complaint·December 14, 2023

The first allegation is that Staff did not accept day care child's doctor's note to return to the facility after illness. The facility has a written policy in the parent handbook which states that children cannot return to the facility until 24 hours have passed since the fever or other symptoms have cleared. All enrolled parents are aware of this policy and have signed the agreement upon enrollment. As per the facility director, C1 had a fever on November 6th during drop off in the morning around 7:15 AM which was recorded as 101 F & 102 F. Facility director stated to parent that according to the policy the child could not attend the facility until the child was fever free for 24 hrs. The parent took the child to the clinic at 11 am on the same date and the visit report states, \342\200\234positive for fever\342\200\235. The child returned to the facility on November 7th and S2 informed the parent that the 24 hours had not yet elapsed and therefore the daycare could not accept the child, as stated in the parent handbook. Based on information gathered, LPA was unable to determine if the child was fever free for 24 hours without medication at the time of drop off the following day. The second allegation is Staff did not ensure that the facility is free from bugs. Interviews revealed that C1 was dropped off at the facility with bug bites all over the face and arms. Facility staff informed parent during drop off that if the child was observed to be uncomfortable, the parent would be notified to pick the child up. Per records review, LPA observed that the facility-maintained documents for periodic pest control treatment, and noted that the last one was dated Saturday, September 30th, 2023. In addition, per interviews conducted, LPA was unable to determine if the child obtained the bites while at the facility or another location since no other incidents had been reported at the daycare. See LIC 9099C for continuation. The third allegation is Staff did not provide day care child adequate supervision, resulting in the child sustaining frequent bruising. Interviews revealed that C1 had never sustained an injury at the facility and there was no recollection by staff of the child getting injured, otherwise an ouch report would have been generated and the parent would have been notified, per facility policy. Per record review, LPA could not verify any incidences when C1 was injured or hurt at the facility and was unable to obtain any additional documentation of the injury from the reporting party. From the information received through interviews with staff, and facility documents the above allegations cannot be verified. Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the allegations did or did not occur, therefore, the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted, a Notice of Site Visit posted, and a copy of this report was provided to the facility on this date and time.