complaint·January 6, 2023

CD and staff discussed some of the measures which included management providing assistance, staff notifying facility management via radio communication if ratio requirements was not met, shuffling child(ren) between classroom(s), or parent(s) were instructed not to sign in or release their child to the class until that class had adequate staff to meet ratio requirements. CD’s statement also corroborated that hazardous materials were found on the playground while children were playing, when on two separate occasions a staff and parent found paraphernalia needles in the grassy area of the playground. CD further stated vagrants sometimes loiter on the facility premise, leaving items such as lighters, food, can(s) and evidence of campfire on the playground. At 7:30am, a staff member was designated to scan and canvas the playground prior to the children going outside to play. Statements provided by staff (S1-S5) validated that hazardous material was found on the playground in September 2022, a parent and staff found a used syringe on the playground while the children were playing outside. S3, S4 & S5’s statements noted they do not have time to canvas the playground prior to children playing in the yard to ensure the area is clear of such hazardous items. Statements provided by S2, S3, S4 & S5 also supported claims that the facility operated out of ratio when they observed at least one classroom operating out of ratio. S3 described witnessing 13 children in care with one Teacher in the Preschool class and on another occasion, seeing more than 30 children under the care of S1 & S4 in Discovery Preschool (DP). S3 also expressed Preschool & Preschool B classrooms operated out of ratio daily. S4 further conveyed another classroom operated out of ratio a few times and that on several occasions around 3:00 pm after nap time, 24 children started to wake up resulting in S4 being left alone to supervise 24 children who were awake for 20 to 30 minutes. When the classroom was out of ratio, staff used a walkie talkie to communicate to facility management and to request assistance in the class, however; the response from management was not always fast enough to resolve the issue. Additionally, S5 reported being left alone to supervise 13 children in a classroom and that maintaining ratio requirements was particularly challenging after nap time due to 24 children waking from nap. During LPA’s visit on 10/07/22 starting at 8:48am & at 11:05am, LPA also observed 13 children in care with one staff in the Preschool B classroom. Based on this investigation, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met and therefore, the above allegations are found to be SUBSTANTIATED. The facility did not comply with California Code of Regulations Teacher-Child ratio 101216.3(a) and Outdoor Activity Space 101238.2(d)(2). Exit interview conducted, and report was reviewed with the Center Director, Donje Fields. (Continue to LIC 9099-C) 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. California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 12 & Chapter 01, Article 06, are being cited on the attached LIC 9099D. Appeal Rights were provided. CD’s statement did not provide evidence to support claims concerning a lack of supervision resulting in inappropriate interactions between children or that staff did not notify parent(s) of an incident. According to CD, the facility was currently experiencing a staffing shortage, but CD felt the staffing shortage did not have any impact on staff’s ability to provide adequate supervision. CD stated C1 had not been involved in a fight, however; CD did report that within the last two weeks during lunch time in the Discovery Preschool (DP), another child (C2) bit C1 on the right arm while C1 was sitting at the table for lunch, but the parents of the children involved in the incident were notified and provided with a written incident reports on that same day. CD stated at the time of the incident, S1 and S2 were present and in proximity to the children but could not intervene in time to prevent C1 from being bit. CD further stated that if staff noticed a child was about to hit their friend(s), staff would intervene or intercept to disrupt that undesired behavior. Multiple statements provided by S1-S5 indicated staff only had knowledge pertaining to the bite incident and staff further reported there had not been any fights between children or that child(ren) did not fall off or get injured on the play equipment. S3, S4 & S5 felt there was not a supervision issue at the facility and staff provided constant supervision by actively walking and scanning the children’s play areas, but staff also felt that the facility was inadequately staff and additional support was needed. It was further acknowledged that some staff are on their phones at times, but it does not negatively impact supervision. Staff reported they were required to notify facility management of incidents involving children, as well as produce a written incident report which was later provided to that child’s parent(s). S4’s statement noted sometimes shift changes between staff resulted in mis-communication, or staff not knowing about an incident to report it. P1, P2, P3 & P4 statements did not notate any concerns of how staff provided supervision and reported they were notified of incident(s) involving their child(ren) in a timely manner. They further stated that the facility notified parents of incidents verbally, via telephone, or provided a written incident report. On 10/11/22, the facility submitted six incident reports for six children ranging from 09/13/22 through 09/30/22, which documented one incident involving C1 being bitten on the right arm on 09/21/22. The facility reported they did not have any other reports which involved C1. Based on LPA’s investigation, although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the allegations occurred, therefore the above allegations are found to be UNSUBSTANTIATED. Exit interview conducted, and report was reviewed with the Center Director, Donje Fields. 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.