complaint·September 4, 2025

classroom during the incident, but did not directly spray the children in their faces. There were no other teachers, or witnesses in the room that could corroborate the incident one way or another. LPA interviewed two other staff to confirm if this is usual behavior for teachers, and both confirmed that it was. Staff further stated that on the alleged day of incident, there were no parents who stated that their children complained of a chemical being sprayed in their faces upon picking them up that day. Additionally, local Law Enforcement investigated the incident and found no basis that would warrant further investigation into the matter. Thus, due to evidence that was obtained, and reviewed, and interviews conducted, the allegation was Unsubstantiated. It was alleged that Staff served food with known allergens to day care child, (C1). LPA reviewed C1’s file at the facility and found that on initial enrollment in August 2024, C1 did not have any allergies noted. In January 2025, C1’s parent sent staff via email, certain items that C1 is allergic to. In February 2025, there was a note completed by staff in C1’s file that C1 was given a piece of food that contained an allergenic. However, upon record review, it was determined that the food item that C1 consumed is not confirmed to be a direct allergenic. Per record review, the food item, “can” contain the allergenic; however, the probability is extremely low. Thus, this allegation was Unsubstantiated. A finding of Unsubstantiated means that 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. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided along with copies of the LIC811 (confidential names list), LIC9099C, and a copy of the Appeal Rights was provided. A Notice of Site visit was given, and the Licensee understands that it must remain posted for 30 days.