complaint·November 16, 2023

Confidential interviews disclosed that S1 is not always present at time of drop off and told that S1 is getting ready as she has just woken up. Interview with S1 denied allegation that she leaves her spouse (S2) alone with the children. Interview with S2 denied allegation that he is ever left alone with the children in care. Licensee denied that she is forging parent’s signatures on the sign in sheets. S1 and S2 denied the allegation that C1 bullies other children in care, and that C1 gets along with other children. Confidential interviews disclosed that at certain times, S2 will answer the door, stating that S1 is getting ready for the day in the past, but nothing recently like that has occurred. Confidential interviews disclosed no concerns with the care and supervision of children in care. Other confidential interviews revealed no concerns with C1 with other children in care. One confidential interview disclosed that S1 puts her own hours in the time sheets for their children but that the time sheets are reviewed by the parents/guardians prior to turning them in. Based on confidential interviews, the allegations licensee does not adequately supervise day care children and lack of collaboration from reporting party, may have happened, however, not supported or proven by evidence. Therefore, the allegation was unsubstantiated. Exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report, appeal rights and Notice of Site Visit were provided to licensee, Emma Sanders. The licensee was informed that the Notice of Site Visit must remain posted for 30 days.