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 | Continued from 9099............
Continuing in the investigation, LPA found that although a child was left outside by staff 2 (S2), S2 stated that she did not formally notify the Director the day of the incident. S2 stated that the Director may have been made aware of the incident as the child was brought inside, through the front door, by another staff member (S3). LPA has observed that the alleged gate that was utilized cannot be opened without an alarm ringing. Although the Director may have been aware of the incident, through observations, interviews with the Director, and record review, it cannot be determined whether the Director was fully made aware of the details of the incident in a timely manner to report to Community Care Licensing.
Based on the information obtained, LPA was not able to determine that there is a lack of supervision during nap time and that the facility did not report a child being left outside, therefore, the allegation is determined to be UNSUBSTANTIATED, meaning that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove it. An exit interview was conducted.
Notice of site visit and appeal rights were also addressed. The Notice of site visit shall remain posted for 30 days for guardian/parental review. |