In In re Allegation of Physical Abuse Concerning L.R., 321 N.J.Super. 444, 449-50, 729 A.2d 463 (App.Div.1999), the Court held that a teacher is not entitled to a hearing to contest a finding that child abuse allegations have not been substantiated but that DYFS has expressed concerns about the teacher's conduct, because such a finding "is not included in the 'Central Registry,'" and "is intrinsically less damaging to reputation than a finding that child abuse charges have been 'substantiated'. . . ." 321 N.J. Super. at 460, 729 A.2d 463. However, the Court did not say that such a finding has no adverse effect upon a teacher's professional or personal reputation, or that a teacher has no right to challenge the form of such a finding. The Court only concluded that "an investigative finding that child abuse allegations were 'not substantiated' does not have a sufficiently direct and substantial impact upon employment or familial relationships to 'entitle appellants to the due process protections required in adjudicatory proceedings.'" Id. at 461, 729 A.2d 463. In L.R. the Court held that DYFS does not have statutory authority to order a school district to take remedial action in response to DYFS' investigatory findings. 321 N.J. Super. at 452-56, 729 A.2d 463. Instead, once DYFS completes an investigation of a child abuse complaint against a teacher and makes whatever recommendation it may have to the school district, DYFS has fully discharged its responsibilities and may close its file. Id. at 453, 729 A.2d 463. The Court also indicated that "DYFS' directive to a School District to 'confirm' its corrective action 'in writing' at least implied that the district was required to act in accordance with DYFS' recommendations, rather than to exercise its own independent judgment in deciding what action, if any, to take." Id. at 454, 729 A.2d 463. Accordingly, the Court directed DYFS "to notify the . . . school district that DYFS' reports concerning the child abuse allegations against appellants did not require the district to take any disciplinary or other personnel actions but were investigatory findings and recommendations only, and that the district has the responsibility to make an independent judgment as to whether to accept DYFS' findings and recommendations." Id. at 456, 729 A.2d 463.