In Matter of Jose Y., 177 AD2d 580, 576 N.Y.S.2d 297 [2d Dept 1991] although the record did not support a finding of "actual knowledge" that would constitute abuse, neglect was established by the mother's failure to recognize behavioral changes in her five-year-old child even though the signs had been described to her by a teacher and social worker and a reasonably prudent parent would have observed these signs and taken protective action. In Matter of Anna Marie A. v. Elena A., 194 AD2d 608, 609, 599 N.Y.S.2d 66 [2d Dept 1993] the evidence did not support a finding that respondent had "actual knowledge;" however, since she should have known that the children were in imminent danger and a reasonably prudent parent would have observed the signs of sexual abuse and taken action to protect the children, the mother neglected the children. In re Alexis C., 27 AD3d 646, 811 N.Y.S.2d 449 [2d Dept 2006] respondent neglected her nine-year-old daughter where the child told her about an incident of sexual abuse involving her fiancee but respondent did not believe the child, allowed her fiancee to continue residing in the home and took no other action. In re Heather S.,19 AD3d 606, 607, 797 N.Y.S.2d 136 [2d Dept 2005] respondent neglected her child by permitting her boyfriend to continue to reside in the home after she was informed of the abuse]; See also Matter of Tantalyn TT., 115 AD2d 799, 800, 495 N.Y.S.2d 740 [3d Dept 1985] the children were neglected by respondent who did not have "actual knowledge" of the abuse, since a determination of neglect is based on a failure to exercise a minimum degree of care necessary to protect a child from impairment of physical and mental well-being.