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 3
Investigator Renquist attempted to interview 4 children who were attending care in 2016. Three children were interview on 1/5/22, all three children recall attending the childcare. All three children disclosed they took naps in the playroom and never witnessed any inappropriate behavior between any of the children.
Investigator Renquist reported Anaheim police department interviewed C1 and C2. C1 was interviewed on 12/22/21 at CAST, Investigator Renquist, Detective Cao, and Deputy District Attorney Hong were present for the interview. C1 stated, back in 2016 in the bathroom of the childcare playroom C2 forced C1 to conduct inappropriate and sexual action on C2. C1 stated, this occurred multiple times. On 11/28/21 C2 was interviewed by Anaheim police department. C2 does remember attending the childcare facility. C2 denied ever showing anybody their private part or seeing any child’s naked or their private parts while in the childcare. C2 denied ever having made another child get undressed and did not know what sex was. C2 did not remember who C1 was.
Investigator Renquist interviewed 2 parents on 1/5/22 and 1/19/22. Both parents confirmed their children attending the childcare facility in 2016. Parent #1 (P1) stated, they had never witnessed anything inappropriate between the childcare children, and their children were always communicating to P1 what they had done at the childcare. Parent #2 (P2) stated, they were aware C2 was interviewed by Anaheim Police Department on 11/26/21.
Based on the investigation conducted by this agency, interviews were conducted with complainant party, licensee, prior staff, 3 children, 2 parents, and the additional CAST interview. Children’s roster and police report were reviewed. It was determined there was insufficient evidence that C1 was sexually abused by another child while in care. Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are Unsubstantiated.
Exit interview was conducted with Licensee, Fani Ramirez in Spanish. Notice of Site Visit was posted during the visit. Licensee 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. Licensee was provided a copy of their appeal rights (LIC 9058 01/16) and their signature on this form acknowledges receipt of these rights. First level appeals should be sent to the regional manager to the address listed above. |