complaint·July 9, 2021

Staff further claimed that LS only worked at the side business after the daycare children had left for the day, the side business was separate from the facility, and the side business did not conflict with the operations of the facility. Through the course of the investigation starting from 04/06/21 through 07/06/21, LPA interviewed LS, one adult, six parents (P1-P6), one child and two staff (S1 & S2) and attempted to interview a child. Some children were not verbal, too young to interview, or did not qualify to be interviewed. Statements provided by multiple parents did not report any corroborating evidence of LS operating a side business which interfered with day care operations. Parents reported whenever they dropped off and/or picked up their child(ren) at the facility, LS and staff were always present and available, and parents felt that LS was not operating dual businesses during the facility\342\200\231s operating hours. While most parents\342\200\231 statements did not report any concerns at the facility, two parents\342\200\231 statements reported they were aware of the facility\342\200\231s side business, and on at least one occasion they witnessed customer(s) of TJ\342\200\231s Designs picking up merchandise at the facility\342\200\231s front porch during drop off and/or pick up time. During LPA\342\200\231s inspections on 04/07/21 and 04/12/21, LPA observed LS and staff were providing care and supervision to the children at the facility, and LPA did not observe LS engaging in any other activities pertaining to TJ\342\200\231s Designs that interfered with the operation of the facility. Based on the investigation, there\342\200\231s not a preponderance of evidence to support the allegation, and therefore, the allegation is unsubstantiated. This report was discussed and reviewed with LS and an Exit interview was conducted with LS. Notice of Site Visit shall be posted for 30 days. There were no title 22 deficiencies cited during this visit. Appeal Rights were provided.