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 | L denied the allegation on 3/26/21 at 03:40 pm stating that the allegations are absolutely untrue, claiming this complaint was filed due to a personal issue unrelated to the facility.
Through the course of the investigation, starting from 03/25/21 through 06/30/21, LPA interviewed Licensee, four adults, eight parents, and attempted to interview three children. Some children were not verbal, too young to interview, not available, or did not qualify to be interviewed. Regarding children being unsupervised, children and parents statements could not corroborate the allegation. C2, C3 stated there was always an adult with them. One adult (A1) stated that L would have the children play outside in the backyard unattended while her staff would clean inside (or when L was unavailable) but there was always staff around. There was no evidence to confirm that children’s care needs were not met due to a lack of supervision.
Regarding marijuana being smoked in the home, two adults (A1, A3) and one child (C3) did report observing L smoking marijuana in a separate shed located near the home but did not observe L smoking in the home. Other statements provided by two adults, three children and eight parents did not report any corroborating evidence of L smoking marijuana in the home, of L being impaired, or affecting her ability to provide care for the children. Some parent statements further noted that their children were happy or excited to go to the facility and did not have any concerns or negative experiences regarding L’s ability to provide care and supervision.
Regarding that the Licensee made inappropriate comments in the presence of day-care children, parents, children and adults interviewed could not corroborate the specific allegation but A1 and C-3 statements indicated that L would get upset and frustrated with the children and that L had gotten mad at C1 once. Another statement revealed that some parents were unhappy with L while other statements showed that many parents were happy with the level of care from L and had never heard L making inappropriate comments in front of the children.
Based on the investigation, although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there’s not a preponderance of evidence to corroborate the allegations and therefore, the allegations are unsubstantiated. This report was discussed and reviewed with L and an Exit interview was conducted with L. L’s signature was not recorded on this Complaint Investigation Report (CIR), however; L was provided with a copy of this report, and L’s confirmation of read receipt is on file. Notice of Site Visit shall be posted for 30 days. There were no title 22 deficiencies cited during this visit. Appeal Rights were provided. |