complaint·February 6, 2025

Page 2 On 12/13/2024, LPA interviewed Reporting Party (RP) for further information. RP stated, “The children were playing on the front playground equipment and there were no adults in view. The garage door was open and the door into the home was open, however no physical adult was present.” During the investigation, LPA Garcia interviewed 2 staff, 2 children, 7 parents, and obtained children’s roster. On 12/17/24, LPA conducted surveillance and observed the children playing in the front yard while licensee was inside. LPA took photographs. During interviews conducted on 12/17/2024, S1 stated that while children are playing in the front yard they are either sitting down with them or in the garage where they have visual and hearing supervision of the children. S1 stated they have sight and sound of the children at all times. Staff 1 (S1) stated, “We have normally supervision at all times. If I need to use the restroom S2 watches them.” Staff 2 (S2) stated, “When S1 is away, I take over when I’m here… Let’s say when S1 is gone, has to cook, or a bathroom break. I am here supervising children.” During children interviews conducted on 12/17/2024, Child 1 (C1) and Child 2 (C2) were not qualified for interviews. LPA Garcia interviewed 7 parents. 7 out of 7 parents stated there are satisfied with the care and supervision being provided to their children. Based on interviews, observations, record review, the allegation that provider did not provide adequate supervision to day care children is unsubstantiated. 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, Nina Soliman. A notice of site visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days. End of Report