Inspector’s narrative
What the inspector wrote
Allegation regarding- Staff did not ensure child was kept in clean and dry clothing while in care. According to RP, they picked up C1 4 times in June of 2024 and observed C1 to be soaked through their diaper. RP stated that the facility does require parents to provide extra clothes, diapers, and wipes. RP recalls only 1 time where C1s clothes was changed and was asked to bring more clothes. Per RP, they spoke with S2 and confirmed that the diaper was not being changed; however, the conversation ended due to parents arriving to pick up. RP recalls that S2 stated they would change C1s diaper if it was observed to be soaked. RP also stated that they spoke with S1 regarding their concerns of diaper changing and felt that S1 implied that RP was lying. According to the RP, they can confirm that C1s diaper was not changed because RP had purchased new diapers with different designs and noticed that the diaper C1 was dropped off in was still on. Interviews with staff revealed that parents are required to bring extra clothes, diapers, and wipes. Staff also revealed that they change children’s clothing depending on how dirty they get. S1 and S2 stated they change diapers as needed. Interviews with staff also revealed that there is no log documenting clothing and diaper changes. All staff deny leaving children with dirty diapers on. Interviews with P3 revealed that C4 had developed a severe rash a few times (exact dates unknown). P3 does not know the details of what lead to C4 having a severe rash; however, P3 stated that C4s rash was so severe that C4 couldn’t walk and that the skin was peeling. P3 did not have a date on when this occurred but stated this incident happened this year. Per P3, C4 was not bleeding and was not taken to the doctor. C4s rash lasted a week and healed with home remedies. P3 also stated that there haven’t been any other incidents regarding diaper changes or rashes. Staff interviews found that that toddler’s diaper changes are not recorded, and that staff does not have allocated times for diaper checks. Rather, interviews found that toddlers are changed on an as needed basis.
This agency has investigated the complaint alleging “Staff did not ensure child was kept in clean and dry clothing while in care.” Based on interviews conducted, LPA found the complaint to be deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. Meaning that, although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred.
A notice of site visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days.
Exit interview conducted and report was reviewed with director Irene Lopez.
Page 2 of 2
Allegation regarding- Child sustained injuries while in care. According to the complainant, C1 would come home with bites, bruises, and scratches caused by other children at the facility. According to the RP, injuries were discovered when C1 would take a bath. Per RP, injuries observed on C1 began in February of 2024. LPA was provided with a screenshot of a text message between RP and S2 dated 03/25/24, where S2 apologized to RP about C1 being bit by C2 without S2s knowledge. During LPAs initial interview with S2, staff denied that a biting incident had occurred in March. However, S2 later confirmed that a biting incident did occur on 06/10/24. LPA’s interviews with S1 thru S3 confirmed that a second biting incident happened on 06/10/24. According to S1 and S2, C1 and C2 were fighting over the Little Tikes Cozy Coupe when C2 unexpectedly bit C1 on the arm. RP was notified of the 06/10/24 biting incident. LPA also observed another screenshot of a text message between RP and S2 where there is a picture of C1 with a bump on their forehead (no date was observed). S2 states they forgot to mention to RP that C1 had a bump on their head. In a text message S2 disclosed to RP that C1 and another child were playing outdoors when both children started fighting over a toy and C1 was subsequently hit on the forehead. When asked, S2 stated that they didn’t recall the text message. S1 thru 3 stated that daily assessments on children are conducted during drop off and if there are any observations, it will be documented, and parents will be notified. S1 and S2 deny observing bumps, bruises, or scratches on C1. Interviews with P2 revealed that they were aware that C2 had bitten C1 because the facility contacted P2 and provided a written report. Interviews conducted with P3 revealed that C2 has bitten C4 at least 3 times while in care. P3 stated that C4 was bitten on their back, arm, and bruising was also observed. LPA conducted file reviews for C1 thru 8 and observed only (2) ouch reports. C1 had an ouch report regarding the biting incident on 06/10 and C4 had (1) ouch report not related to the biting incidents. LPA also obtained pictures of C1 and observed a bite mark on their arm, a bump on their head, a bruise on their arm, and what appears to be a scratch on their ear and leg. LPA also obtained a picture of C4s bite on their back.
Allegation regarding- Staff did not prevent child from having altercations with other children in care. Per RP, staff do not pay attention to children and do not prevent them from fighting with each other. RP also stated that they spoke with S3 regarding the altercations involving C1 with other children in care. Per RP, S3 stated that C1 is very active and pushes children resulting in other children hitting C1. According to the RP, they were not made aware that C1 displayed aggressive behaviors. Interviews with staff revealed that it is normal for children to fight; however, they speak with children to be nice and share toys.
Page 2 of 4
Based on staff’s observations, there are no concerns regarding the altercations between C1, C2 or other children in care. LPA obtained evidence that on 03/25/24, S2 was not aware that C2 had bit C1. LPA obtained evidence of text messages where staff acknowledges that the facility is trying to find a solution to assist C2 with their reaction to bite other children. Interviews with P3 revealed that there has been more than (1) altercation between C2 and C4. LPA obtained a copy of the Toddler Center Rules and Regulations and Rules of discipline. Upon review of the documents, LPA observed that the policy in place regarding biting, developing language and impulse is very vague. Also, during a file review for C1 thru C2, LPA did not observe any documentation of a preventative plan or an attempt to assist children and parents when behavioral challenges are observed. The investigation found that C2 had known aggressive behaviors which resulted in a lack of supervision and children being hurt.
Allegation regarding- Staff did not ensure reporting requirements were followed. According to the RP, they were not provided with a written report of incidents involving C1. RP also stated that staff wouldn’t tell them that C1 was hurt by other children in care. Interviews with staff revealed that the practice of notifying parents of injuries are via text, phone call, in-person, and or providing an ouch report. LPA conducted file reviews for C1 thru 8 and observed only (2) ouch reports. C1 had (1) text regarding a biting incident that occurred on 03/25/24 and (1) ouch report regarding a second biting incident dated 06/10/24. Though LPA verified that communication takes place, interviews with RP and P3 found that injuries were not always communicated by staff. Evidence of at least two text messages disclosed that RP and P3 initiated an explanation to a bruise and bite. Based on interviews and documents obtained, staff failed to report to parents of injuries that took place at the facility.
Based on interviews, children’s record review, and documents obtained, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegations is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 12, Chapter 1, the following deficiencies are being cited (see attached 9099D).
Type A citation
LPA Veronica MartinezGarza informed director Irene Lopez that this report dated
08/08/24
document(s)
1
Type A citation(s) which shall be posted for 30 consecutive days as there is/are immediate risk(s) to the health, safety, or personal rights of children in care.
Page 3 of 4
Also, LPA Veronica MartinezGarza informed the director Irene Lopez to provide a copy of this licensing report dated
08/10/24
that documents any Type A citation(s) to parents/guardians of all children currently enrolled by the next business day or the next day the children are in care, and to any newly enrolled parents/guardians for 12 months from the date of this report. A signed Acknowledgement of Receipt of Licensing Report (LIC 9224), or other written statement, must be placed in the child's file for verification.
A notice of site visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days.
Exit interview conducted and report was reviewed with director Irene Lopez.
Page 4 of 4
