSM 1 maintained a position where she could see and hear Child B, but Child B could not see her. As soon as Child B was asleep, the mat was removed, and Child B was visible to monitor frequently.
- Violation
CCSM , CCSM 2 (Child A's Mother) and CCSM 3 did not act in a manner that is conducive to the welfare of children. CCSM 1, CCSM 2 and CCSM 3 as child care staff members present at the child care center. On one incident CCSM 1 gave Child A ) a During another incident, Child A was given I
- Violation
I received a voicemail the evening of 04/20/2023 and a phone call from Licensee Paula Mathieu on 04/21/2023, informing me that she had been made aware of an incident that occurred at the child care center. A staff member had reported to her that CCSM 1, CCSM 2 (Child A's Mother) and CCSM 3 had taken while working at the child care center on 04/20/2023, and also CCSM 1 gave Child A arm () I conducted an onsite inspection with at 10:00am on 04/21/2023. While onsite and I interviewed Licensee Paula Mathieu, CCSM 2, CCSM3, CCSM 4, CCSM 5. Ms. Mathieu reported she is not aware of any concerns with CCSM 1, CCSM, 2 or CCSM 3, but that she is not regularly at this child care center. She explained that she is regularly at their other location. She had been at this child care center off and on since the Program Director Paula Sherman has been out of the center the last month for personal leave. Ms. Mathieu reported that she would be terminating CCSM 1, CCSM 2 and CCSM 3 effective immediately. CCSM 2 (Child A's Mother) was aware of the allegations and reported that on 04/20/2023, when CCSM 1 was leaving to take her lunch break, CCSM 1 stated that she was going home and still had "some of those pretzel things" She asked CCSM 2 if she wanted her to bring her back one. CCSM 2 could not recall what time CCSM 1 returned but reported that she and CCSM 1 at about 3:15 pm at the child care center while children were sleeping. CCSM 2 could not recall if CCSM 3 took one and she did not witness her 3 take an edible that day. CCSM 2 went outside on the playground with her class at approximately 3:34 pm. CCSM 1 came to ask if CCSM 2 wanted to give Child A a . CCSM 2 replied "you can if you want to," and CCSM 1 took Child A inside from the playground at about 4:00pm and gave her the asked CCSM 2 to clarify if she was aware of what CCSM 1 was going to do when she took Child A inside, and if CCSM 2's intention was for Child A to receive-. CCSM 2 stated that she "assumed" CCSM 1 was giving Child A a , adding that she did not know how much Child A was receiving, or what Child A would be _. CCSM 2 said that Child A's behavior "didn't really change" after taking the so it "didn't seem like a big thing." asked why she would want Child A to have . CCSM 2 explained that she had "read articles" that for difficult children." and described Child A as "aggressive, socially awkward and having no empathy." asked if Child A's pediatrician had been spoken to regarding her concerns, and CCSM 2 stated that she had but had not received any input. requested that CCSM 2 contact Child A's and an appointment was made for 3:00pm that same day. CCSM 2 reported that this was not the first time Child A received a from CCSM 1. Approximately two weeks earlier, CCSM 1 brought to the child care center for a parent at the child care center and CCSM 1 gave one Child A. CCSM 2 described Child A as "chill," and that the "didn't really do anything to her." asked CCSM 2 if she understood the danger and severity of the decision to allow Child A to . CCSM 2 stated that she understood, however she reiterated that she "read articles" and stated that Child A "never seemed like it was affecting her." CCSM 3 was aware of the allegations and admitted that she had taken _ approximately 20 minutes before leaving for the day at about 4:40pm. CCSM 3 explained that CCSM 1 returned from her lunch break and showed staff the that she had brought back. Between 4:15 pm - 4:20 pm while the preschool and toddler classes were outside on the playground, CCSM 1 and CCSM 3 were cleaning rooms inside the center when CCSM 3 stated she took -. She stated that she knew she should not have taken it while at work, but she was "done being in ratio" for the day and was about to leave the center. CCSM 2 then sent Child A into the center from the playground with CCSM 1 asking if she "wanted a treat." CCSM 1 took Child A to the kitchen and took her back outside "laughing" and said "she (Child A) - whole thing." CCSM 3 imme
- Violation
CCSM 1, CCSM 2 (Child A's Mother) and CCSM 3 did not act in a manner that is conducive to the welfare of children. On 04/20/2023, CCSM 1, CCSM 2 and CCSM 3 as child care staff members present at the child care center. On one incident CCSM 1 gave Child A ) a During another incident, Child A was ........................... ..................
Questions to ask on your tour
Generated from this facility's specific inspection record
- 1The Apr 24, 2023 inspection noted: “On 04124/2023, and I a complaint regarding Child Care Staff em r (CCSM) and I contacted the complainant via telephone and interviewed her on he complainant repo…” — what has changed since then?
- 2The Apr 21, 2023 inspection noted: “CCSM , CCSM 2 (Child A's Mother) and CCSM 3 did not act in a manner that is conducive to the welfare of children. CCSM 1, CCSM 2 and CCSM 3 as child care staff…” — what has changed since then?
Data synced from Michigan MiLEAP, Child Care Licensing Bureau · Source records · Report an error