complaint·December 17, 2024

LPA Chan interviewed the reporting party (RP). RP stated that on 9/20/24, staff #5 (S5) told Child 1’s (C1) authorized representative they noticed that C1’s eyes were red the previous day on 9/19/24; however, the authorized representative was not notified regarding C1’s eye condition. LPA interviewed staff. S5 stated they noticed C1’s eyes were red and had line marks on eyelids, S5 admitted they did not inform C1’s authorized representative. None of the parents interviewed disclosed any information that could support the allegation. None of the children interviewed disclosed any information that could support the allegation. Based on interviews conducted, and facility records reviewed, C1’s authorized representative was not notified on the redness on C1’s eye. The preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. A substantiated finding means that the complaint is substantiated, and the allegations are valid. See LIC9099D for a Type B deficiency. An exit interview was conducted with Director, Megan Phan. The Notice of Site Visit was posted during the visit. 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. The director was provided a copy of their appeal rights (LIC 9058 01/16) and their signature on this form acknowledges receipt of these rights. First-level appeals should be sent to the regional manager to the address listed above. Page 2 of 2 LPA Chan interviewed the reporting party (RP). RP stated, RP noticed marks on Child 1’s (C1) eyes after pick up. RP stated they took C1 to the urgent care for a medical diagnosis. LPA interviewed staff at the facility. Staff stated they did not witness any staff poke a child in the eye. LPA conducted an interview with C1, LPA was not able to qualify C1 during interview. None of the parents interviewed disclosed any information that could support the allegation. None of the children interviewed disclosed any information that could support the allegation. Based on interviews conducted, Social Services Agency Report and facility records reviewed, the preponderance of evidence standard has not been met. 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. An exit interview was conducted with Director, Megan Phan. The Notice of Site Visit was posted during the visit. 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. The director was provided a copy of their appeal rights (LIC 9058 01/16) and their signature on this form acknowledges receipt of these rights. First-level appeals should be sent to the regional manager to the address listed above. Page 2 of 2