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 | On 12/20/19 starting at 8:11 am, LPAs Augustin and N. Cunningham qualified and interviewed five children (C2, C3, C5, C6 & C7) at 8:45 am, but two children (C4 & C8) did not qualify to interview. LPAs further interviewed two staff (S1 & S2) at 9:00am. Interviews conducted with five children and two staff did not provide corroborating evidence to support the allegations that C1 sustained a red eye as a result of staff not providing adequate supervision, and staff did not notify C1’s authorized representative of incident. According to S1’s statement, S1 noticed C1’s right eye was red when C1 was dropped off at care at 8:15am, and at approximately 3:00pm, while C1 was playing with soap, C1 rubbed soap in his eye and hair. S1 washed C1’s whole face and did not see any injuries on C1. S1 claimed C1 was fine and that the incident did not rise to the level where the incident needed to be reported to C1’s authorized representative.
On 12/23/19 at 10:20am, LPA Augustin attempted to interview one child (C1), however, C1 did not qualify to interview because C1 was not verbal to the extent necessary to provide responses. On 01/27/20 at 9:11am, LPA conducted subsequent interviews with six parents (P2, P3, P4, P5, P6 & P7), which did not provide corroborating evidence to indicate that C1 sustained an injury while in care.
On 02/14/20 at 8:18am, LPA conducted subsequent interviews with the Assistant Director (AD), two staff (S2, S3 & S4), and obtained additional information from S2. Interviews conducted with AD and two staff did not provide corroborating evidence to support the allegations. Therefore, based on the investigation, the allegations are unsubstantiated. This report was reviewed and discussed with CD. Notice of Site Visit shall be posted for 30 days from today’s inspection. There were no Title 22 deficiencies during today's inspection. Appeal Rights were provided. |