Complaint·January 3, 2024

(Page 2) On 11/02/2023, LPA interviewed RP. RP stated this is not the first time the dog has bitten a child. Child #6 (C6) was bitten by the same dog on the arm in September 2023. RP stated being unaware there were dogs at the facility. RP stated when RP took the tour of the day care, RP did not see any dogs nor was informed there were dogs at the facility. During the investigation LPA Lucero interviewed the reporting party, 3 staff members, 4 children, conducted a facility inspection, obtained medical documents, and reviewed the children’s roster. During the investigation, Staff #1 (S1) was interviewed on 11/02/2023. S1 stated on 10/30/2023 around 4 PM, Child #1 (C1) and Child #2 (C2) were inside the home. C2 had just arrived at the facility a while ago from school and was given food to eat. C2 proceeded to walk outside to the backyard to eat food. C1 followed C2 outside to play in the backyard. S1 stated S1 and Staff #3 (S3) were both in the kitchen and they were unaware that C1 went outside. S1 heard C1 crying and went outside to find C1 sustained a cut on their top lip by S1’s dog. S1 asked C2 what happened and C2 informed S1 that C1 pulled the dog’s hair. S1 then provided first aid to C1 and notified C1’s parents about the incident. S1 stated there are two dogs at the facility and are kept locked behind a gated fence in an off-limit area in the side patio during childcare operating hours. S1 is unsure how the gated fence came undone or if the gated fence was properly closed and was open by the strong winds. S1 stated usually a staff is outside with the children when they are eating or playing in the backyard, however that day there were no staff outside. Staff #2 (S2) stated S2 was not present the day of the incident but was made aware of the incident by S1. S2 stated S2 and S1 make sure the dogs are locked away in the side patio before the children arrive. S2 is unsure how the gated fence could have come undone. S2 stated a staff is usually outside with the children when they are outside. S3 stated S3 was in the kitchen serving lunch and S1 was also inside the kitchen. C1 and C2 were inside and once C2 received lunch, C2 proceeded to walk outside to the backyard to eat their lunch. S3 is unsure how C1 managed to get outside to the backyard, S1 and S3 thought C1 was inside. S3 stated they heard C1 crying and observed C1 with a cut on their top lip sustained by S1’s dog. (continue to page 3) (Page 3) S3 stated being unsure how the gate came undone, because S1, S2, and S3 make sure the dogs are locked behind the gate before the children arrive. S3 assumes it could have been the dog who was able to push the gate door open because it wanted to free itself and the latch wasn't properly secured, or it could of been a child who managed to open the gate door. During facility visit on 11/02/2023, LPA conducted a facility inspection. LPA observed an approximately 4-foot wood fence in the side patio with 2 dogs locked behind it. Gate is locked using a sliding bolt. On 12/19/2023, LPA Lucero interviewed 4 children. C2 stated they do not recall being present at the time of the incident. C2 stated not being aware that there are dogs at the facility. Child #3 (C3) stated there are two dogs at the facility but dogs are always locked behind a gate and never come out. C3 stated staff do not let children go near the side patio gate where the dogs are located because S1 has told me the dogs might bite them. C3 denied ever seeing a dog bite a child. Child #4 (C4) stated there are two dogs at the facility locked behind a gate. C4 stated never seeing a dog come outside the gate near the children and that S1 informed C4 not to go near the gate because the dogs may bite them. C4 denied ever seeing a dog bite a child. Child #5 (C5) stated there are two dogs at the facility and are always locked behind a gate. C5 denied ever observing the dogs outside of the gate. C5 stated S1 informed children to not go near the dogs because they might bite them. C5 denied ever seeing a dog bite a child. LPA obtained and reviewed medical records for C1. Records show C1 was treated for a dog bite on 10/30/2023. The licensee also filed a self reported unusual incident report with the licensing office regarding the dog bite incident on 10/31/2023. Based on LPA’s interviews conducted with reporting party, 3 staff, unusual incident report filed, and medical records obtained it has been determined child sustained injury by licensee's dog due to lack of supervision. Therefore, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be Substantiated. California Code of Regulations, Title 22, 102417(a) Operation of a Family Child Care Home is being cited on the attached LIC 9099D. (continue to page 4) (page 4) LPA Lucero informed Licensee Maria Ortega that this report dated 01/03/2024 document(s) one (1) Type A citation which shall be posted for 30 consecutive days as there is/are immediate risk(s) to the health, safety, or personal rights of children in care. Also, LPA Lucero informed the licensee to provide a copy of this licensing report dated 01/03/2024 that documents any Type A citation(s) to parents/guardians of all children currently enrolled by the next business day or the next day the children are in care, and to any newly enrolled parents/guardians for 12 months from the date of this report. A signed Acknowledgement of Receipt of Licensing Report (LIC 9224), or other written statement, must be placed in the child's file for verification. Exit interview was conducted. Notice of Site Visit was posted during the visit. Licensee Maria Ortega 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. Licensee 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. End of Report.