Skip to main content

Inspection visit

complaint

CANCHOLA & GUILLEN FAMILY CHILD CARELicense 1980203261 citation on this visit
1 citation recorded

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

On 9/18/2024, Monterey Park Regional Office received a complaint that S1 was under the influence while working at Canchola & Guillen Family Child Care Home. The allegation was cross reported by another agency because S1 has an open case with this agency. S1 was required to submit a toxicology test on Monday 4/15/2024 however, S1 never appeared to conduct their test on 4/15/2024, \342\200\234due to their work schedule\342\200\235. S1 completed their toxicology test on 4/16/2024, and results dated 4/23/2024 indicates that S1 tested positive for Amphetamine and Methamphetamine. During the investigation, LPA interviewed S1 and asked for their work schedule. According to S1 they work Monday through Friday from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm. Licensee Gerardo Guillen disclosed that there have been no breaks in care and \342\200\234that\342\200\231s why we can count on them\342\200\235 when referring to S1. Licensee Gerardo, was unable to provide date of absences during the month of April, only indicating that S1 had to leave early one day, but \342\200\234came back\342\200\235, no date was provided. Time sheets were unavailable for review as Licensee, states that would verify staff attendance via ring camera. Licensee states that recently they have been having S1 and S2 fill out time sheets within the last month. According to S1 they are left alone with the children for \342\200\234maybe one and half or two\342\200\235 hours when Licensee Gerardo leaves the home to pick up the children from school or when he is teaching CPR classes. P1 states that an \342\200\234older lady\342\200\235 is the main caretaker, and that she would be present at the home during pick up and drop off. During parent interviews, it was disclosed that there were no breaks in care provided in April 2024 by S1, and that S1 will also meet parents at the door. Investigation revealed that licensee Gerardo was aware of the incident involving S1, which was not reported to the department. LPA conducted interview with licensee Gerardo on 9/18/2024, Licensee was asked if they were aware of the open case involving S1. Licensee stated that they became aware of the results the day of the meeting. Per Licensee, the results came out to be positive during a long weekend- when S1 was not working. Per Licensee during the month of April they would have had the same children present as of today- so therefore there were 3 or 4 children present in the home on 4/15/2024 and 4/16/2024. S1 stated that Licensee Gerardo is aware of their open case and the positive toxicology results. Page 2 of 3 Licensee states that they were aware that S1 had to leave early on 4/16/2024 to conduct their toxicology test. Per S1 they continued working at the home after they were notified of the positive toxicology result. S1 stated that Licensee Gerardo was present during a meeting on 5/14/2024 about their case where drug usage was discussed. Licensee confirmed that they were present at the meeting and that S1\342\200\231s drug usage was discussed. Drug usage was discussed with LPA, and is being positively addressed. Based on interviews conducted by the LPA and the licensee\342\200\231s own statements, 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), are being cited on the attached LIC 9099D. LPAs Saul Valenzuela and Roxana Lopez informed licensee Gerardo Guillen that this report dated 9/18/2024 document one Type A citation which shall be posted for 30 consecutive days as there is/are immediate risk(s) to the health, safety, or personal rights of children in care. Also, LPAs Saul Valenzuela and Roxana Lopez informed the licensees Gerardo Guillen to provide a copy of this licensing report dated 9/18/2024 that documents any Type A citation(s) to parents/guardians of all children currently enrolled by the next business day or the next day the children are in care, and to any newly enrolled parents/guardians for 12 months from the date of this report. A signed Acknowledgement of Receipt of Licensing Report (LIC 9224), or other written statement, must be placed in the child's file for verification. A notice of site visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days. Failure to comply with posting requirements shall result in an immediate civil penalty of $100. An exit interview conducted, and the report was reviewed with Licensee, Gerardo Guillen. Page 3 of 3

Citations

1 citation recorded*CCLD

What does Type A vs Type B mean?

Type A. Serious citation. Imminent or substantial risk to children. The regulator requires corrective action immediately and may impose a civil penalty.

Type B. Lower-severity citation. Corrective action required, no imminent risk. The regulator monitors compliance on the next visit.

  • REVOCATION OR SUSPENSION OF A LICENSE OR REGISTRATION

    (3) Conduct in the operation..... of a family day care home which is inimical to the health, morals, welfare, or safety of either an individual in or receiving services from the facility or the people of the State of California. This requirement is not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interviews, the licensee did not comply with the section cited above in that staff # 1 tested postive for control substances while providing care for children, which poses/posed an immediate health, safety or personal rights risk to persons in care.

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the September 18, 2024 inspection of CANCHOLA & GUILLEN FAMILY CHILD CARE?

This was a complaint inspection of CANCHOLA & GUILLEN FAMILY CHILD CARE on September 18, 2024. 1 citation were issued: 1 Type A (serious).

Were any citations issued to CANCHOLA & GUILLEN FAMILY CHILD CARE on September 18, 2024?

Yes, 1 citation was issued (1 Type A, 0 Type B). The first citation was for: "(3) Conduct in the operation..... of a family day care home which is inimical to the health, morals, welfare, or safety ..."

What type of inspection was this?

This was a complaint inspection. Complaint inspections are triggered when someone reports a concern about the facility to CCLD.

Share this reportEmail

Next steps

If this is your facility,claim this pageand add your response to the public record. Free.

Spotted an inaccuracy on this visit?Request a reviewand we will check it against the public record.

Researching this visit professionally?Book a 20-minute calland we will walk through what we have on file.

Data from CCLD public records. Last updated . If you believe any information is inaccurate, report it here.