complaint·December 7, 2023

Page 2 Per interview with the teacher she stated she explained to the grandmother how the incident occurred and that she witness the child walk wobbly and fall and hit his head slightly scrapping his forehead area of his head against the wall and she ran to him and picked him up off the ground as he had fallen and cried a little. Teacher comforted him and checked him for any bleeding or cause of a concussion, but she only observed a very small scrap. Teacher stated she had attended to the child right away. The child has long hair on his forehead and the mark was a slight scrap and was hard to see. However during other interviews It was also stated that the teacher forgot to notify the administrative staff of the incident that occurred early in the day and the teacher ended up telling the director after the grandma had left from picking up the child. It was also stated that the incident report was not written up until after the grandmother left from picking up the child. Based on interviews, and records reviewed and received, the above allegations are deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violations occurred. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided to Heather Jenkins, Site Supervisor, and the Notice of Site Visit and Appeal Rights. Page 2 Nobody at the day care spoke verbally to mom until after the child was picked up from the day care, by grandma in the evening. Per interviews it was stated that the mom never got a copy of the incident report because the Director wanted to give it to the mom and did not give it to the grandmother who picked up the child as she stated she thought that was protocol to give to the parent. Mom ended up dis-enrolling the child that same night by a telephone call with the director and never received the incident report. Based on LPA interviews conducted and documents reviewed and received, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore, the above allegation is found to be substantiated. California Code of Regulations (Title 22 Division & Chapter), is being cited on the attached deficiencies page LIC 9099D. A notice of site visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days. Appeal Rights provided. Failure to comply with posting requirements shall result in an immediate civil penalty of $100. Exit interview conducted and report was reviewed with the Heather Jenkins, Site Supervisor Page 2 of 2