VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

Boys & Girls Clubs of Southeast Virginia- Rosemont Unit
1505 Competitor Court
Va beach, VA 23456
(757) 368-4445

Current Inspector: Christopher Robinson (757) 404-2322

Inspection Date: March 4, 2019 and March 6, 2019

Complaint Related: No

Areas Reviewed:

22VAC40-665 INTRODUCTION 22VAC40-665 ADMINISTRATION 22VAC40-665 STAFF QUALIFICATIONS & TRAINING 22VAC40-665 PHYSICAL PLANT 22VAC40-665 STAFFING & SUPERVISION 22VAC40-665 PROGAMS 22VAC40-665 SPECIAL CARE PROVISIONS & EMERGENCIES 22VAC40-665 SPECIAL SERVICES

Comments:

A Subsidy Health and Safety inspection was conducted on 3/4/19 from 2:20pm - 4:00pm. During the inspection there were 75 children ages six years old to ten years old in care with 16 staff. Children were observed participating in various activities in the classrooms, and doing homework. Records were reviewed for ten children while at the facility. The records for eight staff were reviewed on 3/6/19 at the central office. A licensing inspection was also conducted this date; the two inspections combined cover all subsidy health and safety requirements. Only subsidy requirements that are not covered in licensing standards are reviewed during this supplemental inspection. Violations were found during the supplemental subsidy health and safety inspection requirements and are identified on the violation notice.

Violations:

Standard #:	22VAC40-665-520-B-11
Description:	Based on a review of nine children's records, it was determined that the vendor did not ensure that a written allergy care plan for each child with a diagnosed food allergy, to include instructions from a physician regarding the food to which the child is allergic to and steps to be taken in the event of a suspected or confirmed allergic reaction. Evidence: 1. The record for child #1 contained documentation from a physician that child #1 was allergic to peanuts. However there was no allergy plan present for child #1 at the facility. 2. The record for child #4 contained documentation from a physician that child #4 was allergic to tree nuts. However there was no allergy plan present for child #4 at the facility. 3. The record for child #5 contained documentation from a physician that child #5 was allergic to cashews. However there was no allergy plan present for child #5 at the facility. 4. Staff #1 (Unit Director) reviewed the record for child #1, child #4, and child #5 and confirmed that there was not an allergy plan for any of the children.
Plan of Correction:	The vendor responded: The parents of all the children will be asked to provide an allergy plan. All newly enrolled children that have food allergies will be required to provide an allergy plan from a physician.
Standard #:	22VAC40-665-650-E
Description:	Based on a review of policies and procedures for the facility and interviews, it was determined that the vendor did not ensure that a written policy and procedure that describes how the vendor will ensure that each group of children receives care by consistent staff or team of staff members was developed and implemented. Evidence: 1. The Licensing Inspector could not find the policy and procedures for maintaining consistent staff at the facility during the inspection. 2. Staff #5 confirmed that there was no documentation available for viewing during the inspection regarding how the vendor will ensure that each group of children receives care by consistent staff or team of staff members.
Plan of Correction:	The vendor responded: A a written policy and procedure that describes how the vendor will ensure that each group of children receives care by consistent staff or team of staff members will be developed and a copy will be placed at the facility in the Licensing Book. All current staff and any new staff will review this policy.
Standard #:	22VAC40-665-770-B-5
Description:	Based on a review of the center's policies and interviews, it was determined that the vendor did not ensure that they shall develop and implement the continuity of operations procedures to ensure that essential functions are maintained during an emergency. Evidence: 1. There was no documentation available for viewing during the inspection regarding continuity of operations procedures to ensure that essential functions are maintained during an emergency. 2. Staff #5 confirmed that there was no documentation available for viewing during the inspection regarding continuity of operations procedures to ensure that essential functions are maintained during an emergency.
Plan of Correction:	The vendor responded: We will develop procedures for the continuity of operations procedures to ensure that essential functions are maintained during an emergency. A copy of the policy and procedures will be placed in the Licensing Book at the facility, and the staff will be trained on it.