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 | 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’s operating hours.
While most parents’ statements did not report any concerns at the facility, two parents’ statements reported they were aware of the facility’s side business, and on at least one occasion they witnessed customer(s) of TJ’s Designs picking up merchandise at the facility’s front porch during drop off and/or pick up time.
During LPA’s 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’s Designs that interfered with the operation of the facility. Based on the investigation, there’s 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. |