complaint·October 3, 2023

building. The infant center is in a different building. Director stated she was unsure if it was gas or something else. The Director notified parents arriving at the preschool, and gave them the option of taking their child or keeping them here as she figured out what was happening, but they may have to return and pick up children if the Gas Company determined a threat. Child #1 is one of the first to arrive in the other building(infant center), so the Director hadn't made it to the infant center to alert staff yet. The Gas Company arrived promptly and turned the gas off. The technician advised since the gas was turned off, the school did not have to close and they could resume operation. An incident report was submitted to Community Care Licensing. LPA observed a doctors note dated 06/12/23 for C1. In addition, the facility had the parent of C1 fill out the LIC 9221 (Parent Consent for Administration of Medications and Medication Chart) weekly. The doctors note says the lotion should be applied "2-3 times daily for skin dryness while in day-care." Initially, it was established the parent would apply the lotion in the morning and evening, and the day care staff would apply at 11:00am. LPA observed it charted that the facility staff were applying it at 11:00am, when C1 was present at the facility; however, LPA observed on the weekly form(LIC 9221) the dosage and frequency kept changing. Since there was confusion, the Director spoke with the parent for clarity and relayed that information to the staff. Based on available documentation, it appears the staff were applying the lotion and charting it based on the instructions given on the LIC 9221. Based on interviews conducted and record review, the allegations that day care child sustained multiple unexplained injuries, staff did not notify day care child's parents of injuries, staff did not notify day-care child's parent of gas leak in facility and staff are not applying day care child's lotion per doctor's note, may have happened or is valid, but there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur. Therefore, the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. Exit interview conducted. A copy of this report and appeal rights were discussed and provided to the Director Mary Velasquez on this date. A NOTICE OF SITE VISIT WAS ISSUED AND LPA VERIFIED THAT IT WAS POSTED IN A PROMINENT LOCATION AT THE FACILITY BEFORE LEAVING. THE LICENSEE UNDERSTANDS THAT IT MUST REMAIN POSTED FOR THE NEXT 30 DAYS.