1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32 | LPA Lee observed that Staff#1 did not sign or comment on the written warning. During an interview, Staff#1 stated the written warning was not signed due to believing that they had not done anything wrong. Staff#1 went on to state that the incident involving Child#1 being kicked by another child was not documented because they did not see the incident and Child#1 did not say anything after the incident had occurred. During an interview, the Director stated that Staff#1 was asked not to use their personal phones when providing care for children during outdoor play time. During the inspection conducted on this date, the Director informed LPA Lee that Staff#1 was no longer employed with the facility as of 07/31/2023.
Although it is possible that a staff member could have missed or not see an incident while providing proper supervision, the fact that Staff#1 received a written and verbal warnings from the Director about documenting incidents, and not looking at their personal phone while at the facility does indicate that Staff#1 was not providing the proper amount of supervision when they were working at the facility until 07/31/2023. Based on the information obtained during the investigation, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the allegation that facility staff is not properly supervising children in care has been substantiated. California Code of Regulations,(Title 22, Division 12 & Chapter Number 1, ariticle 6), is being cited on the attached LIC 9099D.
The notice of site inspection must remain posted for 30 days during hours of operation. Failure to maintain posting during business hours will result in a civil penalty of $100.00 dollars.
Exit interview conducted with Director Gracie Chavez. Appeal rights discussed and explained. |