complaint·June 6, 2023

The facility denied this allegation and made no disclosure. The Director stated that the facility provided the incident report to the parent of Child#1 the next day. When asked why the incident that occurred on 04/20/23 was not reported to the department the Director stated the facility decided not the report the incident based on the severity of the injury that Child#1 sustained. During interviews, staff members interviewed stated that written reports are provided to parents during pick up, and the only time a written report is not provided is if the parents chose to decline after being informed verbally. Regulations for child care center states that a child's parent/authorized representative should receive a report within 24 hours or the next business day. The parent of Child#1 received a written report on 04/21/23 for an incident that had occurred on 04/20/23. LPA Lee confirmed with the facility that the incident that occurred on 04/20/23 was not reported to the department. The facility stated that it is possible that during the initial response to the injury, the mark that was determined to be not severe enough could have swollen and gotten worse later on in the day or the next day. When the facility gathered and verified information from staff members and created the written report on 04/21/23, a report should have been made to the department that day or the next business day which would have been 04/24/23. If a parent is inquiring to get more information about a mark that was observed, the facility should have verified with the parent the status of the child's injury when the report was provided on 04/21/23 and then reported this incident to the department. The fact that this facility chose to not report this incident the department is a potential risk to children in care. Based on the information obtained during the investigation, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the allegation that the facility did not follow reporting requirements has been substantiated. California Code of Regulations,(Title 22, Division 12 & Chapter Number 1, ariticle 6), is being cited on the attached LIC 9099D. The notice of site inspection must remain posted for a period of 30 days during hours of operation. Failure to maintain posting will result in a civil penalty of $100.00 dollars. Exit interview conducted with Director Megha Sahni. Appeal rights discussed and explained. It is possible that the alleged injuries sustained by Child#1 was due to the lack of supervision from the staff members in the classroom. It is also possible that Child#1 sustained the injuries, despite adequate supervision being provided by the facility. A child that suddenly trips or falls can sustain an injury despite a staff member providing enough supervision to provide aide and document the incident that lead to an injury. Based on the evidence collected during the investigation, the allegations that staff did not provide adequate supervision resulting in child sustaining multiple injuries may be valid. However, there is not enough preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation(s) did or did not occur, therefore at this time the above allegations are found to be unsubstantiated. Exit interview conducted with Director Megha Sahni. Appeal rights discussed and explained. The notice of site inspection must remain posted for a period of 30 days during hours of operation. Failure to maintain posting will result in a civil penalty of $100.00 dollars.