Complaint·April 2, 2021

Facility staff are reporting that the RP was notified both verbally and in writing about C1 being bitten on the cheek. Staff 4 (S4) and Staff 5 (S5) are reporting that on 01/27/2021 RP was picking up C1 and present when C1 was bitten on the cheek and was provided a written report. S4 and S5 are reporting that they were in the room and were supervising the children when the incident occurred and S4 observed the incident. The facility and Rp have provided a copy of the written report with RP signature that was created for the incident that happened on 01/27/2021. Staff are reporting that C1 was bitten on forearm on 02/10/2021. Staff 4 and Staff 6 are reporting that the incident was recorded, and RP was notified of the incident verbally during pick up and in writing the following day (02/11/2021). S4 and S5 are reporting that the teacher (Staff 3) who was supervising and witnessed C1 get bitten on the forearm left early on the day of the incident and was unable to write the report, but RP was notified of the incident during pick up. Staff 3 (S3) reported that on the day of the incident S3 was supervising children in the playground when C1 was bitten by another child in the playground. S3 stated she heard C1 winning so she separated the children. S3 is stating that S3 did not observe C1 get bitten on the forearm. S3 did not see the bite mark because C1 was wearing long sleeves. S3 did not see the child that could have bitten C1 because there were four children around C1. S3 is stating that she found out C1 was bitten because she was asked by S4 if she witnessed the incident. S3 states she did not check the child after RP complaint and did not see the bite marks. After considering available information, S3 was not providing adequate visual supervision to see the child get bitten and attend to the bite sustained by C1. Based on available information and evidence obtained over the course of the investigation it was revealed that on 02/10/2021 Staff 3 was supervising children in the playground when C1 was bitten on the forearm but S3 did not witness the incident. S3 was made aware of the incident when question by S4 about it. Based on LPAs observation and interviews which were conducted and record review(s), the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation(s) is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. California code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 12 & Chapter 1), are being cited on the attached LIC9099D. Pg 2. The Director/Owner Peggy Nairn was advised that the Notice of Site Visit must be posted at the entrance of the facility for a period of 30 days . A copy of the licensing report (LIC9099) must also be posted for 30 days. If these requirements are not met, civil penalties in the amount of $100 per violation will be assessed. **In addition; A copy of this report must be provided to the authorized representatives of all currently enrolled children and any newly enrolled child for the following 12 months. The ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF LICENSING REPORTS (LIC9224) shall be signed and kept in each of the children’s records. The report shall be provided no later than the next business day or the next day the child is in care. There is one Type A deficiency being cited during today’s visit. An Exit Interview was conducted, a copy of this Report, Notice of Site Visit and Appeal Rights were explained and emailed to Director/Owner Peggy Nairn . It has been explained that a reply to the email shall be considered a substitute for the hard-copy signature Pg 3.