STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE OFFICE OF

ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

COUNTY OF DAVIDSON 01 DHR 1387

MICHAEL R. TILLEY )

TINA W. TILLEY )

Petitioner, )

)

v. ) DECISION

)

N.C. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH )

AND HUMAN SERVICES )

Respondent. )

On December 17, 2001, Administrative Law Judge Melissa Owens Lassiter heard this contested case in High Point, North Carolina.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Tina Tilley, Pro se

289 Rosebriar Drive

Lexington, NC 27292

For Respondent: Jane Rankin Thompson

Assistant Attorney General

Division of Social Services

310 E. Third St – Suite 200

Winston-Salem, NC 27101

ISSUE

Did the Respondent properly revoke Petitioner’s family foster home license?

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. On December 22, 1998, Davidson County Department of Social Services (DSS) received a report of inappropriate supervision of a child at the day care home operated by Petitioner Tina Tilley.

2. Randy Glass, child protective services investigator with Davidson County DSS, investigated the report of inappropriate supervision. On December 22, 1998, Glass interviewed the victim child in her own home. She was a talkative three year old who stated that she and other day care children were allowed to play outside without a “big person” watching them. All the children were three or four years old and this lack of supervision occurred on more than one occasion.

3. The victim child’s mother stated she was unaware of any problem until the Tilleys’ next door neighbor recognized her daughter in the supermarket and told her that one day the child had been in the neighbor’s yard for 20 minutes before Ms. Tilley came to get her. This incident was corroborated by the next door neighbor later that day, as was the fact the preschool children played outside without adult supervision.

4. On December 22, 1998, Mr. Glass, along with Janet Curlee of the Division of Child Development, the licensing agency for day care home and facilities, visited the Tilley home. The Tilley home was in a subdivision off Highway 8, about 50-75 feet from the street. The yard was not fenced and there were woods on one side and a house on the other.

5. Ms. Tilley at first denied the day care children were ever outside without adult supervision, but later admitted her thirteen year old son watched some preschool age children outside while she cared for others inside. She also stated a child did get away to the neighbor’s yard for a few minutes before she found her. Ms. Tilley’s thirteen year old son confirmed he sometimes watched day care children, as did his two younger brothers.

6. Mr. Glass interviewed the parents of three children, whose names were supplied by Ms. Tilley, and they all expressed no concerns about the care their children were receiving from Ms. Tilley.

7. On January 8, 1999, Davidson County DSS staffed this case and made the decision to substantiate inappropriate supervision of the day care children by Ms. Tilley. Both Ms. Tilley and the Division of Child Development were notified. By letter dated May 16, 1999, and sent certified mail, the Division of Child Development notified Ms. Tilley and Davidson County DSS that it was issuing a written warning to Ms. Tilley about her day care license. In that letter, the Division explained the basis of that action was the January 1999 substantiation of neglect by Davidson County DSS.

8. The January 1999 neglect substantiation was also sent to the State’s central registry of abuse and neglect cases. Because the allegations were substantiated only on the day care children, and not Ms. Tilley’s own children, the required form listed the perpetrator of neglect as “Tina Tilley Day Care.”

9. In fall 2000, Mr. and Mrs. Tilley applied, and were licensed, as foster parents with Davidson County DSS. Because 10 N.C.A.C. 41F.0807(a) prohibits licensure as a foster parent of anyone who has a substantiation of abuse or neglect, the central registry was checked under the names of Michael Tilley and Tina Tilley. The check for “Tina Tilley” yielded no results, apparently because the substantiation was in the name of “Tina Tilley day care home”.

10. In March 2001, another report of neglect was received against the Tilleys. Davidson County DSS asked Rowan County DSS to do the investigation, recognizing the Tilleys were foster parents. Rowan County DSS did not substantiate the report of neglect, but did uncover the January 1999 substantiation.

11. By letter dated June 25, 2001, Respondent sent the Tilleys a Notice of Administrative Action revoking their foster care license based on the 1999 neglect substantiation.

12. At the administrative hearing, Ms. Tilley chose not to testify on her own behalf, but argued in closing that she had provided good care for her day care children.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. Pursuant to North Carolina General Statute 131D, Article 1A, the Social Services Commission has adopted rules governing the licensure of family foster homes. Those rules are found in Chapter 41F of the North Carolina Administrative Code. 10 NC Admin. Code 41F .0807(a) provides that, “licenses are automatically revoked when an agency duly authorized by law to investigate allegations of abuse or neglect finds that the foster parent has abused or neglected a child.”

2. The Respondent has shown by substantial evidence that Davidson County Department of Social Services followed proper procedures in conducting the protective services investigation involving the Petitioner, and appropriately found Petitioner to have neglected her preschool day care children by not providing appropriate supervision.

3. Respondent’s action in revoking Petitioners’ family foster home license was proper, and should be upheld based on the neglect substantiation of inappropriate supervision.

DECISION

Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the undersigned determines that the Respondent’s decision to revoke Petitioners’ family foster home license should be AFFIRMED.

ORDER AND NOTICE

The Department of Health and Human Services will make the Final Decision in this contested case. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-36(b), (b1), (b2), and (b3) enumerate the standard of review and procedures the agency must follow in making its Final Decision, and adopting and/or not adopting the Findings of Fact and Decision of the Administrative Law Judge.

Pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-36(a), before the agency makes a Final Decision in this case, it is required to give each party an opportunity to file exceptions to this decision, and to present written arguments to those in the agency who will make the Final Decision. N.C. Gen. Stat. 150B-36(b)(3) requires the agency to serve a copy of its Final Decision on each party, and furnish a copy of its Final Decision to each party’s attorney of record and to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-6714.

This the 15th of February, 2002.

______

Melissa Owens Lassiter

Administrative Law Judge

4