Complaint·April 19, 2022

Page 2. The Department received a complaint on 2/25/22 alleging daycare child sustained a diaper rash in care and licensee failed to meet child\342\200\231s diapering needs. The complaining party (CP) stated, on 2/18/22 and 2/24/22 after picking up child #1 (C1) from the childcare CP notified that Licensee failed to clean C1 properly because CP saw a little bit of poop on C1\342\200\231s bottom, in which, it caused a diaper rash. CP stated, the diaper rash was not sever and C1 was not taken to the doctor. During the investigation LPA Odom interviewed Complaining Party, Licensee, 1 staff member, and 4 parents. LPA Odom reviewed the Children\342\200\231s Roster, childcare daily activity plan, sign in and out sheets, and took pictures of the facility. Children were not interviewed due to the type of allegation. During an interview on 03/03/22, licensee (S1) stated, on 02/25/22 during drop off CP told S1 that C1 had a diaper rash because staff didn\342\200\231t clean C1 correctly. S1 stated, CP was informed by Staff #2 (S2) on 2/24/22 during pick up that C1 had not pooped in the childcare. According to sign out sheet CP did not pick C1 on 2/18/22, P1 picked up C1 on 2/18/22. S1 stated, staff will check infant\342\200\231s diapers every hour and preschool children will be asked by staff if they have a dirty diaper every hour, after two hours staff will physically check if a preschool child has a dirty diaper. According to the childcare daily activity plan children\342\200\231s hygiene (washing hands, and diaper change) is taken care off at 8:00am, 10:15am, 11:00am, 12:00pm, 2:45pm, and 4:45pm. During the investigation 1 staff members was interviewed on 03/03/22, Staff #2 (S2) stated, on 02/24/22 CP called the childcare to inform that they will pickup C1 at 2:35pm to have C1 ready for pick up. That afternoon C1 fell asleep and S2 observed that C1 had wet her clothes during nap time. S2 changed C1\342\200\231s wet diaper and clothes before CP picked up C1. S2 stated, during pick up S2 informed CP that C1 had not pooped at the childcare, and CP stated, \342\200\234that\342\200\231s fine, I\342\200\231ll check\342\200\235. S2 stated, on 2/25/22 they received C1 at the childcare during drop off and CP asked who cleaned C1\342\200\231s diaper the day before because C1 had a diaper rash and C1 was not cleaned correctly. S2 informed CP that S2 was the last person to change C1\342\200\231s diaper, S2 did not observe C1 with a diaper rash on 2/24/22 and C1 had not pooped that day before at the childcare. Continue to page 3. Page 3 LPA Odom attempted to interview 5 parents, but only 4 parents were available to be interviewed on 03/04/22 and 04/07/22. All of the parents disclosed that the licensee does meet the needs of their children in care, none of the parents expressed any concerns, and they are satisfied with the childcare. Parent #2 (P2) stated, child #2 (C2) who is an infant has been attending the childcare since May of 2021 and infant has never had a diaper rash while in care. Parent #1 (P1) stated, on the morning of 2/24/22 during bath time P1 noticed C1 had a mild diaper rash. P1 put diaper rash ointment on C1\342\200\231s bottom to help clear the diaper rash and forgot to inform licensee of the mild diaper rash. P1 stated, C1 was not in pain from the diaper rash because the ointment will clear it up quickly and C1 will express when the diaper rash is itchy. P1 stated, licensee meets C1\342\200\231s diapering needs and C1 has never had a dirty diaper during pick up. Based on LPA facility inspection, observations, interviews conducted with complaint party, licensee, 1 assistant, and 4 parents, records reviewed, and pictures taken by LPA, it has been determined there was insufficient evidence that C1 sustained a diaper rash in care and licensee failed to meet child\342\200\231s diapering needs. Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are Unsubstantiated. Exit interview conducted and report was reviewed with the licensee Nora Ledesma in Spanish. A notice of site visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days. Appeal Rights were explained. The Licensee was provided a copy of appeal rights (LIC 9058 01/16) and their signature on this form acknowledges receipt of these rights. All appeals must be in writing and received by the Regional Office within 15 business days. First level appeals should be sent to the regional manager to the address listed above.