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 | Also every parent interviewed stated they would recommend the FCCH.
LPA interviewed Licensee and assistant. The licensee interview revealed Licensee is knowledgeable of the definition of personal rights as defined in Title 22 CCR. Licensee stated, when a child displays challenging behavior, licensee sits down with the child, talks to the child and listens to the child. LPA interviewed assistant. The assistant interview revealed, assistant is aware of the definition of personal rights. Assistant stated, how assistant has observed Licensee, respect the personal rights of children. Assistant also stated, how assistant has not observed an adult at the FCCH act aggressively towards children in care.
As mentioned LPA conducted two unannounced inspections. During those inspections LPA observed Licensee and assistant provide food to children and allow children to sleep and allowed other children to play. Additionally LPA did not observe any adult, violate the personal rights of children in the FCCH during the aforementioned inspections.
Although the above allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is Unsubstantiated.
Exit interview was conducted with Licensee Piedad Murguia. Notice of site visit was provided. Appeal rights were provided.
THE NOTICE OF SITE VISIT NEEDS TO BE POSTED AS REQUIRED BY H&S CODE SEC. 1596.817. THE NOTICE OF SITE VISIT MUST REMAIN POSTED FOR 30 DAYS OR A CIVIL PENALTY OF $100.00 WILL APPLY.
|