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 licensee stated that mother has taken C1 to Mexico for three (3) weeks, then C1 went to stay with the father for a week, then return to care on 6/12/2023, and three (3) days after returning to care the mother advised the licensee that C1 had head lice and to notify the parents of the children in care.
The licensee stated that the licensee only notified two (2) of the parents; C2 & C3 that C1 had head lice. No other parents were notified of the head lice.
On 6/25/2023, Licensee stated that licensee's assistant noticed at 2:30pm that C3 & C4 had head lice. Licensee stated that at 4:30pm, when mother picked up C3 & C4 licensee advised the mother that C3 & C4 had head lice. The mother stated I forgot to tell you that the school sent a notice that there was head lice at the school.
Based on LPA interviews which were conducted and record review, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation(s), that the Licensee did not prevent the spread of head lice, and Licensee did not notify day-care children parents of the heading lice incident, are found to be SUBSTANTIATED. California Code of Regulations, (Title 22, Division & Chapter number), are being cited on the attached LIC 9099D.
An exit interview was conducted, and Plan of Correction was reviewed and developed with the licensee. A copy of this report and appeal rights were discussed and left with the licensee.
Today’s visit was conducted in Spanish. Today, deficiency cited under Title 22 Division 12 Appeal rights given. LPA observed the Notice of Site Visit posted.
|