complaint·January 23, 2026

During the course of investigation, LPA interviewed 4 staff , 5 children, 3 parents, and reviewed facility files. Reporting Party (RP) stated a confidential video of Child 2 (C2) was shared to Child 1 (C1)’s representative. LPA interviewed staff, Staff 1 (S1) stated they were aware that an internal video monitoring was sent to the wrong recipient. Staff 2 (S2) admitted to accidentally sending an internal video monitoring to C1’s representative, making them delete the Bright Wheel account of C1. S2 stated that only the licensee has access and can view the video footage of the facility. LPA interviewed 3 parents, none of the parents interviewed disclosed information that supported the allegation LPA interviewed 5 children, none of the children interviewed disclosed information that supported the allegation Based on records obtained, there was a communication between the facility and C1’s representative confirming that an internal video monitoring was wrongfully sent to C1’s representative. Based on interview and record reviewed, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation on Staff did not ensure that daycare child's records were kept confidential is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. See LIC9099D for 1 Type B violation. Exit interview was conducted with Director Jaylena Ulibarri. Report and deficiency were discussed. The Notice of Site Visit was posted and must remain posted for 30 consecutive days. Appeal Rights were provided. Page 2 of 2 During the course of investigation, LPA interviewed 3 staf f , 5 children, 3 parents, and reviewed facility files. Reporting Party (RP) stated notifications were through a phone call and not a written notification. LPA interviewed 3 staff, 3 of 3 staff stated they send Children’s incident reports through Bright Wheel app. Staff 2 (S2) stated they also notify parents through a phone call. Based on record review there were notifications of incident reports to parents through Bright Wheel. LPA interviewed parents , none of the parents interviewed disclosed information that supported the allegation. LPA interviewed children, none of the children interviewed disclosed information that supported the allegation. Based on interviews conducted and record 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. Exit interview was conducted with Director Jaylena Ulibarri. Report was reviewed and discussed. The Notice of Site Visit was posted and must remain posted for 30 consecutive days. Appeal Rights were provided. Page 2 of 2