complaint·August 22, 2024

Page 2 of 3 5:45 PM, it was observed 3-year-old child, in the restroom unsupervised. Per the RP, on 6/24/2024, child was not in the classroom and was in the restroom with no diaper on and playing in the toilet. Additionally, the RP also stated on 6/25/2024, child disclosed that child was in the restroom playing in the toilet again. During the investigation, LPA interviewed 5 staff working with child # 1(C1) throughout the day, 8 qualified children, C1 was not available, and 10 parents’ contact of whom 3 parents responded. Staff # 1 (S1) stated that (C1) liked to run away and staff had to follow the child. C1 was changed in the bathroom while standing up and C1 was never in the bathroom alone. S2 stated they watched C1 till the closing. S2 stated they have seen C1 going to the restroom and flushing all the toys such as toy cars in the toilet. C1 has done that once very quickly. S2 had to follow C1 in the bathroom preventing C1 not to drop anything in the toilet. S2 stated that was the time C1 was observed in the restroom after dropping the toy in the toilet whom S2 was with the C1 and C1 was not alone. S2 stated C1 was not without diaper in the bathroom as it was reported. C1 was not potty trained, and the staff needed to change C1's diaper/pull up in the bathroom. An additional staff was provided for better supervision. S3 stated C1 was never alone in the bathroom. C1 needed to be with a staff to be changed. S4 stated they had witnessed C1 runs away in the hallway and a staff was after C1. C1 has dropped toy in the toilet one time and other times C1 was caught before doing it. Additional staff was working with staff for better supervision. S4 denies witnessing C1 without diaper/pull up alone in the bathroom. S5 stated C1 was at the facility for a short time. S5 was informed that C1 loves to drop the toys in the toilet and runs away from the classroom and the staff needed to watch C1 closely. The facility provided additional staff to help for better supervision. LPA also interviewed 8 qualified children. C1 was not available. Other children stated the staff watch them when they use the bathroom. They ask their teachers when they want to use the bathroom. Children did not see any child drop any toys in the toilets. Continued on page 3 Page 3 of 3 LPA reviewed internal Kindercare Child Supervision Record (CSR) for the dated mentioned on the complaint report (6/24/2024 and 6/25/2024), LPA found out that C1 was the last child to be signed out on those above dates. A staff person was with C1, and that staff denied C1 being unsupervised in the restroom. During the course of interviews with five staff, 8 qualified children, and 10 parents of whom 3 responded with positive feedback, (2 parents had concerns unrelated to the allegation which was discussed with the director), reviewing incident reports, and Child Supervision Record (CSR) for the facility, there is not enough proof or evidence to support the above allegation occurred or did not occur. This agency has investigated the complaint alleging “Staff did not provide adequate supervision to child in care; although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove, the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Notice of Site Visit was posted. The notice of site visit must be posted for 30 consecutive days. Failure to post will result in civil penalties of $100. In the areas which were investigated, no deficiency was cited today. The director, Barbara Brown was provided a copy of their appeal rights (LIC 9058 1/16) and their signature on this form acknowledges receipt of these rights. Exit interview was conducted with director, Barbara Brown. The report ends here.