Complaint·November 5, 2024

Page 2 Regarding allegation Staff did not follow the contract on terminating children, during interviews, Staff (S1) had contacted Child # 1(C1’s) parent on the phone on 9/20/24, attempted to have a meeting with C1’s parent, and provided resources that will help a child to be more successful. However, S1 did not have any documents on the paper regarding the conversation. S1 provided LPA with a copy of the Parent’s Handbook. Based on the reviewed record of the Parent’s Handbook, the program's procedure for dis-enrolling the children states a conference will be scheduled with the parent(s) to discuss how to help motivate the child to behave acceptably. On 10/7/24, LPA interviewed six (6) parents. Four (4) out of six (6) parents did not have any concerns with the facility and did not make disclosures relate to the allegation. Based on LPA’s interviews and record reviews, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is SUBSTANTIATED. Violation of California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 12, Chapter 1 Section 101219 (f) Admission Agreement was observed and being cited on the attached 9099D An exit interview was completed. The report was reviewed and discussed. The Director was informed that the “Notice of Site Visit” must be posted for 30 consecutive days. Failure to post will result in Civil Penalties of $100.00. End of the Report. Page 2 During the investigation, LPA Trinh interviewed the Reporting Party (RP), 4 staff members, and 6 parents. LPA Trinh also reviewed records: Personnel Report, (LIC 500), Children Roster, Sign-in/Sign-out, Classroom Daily Schedule, and Children Incident Reports by emails from a Director/Teacher to Parent from 9/9/24, through 9/20/24. Regarding allegation, Staff did not provide incident reports to an authorized representative, LPA interviewed four (4) staff members, and four (4) out of four (4) stated that staff provide incident reports to authorized representatives/parents either by email, verbally, and written notes when any child gets hurt in the facility. Two (2) staff members stated they emailed C1’s parent about C1 attempting to hit/hurt another child. On 10/07/24, LPA Trinh interviewed six (6) parents. Interviewed parents disclosed no information that could support the allegation. All interviewed parents stated they did not have any concerns with the facility. Based on the record review of the email communication, LPA noted that S1 had notified C1's parent about how C1 was doing in the classroom daily from 9/9/24 through 9/20/24. Based on the information gathered from LPA’s interviews and record reviews, there is not enough evidence to corroborate the allegation : Staff did not provide incident reports to authorized representatives. Although the allegation s may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the allegation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was completed. The report was reviewed and discussed. The facility representative was informed that the “Notice of Site Visit” must be posted for 30 consecutive days. Failure to post will result in Civil Penalties of $100.00. End of the Report.