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 received a copy of the written termination of employment for complainant in addition, the letter also addresses the immediate termination for complainant’s child with no reason as to why child’s services are being terminated. It was determined that the complainant did not receive a reason and the End of Agreement reasons to terminate do not apply to complainant. Director stated that child’s services were terminated due to interest of conflict. However, when LPA Garcia asked Director to demonstrate where in the parent handbook under the “End of Agreement” section is interest of conflict listed as a reason for termination, Director was unable to point out. Staff interviews concur that a reason for termination of child care services was not communicated verbally or by written notification to complainant.
Based on LPAs observations and interviews which were conducted, and record review, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be substantiated. California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 12, Chapter 1, the following deficiencies are being cited (see attached 9099D).
Exit interview conducted with Director Claire Chou. A copy of the Appeal Rights (LIC 9058 FAS 01/16) were given and explained. Director’s signature on this form acknowledges receipt of these rights.
The Notice of Site Visit (LIC 9213) – must remain posted for 30 days during the hours of operation after each site visit by a licensing representative. Failure to maintain posting as required will result in a civil penalty of $100.00. |