LPA Duron interviewed one volunteer parent at the facility and contacted five parents by phone and was able to interview three parents. All interviewed parents stated they did not have any concern with facility.

Based on LPA’s interviews, observations and reviewing records, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 12, Chapter 1 Section 102417 Operation of a Family Child Care (g)The home shall be free from defects or conditions which might endanger a child. Please refer to attached 9099D for documentation of deficiencies.

This requirement is not met as evidence by: Based on LPA’s observations of fence having nails exposed, and no cushioned materials under climbing structures to absorb the falls which poses a potential health risk to the children in care.

An exit interview was completed. The report was reviewed and discussed. Appeal Rights were provided. The facility representative was provided a copy of their appeal rights and their signature on this form acknowledges receipt of these rights. All appeals must be in writing and received by the Licensing office within 15 business days. Any proposed changes to the physical plant, including telephone number, shall be immediately reported to the Department.

During the initial unannounced inspection dated 2/9/23. LPAs Duron and Thompson observed 11 children in care with Licensee present, as well as one qualified staff and one parent volunteer. LPA Duron and Thompson observed facility grounds where there were no signs of smoking and no cigarette butts were observed in the front yard or the back yard of the home. LPA’s observed children being supervised by Licensee, teacher and 1 parent volunteer. At the time of visit children were sitting in patio and engaged in story time with S1 and S2. LPA’s observed children engaged in hands on activities as they worked with age appropriate materials in the environment and observed staff supervising children as they engaged in activities and communicated with children in care.

During the staff interview, licensee disclosed she left the house once a month for about 2 hours in the morning from 8:45am – 11am to volunteer in her own child’s school. While she was gone, her qualified staff and the volunteer parents help supervising the children. S2 also confirmed licensee left the facility once a month for about 2 hours in the morning to volunteer at licensee’s child school. All interviewed staff stated children were supervised at all times by staff and parent volunteers and no one smokes at the facility.

LPA Duron contacted 4 parents. All interviewed parents stated they did not have any concern with facility.

During the investigation, LPA Duron interviewed 3 children, no disclosures were made by any children.

On 3/28/23 LPA Duron re-visited facility on an unannounced inspection. LPA observed licensee, one staff, and one parent volunteer with 7 children present at the facility. LPA observed facility grounds where there were no signs of smoking, and no cigarette butts were observed in the front yard or the back yard of the home. LPA observed staff and volunteer supervising children as staff engaged in activities with children as they were present outside with the children in care.

Based on the information gathered from LPAs’ interviews, observation, and reviewing records, there is insufficient evidence to corroborate the allegations of facility. Licensee is not present the appropriate amount of time in the facility, Day care children are not supervised appropriately, Adults smoke in the facility premises while children are in care. Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the allegations did not occur in the day care facility, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED.

(Cont) Page 2 of 3

End of Report. Page 2 of 3.