complaint·July 12, 2023

Throughout the course of the investigation, LPA Ornelas conducted interviews with the Reporting Party, three staff, one parent, one child; and obtained documents in the form of four written staff statements and a page out of a catalog. The parent of C1 stated that they were not aware of the incident, but reported that they have no concerns regarding the care and supervision that their child is receiving. Parent also reported that their child appears happy at the Center. C1 corroborated that it was S2 that removed the ball from their mouth. The four staff who were in the classroom that day did not recount corroborating stories as to what occurred the day of the incident, but all corroborated that C1 had a ball in their mouth and that it was S2 who removed the ball from the mouth of C1. The page out of the catalog, which is a purchase catalog, shows a ball which is “not appropriate for children under 3 years”. (Child 1 falls within this age range.) Though the child had a ball in their mouth, there was not a lack of supervision since S2 reports that they saw C1 place the ball in their mouth and immediately removed the ball. However, as the incident did occur and C1 did place the ball in their mouth with four staff present, the incident did occur. Based on the evidence as presented above, the allegation that “Day care child put a foreign object in their mouth due to a lack of supervision” has been determined to be Unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint is unsubstantiated means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the allegation occurred. A notice of site visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days. Exit interview conducted and report was reviewed with Principal, Felicia Torrence.