05-003375 Tarsha Seay, D/B/A Seay Family Day Care Home vs. Department Of Children And Family Services
 Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Friday, February 24, 2006.


View Dockets  
Summary: Petitioner was denied renewal of her license for violations of Florida Administrative Code Rule 65C-20.10(1)(f). However, before entry of the Recommended Order Petitioner changed her address, effectively withdrawing her petition for renewal.

1STATE OF FLORIDA

4DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

8TARSHA SEAY, d/b/a SEAY FAMILY )

14DAY CARE HOME, )

18)

19Petitioner, )

21)

22vs. ) Case No. 0 5 - 3375

30)

31DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND )

36FAMILY SERVICES, )

39)

40Respondent. )

42)

43RECOMMENDED ORDER

45Pursuant to notice, and in accordance with Section 120.57,

54Florida Statutes (2005), a final hearing was held in this case

65on November 7, 2005, in Lakeland, Florida, before Fred L.

75Buckine, the designated Administrative Law J udge of the Division

85of Administrative Hearings.

88APPEARANCES

89For Petitioner: Tarsha Seay, pro se

95Seay Family Day Care Home

1007354 Beaumont Drive

103Lakeland, Florida 33810

106For Respondent: Jac k Emory Farley, Esquire

113Department of Children and

117Family Services

1194720 Old Highway 37

123Lakeland, Florida 33813 - 2030

128STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

132Th e issue is whether the renewal application for a family

143day care home license filed by Petitioner should be denied based

154upon alleged violations of Florida Administrative Code

161Rule 65C - 20.10(1)(f) , stated in Respondent 's letter of proposed

172denial dated August 3, 2005.

177PRELIMIN ARY STATEMENT

180By letter dated August 3, 2005, Respondent, Department of

189Children and Famil y Services, notified Petitioner, Tarsha Seay ,

198d /b/a/ Seay Family Day Care Home , located at 2829 Kathryn

209Avenue, Lakeland, F lorida , of the proposed denial of her

219appli cation based upon her inability to ensure the safety of

230children in her care. Respondent alleged that the family day

240care home of Petitioner located at 2 829 Kathryn Avenue,

250Lakeland, Florida , was found to be out of compliance in regard

261to the fencing requ irements as stated in Florida Administrative

271Code Rule 65C - 20.10(1)(f) on July 28 , 20 03 ; March 22 , 20 04 ;

285January 12 , 20 05 ; and June 10, 2005 . Petitioner timely disputed

297the allegations and petitioned for a f inal administrative

306hearing involving disputed issues of material fact.

313On September 19, 2005, this case was referred to the

323Division of Administrative Hearings , a nd , on September 20, 2005,

333the Initial Order was entered. On September 23, 2005, the Joint

344Response to the Initial Order was filed . On Sep tember 29, 2005,

357a Notice of Hearing, scheduling the final hearing for

366November 7, 2005, in Lakeland, Florida, and an Order of

376Pre - hearing Instructions were entered.

382At the final hearing on November 7, 2005, Respondent

391presented the testimony of three wit nesses: William Wright,

400c hild c are l icensing i nspector; Sheila Novels, c ertified c hild

414p rotection i nvestigator ; and Patricia Hamilton, c hild c are

425l icensing s upervisor. Respondent offered ten exhibits in

434evidence , of which seven exhibits ( 1 and 5 through 10 ) were

447received in evidence. 1 The request of Respondent for official

457recognition of Section s 402.301 through 402.319, Florida

465Statutes (2005) , and Florida Administrative Code Chapter 65C - 20

475was granted.

477Petitioner appeared pro se , did not give sworn tes timony ,

487and offered testimony of one character witness, Barbara Giles.

496On November 22, 2005, the one - volume T ranscript was filed . On

510November 28, 2005, Petitioner filed a Notice of Change of

520Address to 7354 Beaumont Drive, Lakeland, F lorida , and

529Respond ent filed its Proposed Recommended Order. On

537November 30, 2005, Petitioner filed a request for extension of

547time to file proposed recommended order. On December 1, 2005,

557an Order extending the filing date to December 23, 2005 , was

568entered . Petitioner f iled a Proposed Recommended Order on

578December 21, 2005. The Proposed Recommended Orders filed by the

588parties were considered by the undersigned.

594FINDINGS OF FACT

597Based upon the observation of and the demeanor of the

607witnesses while testifying, documentary materials in evidence,

614stipulations of the parties, and evidentiary ruling s during the

624hearing, the following relevant, material, and substantial facts

632are determined:

6341. Petitioner was initially granted her first family day

643care home license to operate a family day care home at

6542829 Kathryn Drive, Lakeland, Florida 33805 , on August 3, 2003,

664and her family day care home l icense was renewed by Respondent

676for operation at the above address for one additional year on

687August 3, 2004. At the time of the 200 4 family day care home

701license renewal, Petitioner was in compliance , with no

709noncompliant items noted in her record from 2003 through 2004

719that would have justified denial of the license renewal .

7292 . On an unspecified date prior to August 3, 2005,

740Petit ioner made an application to renew her family day care home

752license. On August 3, 2005, Respondent notified Petitioner by

761letter of the proposal to deny her application for renewal of

772her family day care home license. Petitioner contested the

781proposed de nial resulting in this administrative hearing on

790November 7, 2005.

7933. The denial letter of Respondent indicated that the

802decision was based upon, " [y] our inability to ensure the safety

813of children in your care."

8184. The letter continued stating: "Your F a mily Day Care

829Home was found to be out of compliance in regards to the fencing

842r equirements as stated in 65C - 20. 10(1)(f), Florida

852Administrative Code (F.A.C.), on 07/ 28 / 03, 03/ 22 / 04, 01/ 12 / 05,

86801/ 20 / 05, and 06/10/ 05." Petitioner acknowledged that th e fenc e

882was missing a few boards during the above period.

8915. It is undisputed that the January 12, 2005, inspection

901by Timothy Graddy, child care licensing inspector, found

909numerous violations. Upon reinspection by Mr. Gra d dy on

919January 20, 2005, the violatio ns noted during his January 12,

9302005, inspection were corrected, but for repair of the fence

940around the home and the und ated fire extinguisher inspection

950certification. Mr. Graddy was not called to testify regarding

959the severity of the noncompliance viola tions, the probability of

969harm to health or safety of the children nor actions taken by

981Petitioner to correct the cited violations. No other witness

990testified regarding these mandatory items.

9956. It is likewise undisputed that Respondent imposed an

1004admini strative fine on Petitioner for noncompliance item s

1013identified during an undated inspection in 2004. Petitioner,

1021without requesting a Chapter 120 , Florida Statutes, hearing,

1029paid the administrative fine of $100 on December 9, 2004, for

1040violations noted in compliance inspections that occurred between

1048January and December of 2004.

10537. It is likewise undisputed that the Department imposed a

1063second administrative fine on Petitioner for those violations

1071noted from inspections that occurred between January 1, 20 05,

1081and June 21, 2005. Again, and without requesting a Chapter 120 ,

1092Florida Statutes, hearing, Petitioner paid the administrative

1099fine of $250 on June 1, 2005.

11068. William Wright, c hild c are l icensing i nspector and a

1119member of the license application revi ew committee, reviewed the

1129relicensing application filed by Petitioner, voiced as his

1137primary concern a July 2005 central abuse hotline report of an

1148incident that occurred July 11, 2005. In the abuse report, a

1159two - year - old male child was reported to have had bruises on both

1174facial cheeks. The allegations narrative reflected the child

1182received the bruises by falling / tripping over his shoes.

1192Petitioner called the father of the child , who came by, observe d

1204the bruise on his child's cheek s , signed an inciden t statement

1216prepared by Petitioner , and took his child home. The father did

1227not return his child to Petitioner's family day care home.

1237During the subsequent investigation of the abuse incident ,

1245bruises were found on the child's thigh(s).

12529. Two or three days after the July 11, 2005 , incident

1263report, a subsequent investigation by local law enforcement and

1272follow - up investigation by Respondent's personnel resulted in

1281conflicting and unresolved accounts of how the child received

1290the bruises, where the child received the bruises , and who was

1301at fault for the bruises. It was unclear to the investigators

1312where and how the child received the bruises on his thighs.

1323What is clear is that the child did not receive t h igh bruises

1337while in Petitioner's family day ca re home . Respondent closed

1348the abuse report with "[S]ome indicator of bruises, welts and

1358marks. No intervention services were needed." There is

1366insufficient evidence to conclude, infer o r establish that while

1376in Petitioner's care the child sustained bru ises on his thighs

1387that were discovered several days after the July 11, 2005, abuse

1398report and , thus , to conclude the child's safety was at risk

1409while in Petitioner's family day care home.

141610. Another review committee member, Patricia Hamilton,

1423child care licensing supervisor, opined the proposed denial was

1432based upon "the Department's belief" that Petitioner was not

1441able to operate a day care without violating one or more Florida

1453A dministrative C ode rules. It is her belief that children in

1465Petitioner's f amily day care home would not be safe because the

1477historical inspection record compiled by Respondent , in her

1485opinion, demonstrated Petitioner could not consistently comply

1492with the rules of operating a safe family day care home. This

1504is a reasonable infe rence drawn from a historical review of

1515Petitioner 's family day care home inspection record.

152311. Petitioner, as of November 28, 2005, filed a Notice of

1534Change of Address. Petitioner now resides at 7354 Beaumont

1543Drive, Lakeland, Florida. By moving to a n ew residence,

1553Petitioner effectively withdrew the family day care home license

1562application for license of the residence at 2829 Kathryn Avenue,

1572Lakeland, Florida 33805, the subject of this case.

1580CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

158312. The Division of Administrative Hearin gs has

1591jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter in this case.

1601§ 120.57(1), Fla . Stat . (2005).

160813. Section 402.310, Florida Statutes (2005), states:

1615(1)(a) The departmen t or local licensing

1622agency may deny, suspend, or revoke a

1629license or impos e an administrati ve fine not

1638to exceed $100 per violation, per day, for

1646the violation of any provision of ss.

1653402.301 - 402.319 or rules adopted there

1660under . However, where the violation could

1667or does cause death or serious harm, the

1675dep artment or local lic ensing agency may

1683impose an administrative fine, not to exceed

1690$500 per violation per day.

1695(b) In determining the appropriate

1700disciplinary action to be taken for a

1707violation as provided in paragraph (a), the

1714following factors shall be considered:

17191 . The severity of the violation,

1726including the probability that death or

1732serious harm to the health or safety of any

1741person will result or has resulted, the

1748severity of the act ual or potential harm,

1756and the extent to which the provisions of

1764ss. 402. 301 - 40 2.319 have been violated.

17732. Actions taken by the licensee to

1780correct the violation or to remedy

1786complaints.

17873. Any previ ous violations of the

1794licensee.

1795(2) When the department has reasonable

1801cause to believe that grounds for the

1808denial, susp ension, or revocation of a

1815license or imposition of an administrative

1821fine exist, it shall determine the matter in

1829accordance with procedures prescribed in

1834chapt er 120. When the local licensing

1841agency has reasonable cause to believe that

1848grounds for the d enial, suspension, or

1855revocation of a license or imposition of an

1863administrative fine exist, it shall notify

1869the applicant or licensee in writing,

1875stating the grounds upon whic h the license

1883is being denied, suspended, or revoked or an

1891administrative fine i s being imposed. I f

1899the applicant or licensee makes no written

1906request for a hearing to the local licensing

1914agency within 15 days from receipt of such

1922notice, the license shall be deemed denied,

1929suspended, or revoked or an administrative

1935fine shall be imp osed.

194014. The party asserting the affirmative of an issue has

1950the burden of proof. Department of Banking and Finance v.

1960Osborne Stern & Co. , 670 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 1996); Balino v.

1972Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services , 348 So. 2d

1981349, 350 (Fla . 1st DCA 1977).

198815. The denial of an application for a family day care

1999home license is met by a preponderance of substantial evidence

2009in the record.

201216. Respondent provided a preponderance of substantial

2019evidence supporting the stated reasons for denyin g Petitioner's

2028application for family day care home relicensure.

203517. Pursuant to Florida Administrative Code Rule 65C -

204413.004(4), "A license is issued for a specific location, is not

2055transferable, and is valid for one year from the date of

2066issuance." P eti tioner, by moving to a new residence after

2077commencing th is proceeding , effectively withdrew her renewal

2085application and her challenge to the denial by Respondent, which

2095i s the subject of this proceeding.

2102RECOMMENDATION

2103Based upon the foregoing f inding s of f act and c onclusions

2116of l aw hereinabove, it is

2122RECOMMENDED that the Department of Children and Famil y

2131Servic es ente r a final order dismissing the p etition filed by

2144T arsha S eay , d/b/a S eay F amily D ay C are H ome .

2160DONE AND ENTERED this 2 4th day of February , 2 006 , in

2172Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

2176S

2177FRED L. BUCKINE

2180Administrative Law Judge

2183Division of Administrative Hearings

2187The DeSoto Building

21901230 Apalachee Parkway

2193Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3060

2198(850) 488 - 9675 SUNCOM 278 - 9675

2206Fax Filing (850) 921 - 6847

2212www.doah.state.fl.us

2213Filed with the Clerk of the

2219Division of Administrative Hearings

2223this 2 4th day of February, 2006 .

2231ENDNOTE

22321/ Exhibit 1 is a copy of the denial letter . Exhibits 2, 3,

2246and 4 ar e charts compiled fr om records of violations from years

2259past of which there is no information regarding the inspectors

2269who conducted the inspection and noted the violation, the

2278outcome of each inspection, the correction of noted violations,

2287the severity of the violation, or t he impact on the care of

2300children to each subsequent family day care license renewals in

23102003 and 2004 and to the application for the 2005 renewal .

2322These charts were not self authenticating, were not required by

2332law to be kept , the information source for each document was not

2344identified , and contain ed unsupported hearsay upon hearsay

2352intended to establish fact not based upon any promulgated rule

2362or specified criteria in effect at the time such information was

2373compiled or when the denial letter was posted. Simply put, a

2384Petitioner licensee would have no means to challenge allegations

2393the Department maintains "establish a pattern" for future

2401violations when the inspectors, of necessity, make subjective

2409determination whether an item is in compliance o r not.

2419Respondent's counsel did not provide a copy of Exhibit 10, i.e.

2430a second abuse report on an unidentified two - year - old child in

2444Petitioner's family day care home.

2449COPIES FURNISHED :

2452Jack Emory Farley, Esquire

2456Department of Children and

2460Family Services

24624 720 Old Highway 37

2467Lakeland, Florida 33813 - 2030

2472Tarsha Seay

2474Seay Family Day Care Home

24797354 Beaumont Drive

2482Lakeland, Florida 33810

2485Gregory Venz, Agency Clerk

2489Department of Children and

2493Family Services

2495Building 2, Room 204B

24991317 Winewood Boulevard

2502Tall ahassee, Florida 32399 - 0700

2508John Copeland, General Counsel

2512Department of Children and

2516Family Services

2518Building 2, Room 204

25221317 Winewood Boulevard

2525Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0700

2530NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

2536All parties have the right to su bmit written exceptions within

254715 days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions

2558to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that

2569will issue the Final Order in this case.

Select the PDF icon to view the document.
PDF
Date
Proceedings
PDF:
Date: 06/09/2006
Proceedings: Final Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/05/2006
Proceedings: Agency Final Order
PDF:
Date: 03/14/2006
Proceedings: Notice of Appearance (filed by J. Domineck, Jr.).
PDF:
Date: 02/24/2006
Proceedings: Recommended Order
PDF:
Date: 02/24/2006
Proceedings: Recommended Order (hearing held November 7, 2005). CASE CLOSED.
PDF:
Date: 02/24/2006
Proceedings: Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
PDF:
Date: 12/21/2005
Proceedings: (Petitioner`s) Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/01/2005
Proceedings: Order Granting Extension of Time to File Proposed Recommended Orders (parties shall file their proposed recommended orders on or before December 23, 2005).
PDF:
Date: 11/30/2005
Proceedings: Letter to Judge Buckine from T. Seay regarding request for extension of time to file proposed recommended order.
PDF:
Date: 11/28/2005
Proceedings: Department`s Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 11/28/2005
Proceedings: Change of Address filed by T. Seay.
Date: 11/22/2005
Proceedings: Transcript of Proceedings filed.
PDF:
Date: 11/10/2005
Proceedings: Letter to Judge Buckine from C. Bowman regarding ordering of the Transcript filed.
Date: 11/07/2005
Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
PDF:
Date: 10/31/2005
Proceedings: Letter to T. Seay from J. Farley regarding exhibits and witnesses to be used at the Hearing filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/29/2005
Proceedings: Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
PDF:
Date: 09/29/2005
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing (hearing set for November 7, 2005; 9:30 a.m.; Lakeland, FL).
PDF:
Date: 09/23/2005
Proceedings: Joint Response to Initial Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/20/2005
Proceedings: Initial Order.
PDF:
Date: 09/19/2005
Proceedings: Proposed Denial of Renewal Application for a Family Day Care Home filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/19/2005
Proceedings: Request for a Hearing for Proposed Appeal to all Allegations listed in denial letter from the Department of Children and Families Child Care Licensing Unit filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/19/2005
Proceedings: Notice (of Agency referral) filed.

Case Information

Judge:
FRED L. BUCKINE
Date Filed:
09/19/2005
Date Assignment:
09/20/2005
Last Docket Entry:
06/09/2006
Location:
Lakeland, Florida
District:
Middle
Agency:
ADOPTED IN PART OR MODIFIED
 

Counsels

Related Florida Statute(s) (5):