1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32 | Page 2 of 2
During the investigation LPA interviewed 2 adults, the licensee, co-licensee, 2 staff members, and 3 children. LPA also reviewed children's records. Complainant stated a child disclosed they do not like day care and when asked why the child stated, "I don't like Roberto he is mean and takes kids to lay down with him". LPA conducted an interview with the subject child and there were no disclosures made to support the allegation. In the interviews conducted with other day care children children stated they like their day care and the licensee, co-licensee and staff members are nice. The licensee stated Roberto, co-licensee helps with the children on an as needed basis however primary care is provided by herself and 2 assistants. The licensee stated Roberto's primary job duty is to do school drop-off and pick up for school age children. The licensee stated children nap on individual mats (photographs were taken) and she is usually in the room to supervise children. The two assistants interviewed stated they are present when children nap and Roberto provides minimal assistance with the children. In an interview conducted with the co-licensee he denied the allegations.
Some children could not be interviewed due being non-verbal. Based on the information obtained from the interviews conducted there was a lack of evidence to corroborate the allegations. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged personal rights violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated.
Exit interview was conducted. Notice of Site Visit was posted during the visit. Facility representative was informed that the notice of site visit must be posted for 30 consecutive days. Failure to post will result in civil penalties of $100. |