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 | Per the interviews with the Licensee, and children, they stated at the time of incident, the Licensee was in the day care with the children. Per the Licensee, she intervened and redirected child #2 upon child #1 being scratched by child #2. The Licensee stated the incident was beyond her control, and not due to a lack of supervision. Child #2 admitted to scratching child #1, but not intentionally. It cannot be determined if child #1 sustained the injuries due to a lack of supervision by the Licensee. The Licensee stated she observed a tiny drop of blood underneath child #1’s nose, but that it did not continue to bleed. The Licensee stated child #1 had a faint-like scratch on the cheek. The Licensee stated she immediately reported the incident to the licensing office, and verbally advised the parent. The Licensee stated Spanish is her primary language, and she attempted to communicate with the parent, but the parent would not listen to her (Licensee). However, there was conflicting evidence and no witnesses to corroborate the allegation that due to a lack of supervision child #1 sustained an unexplained injury (scratch on the face and a wound beneath the nose). Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. Therefore, the allegation is Unsubstantiated.
LPA Marie Hernandez explained the complaint investigation report, and the Licensee stated she understood. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of the report was emailed to the Licensee. The Appeal Rights were discussed and provided. The Licensee was advised that acknowledgement of the receipt of the report is to be received within 24 hours. NOTE on Facility Signature: SEE FILE FOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. |