complaint·July 24, 2023

(Continue from LIC9099) Depending on the day, the number of children that needed to be picked up exceeded the bus’s capacity, requiring the bus to make more than one trip to the same school which caused a delay in children’s pickup times. The bus was sometimes 10 or more minutes late arriving at the school(s). Statements provided by AD and S1 confirmed the number of drivers decreased from three to one, leaving AD as the only driver, but the facility was trying to hire new drivers. On some days, AD had to split the groups and make more than one trip to the same school and attributed the bus’s tardiness to traffic. According to two adult statements, on at least one occasion, the bus was either canceled or didn’t show up and C2 & C3 were not pick up at their school resulting in the parents picking them up. Other statements indicated some facility buses were broken and sometimes the bus was five to 12 minutes late but A1, P2, P3 reported the bus had been late 5-45 minutes. P2 & P3 felt the tardiness was caused either by lack of staffing, ineffective communication, bus(es) breaking down, and/or vandalism of the bus(es). P1 & P2 stated that on a prior occasion, the facility didn’t notify them of the pickup cancellation, resulting in P1, P2 & P3 being contacted by their child’s school to pick them up due to the bus not showing up or calling. Some parents also expressed they signed an agreement and paid additional fees to secure transportation for their children. Children interviews (C3, C4, C5, C6), also confirmed that the bus had been late picking them up and they had to wait but were never left alone. C3 also stated that they had to be picked up at the school by the parent. Parents sign an agreement and pay an additional fee to secure transportation for their children. The Parent Handbook and Enrollment Agreement outlines the conditions for transportation which indicates that the facility sent parents a reminder that it was the facility’s goal for the vans to arrive at each school within 10 minutes of the child’s release time, however delays in arrival could occur during unforeseen circumstances and the facility would inform the school as soon as possible. Based on the investigation, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met. Therefore the above allegation is found to be substantiated. The following violation of the California Code of Regulations, Title 22; Division 12 is being cited on the LIC9099D. An exit interview was conducted and report reviewed with Director, Brenda Hardaway . Appeal rights were provided. A notice of site visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days. Failure to comply with posting requirements shall result in an immediate civil penalty of $100. (Continue from LIC9099-C) Depending on the day, the number of children that needed to be picked up exceeded the bus’s capacity, requiring the bus to make more than one trip to the same school which caused a delay in children’s pickup times. CD claimed when the bus was 10 or more minutes late due to traffic, school district personnel were notified and supervised the children while they waited for the bus. Statements provided by AD and S1 confirmed there was one driver dropping off/picking up children from school and though the driver may have been late, staff never left any child(ren) unattended, and school district personnel were always present while the children waited for the bus. AD also claimed whenever the bus was running late, either AD or the facility called the school(s) to notify of the delay. According to two adult statements, on at least one occasion, the bus was either canceled or didn’t show up and C2 & C3 were not picked up at their school resulting in the parents picking them up. Statements indicated some of the facility’s buses were broken and sometimes the bus was late five to 12 minutes but A1, P2, P3 expressed the bus had been late 5-45 minutes. P1 & P2 reported that on a prior occasion, the facility did not notify them of pickup cancellation, resulting in P1, P2 & P3 receiving calls from their child’s school to pick them up due to the bus not showing up which left the care and supervision to school personnel instead of the facility staff. P2 stated there had been so many issues with transportation and being late, specifically one time 30 to 45 minutes late, and that it’s the facility’s responsibility not the schools if something happened. P3 felt it was the facility’s responsibility to provide care and supervision and not the school personnel at the expected pick-up time Parents sign an agreement and pay an additional fee to secure transportation for their children. The Parent Handbook and Enrollment Agreement outlines the conditions for transportation and indicates that the facility sent parents a reminder that it was the facility’s goal for the vans to arrive at each school within 10 minutes of the child’s release time, and delays in arrival can occur due to unforeseen circumstances. If so, the facility would inform the school as soon as possible, and children should wait in the office if the van was late. Based on the investigation, although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the allegation occurred, therefore the above allegation is found to be unsubstantiated. An exit interview conducted with Director, Brenda Hardaway. Appeal rights were provided. A notice of site visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days. Failure to comply with posting requirements shall result in an immediate civil penalty of $100.