complaint·November 26, 2024

Regarding the allegation that Licensee is not present in the home 80% of the day, LPA Waters conducted confidential interviews and facility inspection. During the initial inspection on 09/25/24, LPA Waters observed the licensee to be present at the facility, although the licensee spent several minutes at a time in “off-limit” areas. Licensee also stated she had a therapy appointment at the time of LPA’s arrival and rescheduled to remain at the facility during the inspection. Per interviews conducted, LPA confirmed that the Licensee would periodically leave the facility but could not determine the amount of time she was absent from the facility while she was off site. Further interviews revealed that when the Licensee was present in the facility, she would spend a lot of time in other rooms, specifically “off-limits” areas but was unable to determine the amount of time. Regarding the allegation that Licensee is operating out of ratio, LPA Waters observed 2 staff with 9 children outside while licensee remained inside and in “off-limit” areas the majority of the time LPA was present. During record review, LPA verified that licensee has two employed assistants, currently working from approximately 7:30am-1pm, Monday thru Friday, and an adult child that resides in the facility that is a qualified assistant as well. During course of investigation, LPA did not observe the daycare operating out of ratio. Regarding the allegation that licensee is not keeping the home clean, neat and orderly, specifically in regard to trash buildup and not washing the bottles used by the children, LPA Waters conducted a facility inspection and interviews with staff. LPA Waters observed a staff member emptying the only trash can for the child care area, located outside in the patio area. LPA also observed labeled water bottles in a plastic bin in the outside area, in clean condition. During the visit, Licensee was observed cleaning daycare room 2 for more than 30 minutes. LPA did not observe any evidence that home was not clean or untidy. Based on facility inspection, confidential interviews and record review, LPA Waters could not corroborate the above allegations. 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 allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided along with copies of the Appeal Rights were provided. A Notice of Site visit was given, and Licensee understands that it must remain posted for 30 days. During record review for the month of September 2024, 8 out of the 20 days of operation were 98 degrees or higher, while the other days the temperature fluctuated around 85 and 90 degrees. While LPA was present on 09/25/24 starting at 9:11am, children in care came inside for a total of 25 minutes prior to nap time at approximately 12:45pm. LPA confirmed that the temperature before the children came into the house was 87.4 degrees. Regarding the allegation of withholding care and comfort to children in care, LPA Waters observed an infant (C1) crying upon arrival in a playpen in a childcare room absent of children or staff. LPA observed licensee speak to C1, saying “you’re fine” and “no more crying”. Licensee had staff take C1 outside with the other children. C1 was placed on concrete patio outside and proceeded to cry for approximately 70% of the time LPA was present until C1 was picked up at approximately 1:00pm. LPA observed staff (S1) hold C1 once while outside for approximately 3-5 minutes and feed C1 a bottle in S1’s arms. LPA Waters also observed C1 being placed in the playpen approximately 4 times and when LPA questioned the Licensee, she stated that she was “working with the parents” and told them that they could not hold C1 the whole day so C1 was placed in the playpen often, and it was not intended for C1 to sleep. In addition, LPA Waters observed only two items in the facility that were appropriate for children under 12 months of age and did not have any other toys and/or equipment for the infant. Based on facility inspection, confidential interviews and record review, the preponderance of evidence has been met and the allegation that the licensee violated the personal rights of children in care is SUBSTANTIATED. California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Section 102423(a)(1) and Section 102423(a)(2), are being cited on the attached LIC 9099D. See LIC 9099D for details. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided along with copies of the Appeal Rights were provided. A Notice of Site visit was given, and Director understands that it must remain posted for 30 days.