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 | The scratch observed of Child#1 in the picture does not look like it was caused by the child during sleep. The wound on the picture looks too deep and big to be self inflicted. The wound does look like it was fresh but it is not clear if the picture was taken after the Licensee had provided some sort of fire aide. During the investigation LPA conducted interviews with the Licensee and facility staff. There was no information obtained from the interviews that corroborated the allegation.
It is possible that the would observed on Child#1 was sustained by the facility due to a lack of supervision. However, it is also possible that the injury was sustained outside the day care as well.
Based on the evidence collected during the investigation, the allegations that the Licensee did not prevent injury to day care child may be valid. However, there is not enough preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation(s) did or did not occur, therefore at this time the above allegations are found to be unsubstantiated.
Notice of site visit must remain posted for 30 days during hours of operation. Failure to maintain this posting may result in a civil penalty of $100.00 dollars.
Exit interview conducted with Claudia Carcamo. Appeal rights discussed and explained . |