Complaint·March 12, 2025

(Continued from LIC 9099) Furthermore, staff (S1 & S3) stated the two involved children initially admitted that an incident occurred but when attempting to obtain further details to verify the alleged inappropriate touching, there was a lack of a response, or they received conflicting information. In addition, S1 stated that children go to the restroom by themselves and that on Mondays and Fridays, fewer staff are present, so daycare children are not supervised when they are in the restroom. According to children’s interviews, C3 initially described to staff the details of C1’s behavior while using the restroom with C2 which can be determined as inappropriate, but C3’s follow up interview did not provide the same description of the incident. In addition, C2’s statement did not provide any verifying information of the incident(s), although C2 did state that staff are not present when using the bathroom. According to IB’s investigation, C1 did not disclose any information regarding the allegation and no corroborating evidence was revealed. During the course of the investigation an allegation was raised involving an inappropriate action by a staff member which was addressed by the Department’s Investigative Branch resulting in no corroborating evidence to support the allegation. Interviews conducted by Parents (P3 – P6) did not have any current concerns with the allegation filed against the facility. Based on the information gathered during this investigation, although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove that the allegations occurred and therefore are determined to be unsubstantiated. There were no Title 22 deficiencies cited. This report was reviewed and discussed with Site Supervisor/Staff 3, Michelle Walker. Appeal rights were provided. Notice of Site Visit shall be posted for 30 days from today's visit.