complaint·June 23, 2025

The licensee further stated that, following the change, C1 resumed play and was not restrained or required to remain in a stroller at any point. Both the licensee and S2 affirmed that C1 has never been excluded from any activity and that corporal punishment or other forms of cruel or unusual punishment are never used at the facility. The licensee explained that prior to nap time, she routinely asks all children if they need to use the restroom. She reported that she typically prompts children to use the bathroom every hour, or more frequently for children who are in the process of potty training. The licensee stated that C1 generally wears underwear while awake but is changed into pull-up briefs for nap time due to not being fully potty trained. The licensee noted that there have been prior instances where C1 declined to use the restroom before nap time and subsequently soiled themselves. As a result, the licensee stated that C1 receives extra attention and reminders to use the bathroom. The licensee reported that C1 is developmentally capable of requesting to use the bathroom. The licensee also stated that the children’s bathroom is located in an on-limits area of the home, and children capable of toileting independently are permitted to do so without staff escort. Throughout the course of the investigation, the LPA conducted observations and interviewed children, staff, and other individuals familiar with the facility. The information obtained through these interviews did not yield any corroborating evidence to support the allegations. Furthermore, during the LPA’s visits to the facility on April 8, April 17, and the date of this report, no observations were made indicating any violations of children’s personal rights. The children in care appeared to be treated with dignity in their interactions with staff and others and were provided with safe, healthful, and comfortable accommodations, furnishings, and equipment. Based on available information, although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore, the allegations are determined to be unsubstantiated at this time. There were no Title 22 deficiencies cited. This report was reviewed and discussed with the facility’s licensee, Debra Durgin. Appeal rights were provided. Notice of Site Visit shall be posted for 30 days from today's visit.