Inspection of 20 June 2025 — Inspection Report
Immediate action notice. Regulation 11- Staffing levels, Regulation19- Health welfare and development of the child. Regulation 23- Safety Regulation 32- Complaints However, on inspection additional non-compliance which posed a risk was identified under Regulation 27- supervision. These findings are outlined within the relevant regulations within this report. A sampling process was used to assess compliance under regulation: Regulation 10- Policies and Procedures, Regulation 16(k) - Records in Relation to preschool service (accident and incident) As a result, the scope of the inspection included Pandas vs Stich room and Toddlers.
Regulation 9 — Management and recruitment
- (9) (7)(a) • The service could not provide evidence of induction provided to a newly recruited member of staff. It is acknowledged that the staff member stated that an induction was provided and they were sent policies and procedures but could not provide evidence of same. • Written records of staff supervision occurring in the service over the past twelve months could not be provided on the day. The registered provider informed inspectors on the day that they do not document supervision meetings anymore, this is in contradiction to the service supervision policy as it states; ‘The supervision session is recorded by the supervisor and the record kept in accordance with good practice, legislation and regulation in the office…’
Provider's corrective action:
- In a written response the registered provider stated: (9) (7) (a) • Induction for new member of staff was located after the inspection. A refresh with the staff member was carried out. A staff discussion took place, and all staff were advised that supervision reports will be documented again
Regulation 16 — Record in relation to pre-school service
- (1) (k) A recent incident in was not documented in the accident and incident book. This is in contradiction to the service policy where it states that: ‘…records are kept of significant incidents to include, child’s name, time and location of incident, events leading up to the incident, nature of incident, others involved, witness, how the situation was handled, whether restraint was used, what form of restraint, consequences and parent /guardian’s signature…’
Provider's corrective action:
- In a written response the registered provider stated: (1) (k) The recent incident was recorded in the behaviour log and was updated to the accident and incident book after the inspection. A discussion with staff took place to remind them to record all incidents in the accident and incident book as outlined in the service policy
Regulation 19 — Health, welfare and development of child
- (19) (1) (b) • A log of behavioural incidents were maintained by the service and a sample of these were reviewed. A response to an incident logged was in contradiction to the service policy on managing behaviour where on a date noted food was withheld as a consequence for a child not listening to staff members. This is in contradiction the service behavioural management policy which states that prohibited practices include: ‘Children are never ignored, spoken to sarcastically, humiliated, segregated or have food withheld.’ • This inspection was triggered on information received to the inspectorate where a child placement was terminated due to ongoing concerns of the child’s behaviour. Evidence of an individualised behaviour support plan could not be sourced on the day. This is at variance with the services behaviour management policy where it outlines steps taken to support a child where ‘a child’s serious behaviour issues are causing disruption and problems for other children in the group’. This includes developing an ‘individualised plan that takes a positive learning approach’. • On discussion with staff members the support needs of another child attending the wobbler room was discussed, the staff members were knowledgeable about the needs required to support this child. However no formal support plan was in place to support this child, which is in contradiction to the services policy on managing behaviour. • A child receiving support under the access inclusion model (AIM) did not have the required inclusion plan in place. These plans are required to ensure the child’s safety, learning and development needs were provided for within the service
Provider's corrective action:
- In a written response the registered provider stated: • A discussion with staff was held about with-holding food and snacks from children. Staff were reminded that our policies have been updated since the incident and what is expected of them going forward. All staff have completed behaviour management training. We will ensure all staff are aware of our policies and procedures. • Individualised support plans were printed off and introduced to all staff again. We will ensure all staff are aware of the behavioural support plans in place within the service. • A support plan to meet the child’s individual needs was reintroduced. Management will ensure that staff are aware of who has a support plan and where it is located. • An inclusion plan was located and management will ensure that any child receiving AIMS will have an Inclusion Plan implemented as early as possible and kept in the AIMS folder. Click or tap here to enter text
Regulation 23 — Safeguarding health, safety and welfare of child
- General Safety: 1. An exit door from the school aged care room was not secure on the 30th of May 2025, where one preschool child managed to open the door and exit to the car park. 2. The main door was open the day of inspection at the inspector’s unannounced arrival to the service and the inspectors gained access to the service. It is acknowledged all the children were in the outdoor play area at this time. 3. A tyre in the outdoor area was secured to the ground with concrete and not covered in a shock absorbing surface material to protect children from injury. 4. The service safeguarding policy statement referenced a policy for ‘dealing with allegations of abuse or neglect against employees and the management of allegations of abuse or misconduct against workers or volunteers of a child availing of the service’. However, this policy and procedure could not be sourced on the day posing a risk to the preschool child if the required safety procedures were not implemented. Action submitted by the Registered Provider
Provider's corrective action:
- General Safety: In a written response the registered provider stated: (1) The exit door was locked on the day of the incident. A fence has been erected to ensure nobody can exit the premises. Staff will ensure the door is locked appropriately. (2) Staff were reminded of the importance of ensuring the main door is locked at all times. (3) Shock absorbing mats were installed around the tyre. (4) The complaints policy was altered to match the child safeguarding statement. Going forward policies will be reviewed to ensure they correspond
Regulation 27 — Supervision
- The service did not ensure that the preschool children attending the service were supervised at all times as follows: • At approximately 13:26, all children were bought into the panda’s vs stich room to have a snack. 15 children in the room were being supervised by four staff members, when the inspector observed one boy leaving the room unnoticed. The child remained in an adjacent room until 13:29 when the inspector checked on them. A staff member entered the room at 13:30 and brought the child back into the main care room and closed the door
Provider's corrective action:
- In a written response the registered provider stated: • A discussion with staff took place and staff were reminded to ensure extra supervision as children are transitioning between rooms. Staff were reminded to close doors and observe in a case a child exits the room
Regulation 32 — Complaints
- (2) (a) (b) The service did not demonstrate compliance with their complaints policy as follows: • The service policy stated that ‘All complaints both formal and informal will be recorded in detail……Records will be stored in a complaints file and retained for two years’. There was no complaints file available in the service on the day. Minutes of a meeting with a parent in December 2024 referenced two complaints. There was no record of these complaints or the investigation into these complaints. • A complaint received by the service verbally and submitted to the inspectorate was not recorded or investigated at the time of the inspection. (3) (a) (b) There was no written record of any complaint in the service for the previous two years available to the inspectors on the day. This is contrary to records of meetings reviewed on the day where concerns had been raised to the person in charge
Provider's corrective action:
- In a written response the registered provide stated: (2) (a) (b) • The complaints folder was located following the inspection. The registered provider informed staff that any discussion based on issues arising and brought to her attention, even though spoken about will be documented and addressed. These will be stored in the complaints file. The correspondence from the incident was added to the folder where the investigation was still on-going • The complaint made verbally by parent was typed up post inspection. We will ensure that the complaints folder is easily located within the office and management know where to locate it. Any concerns/complaints from staff or parents will be documented and stored within the folder accordingly. (3) (a) (b) Any concerns/complaints from staff or parents will be documented and stored within the folder accordingly
Found compliant: Regulation 10, 11.