Complaint·September 22, 2023

On 8/29/23 LPA observed that the picnic table in the front patio has no information written on it that indicates the appropriate age of use. On 9/22/23 LPA asked Licensee if she had the manual for the picnic table that states the appropriate age of use, Licensee stated that she did not but showed the LPA a record of purchase of the picnic table. A search of the picnic table on the manufacture's website indicates a recommended age limit of 3-8 years old. LPA observed a photograph posted to Facebook on 4/19/23 of C1 and Child 2 (C2) sitting at the front patio picnic table. C1 and C2 are sitting next to each other eating. C1 is shown unsecured on the bench with his back to the patio fence and was 10 months old at the time of the photograph. Based on the evidence obtained, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met; therefore, the above allegation is found to be substantiated. California Code of Regulations, (Title 22), is being cited on the attached LIC 9099D. Appeal rights were provided. Exit interview conducted, and report was reviewed with the Licensee Tonya Stultz. A notice of site visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days. Failure to comply with posting requirements shall result in an immediate civil penalty of $100. During today’s visit, the facility was toured and records were reviewed. On 8/10/23, LPA smelled no urine in the facility. Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violations occurred, and the findings are unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted. The Notice of Site Visit must be posted for 30 days.