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 Director did inquire whether P1 had contacted the Department of Social Services, Community Care Licensing Division (CCLD) hours before dis-enrolling P1's child, herein C1. This occurred after P1 had questioned the lack of mask wearing inside the Child Care Center. The investigation revealed the Director had prior knowledge P1 had contacted CCLD to learn of face covering guidelines amongst local Child Care Centers before the aforementioned. Further, interviews of parents of children in care revealed the Director had not contacted them to inquired whether or not they had contacted CCLD, despite parents posing similar questions and comments to P1, with respect to the Child Care Center's face covering policies. Moreover, the Director showed no cause to dis-enroll P1's child from the Child Care Center. Although the Director cited an inability to meet P1's needs as a determination for dis-enrolling C1, the assertion is not corroborated by P1, rather P1 was attempting to ascertain whether the Child Care Center staff were requiring children over the age of two to wear face coverings while inside. LPA notes staff members describe C1's adjustment at the Child Care Center as positive and very good.
Based on LPAs observation and interviews, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. California Code of Regulation, (Title 22 Division 12 and 101218.1 (b) (5), is being cited on the attached LIC 9099 D).
A closing interview was conducted with the Director. Director was provided and advised of their right to appeal. LPA informed Director of the need to provide a plan of correction to CCLD as well as the time which the plan of correction needs to be submitted to CCLD.
The Notice of Site Visit was provided to the Director as required by H&S Code Section 1596.817. The Notice of Site Visit must remain posted for 30 days or a civil penalty of $100.00 may apply.
|