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 | LS explained she submitted the attendance sheets to the subsidy program, she never signed the forms under false pretense, and LS claimed parents signed & printed the hours on their child’s Attendance sheet to confirm the days and hours their child attended care; proceeded by LS signing forms for each child to validate care was provided. LS acknowledged after she signed, and prior to submitting the forms to the subsidy program, she did not review the information the parents reported. FR and S1 reported they did not know how many children were present on each of those days, but the facility had a different number of children each day. FR expressed the facility did not kick out the children, and FR & S1 confirmed that only LS completed the Attendance sheets, and S1’s statement corroborated the allegation when she reported the facility operated with 14 children daily, but some days, it was plus or minus one child, which exceeded the terms of the license.
P1-P8 confirmed they were registered with the subsidy program, and they completed their child(ren)’s Attendance sheets for the month of June/July 2024, and their children attended care as documented on the Attendance sheet. Parents’ statements were consistent with each other, confirming at least 14 children were in care during the dates notated above. On 09/27/24, the department received evidence from a credible source which contradicted LS’s claims about operating within the terms of the license. The evidence showed there were as many as 15 children in care on the dates notated above. Additionally, the evidence further indicated LS signed a form for each child to certify the hours were true and correct; LS declared she provided childcare services for up to 15 children from period, 07/15/24 through 07/19/24. Based on this investigation, there is preponderance of evidence to show LS provided care for the number of children as she declared, and the allegation is substantiated.
Exit interview conducted and report was reviewed with the licensee, Victoria Vaezinia. A notice of site visit was given to licensee and must remain posted on, or immediately adjacent to, the interior side of the main door for 30 days. Failure to comply with posting requirements shall result in an immediate civil penalty of $100. The following violation(s) of the California Code of Regulations, Title 22; Division 12, was cited during today’s visit. See LIC attached LIC 809-D. Appeal Rights were provided. |