Inspector’s narrative
What the inspector wrote
The Department received a complaint on 5/9/2025 alleging that the day care accepted sick children, the staff did not notify a parent of a child's illness, and the facility staff did not report a child being transported from the facility to the emergency room. On 5/14/2025, the LPA called the reporting party (RP) for an interview. The RP could not be reached and did not respond to the Department’s request for an interview. In a written complaint, the RP stated that he/she saw other children who appeared very sick, with green boogers, viruses, coughs, and other sicknesses. The RP stated that a parent contacted the ambulance and a child was transported from the facility to the Emergency Room, where the child had to be on oxygen for approximately 4 days because the child presumably caught a virus at the facility.
Allegation: Day care accepted sick children.
On 5/15/2025, the LPA interviewed six facility staff about the allegation. All six staff members denied that the allegation was true. All six staff were asked about the procedures they follow when a child develops symptoms of illness at the facility. All staff stated that they take the child’s temperature, separate the sick child from others to prevent contagion, inform the parents about the illness, and request that the child be picked up. Staff #4 and #6 stated that if the child goes home with a fever, the child must be fever-free for at least 24 hours before returning to school. Staff #1, #2, #3, and #4 stated that a parent must bring a doctor’s clearance note for the child to be around others when they return with symptoms. LPA asked S6 for doctor clearance notes. S6 stated they did not have clearance notes for any of the children with symptoms.
On 5/16/2025, the LPA called seven parents requesting an interview. Parents P1, P3, P4, P5, P6, and P7 were reached and interviewed. The parents interviewed did not provide any information that could corroborate or dismiss the allegation. The rest of the parents could not be reached or did not return the Department’s request for an interview.
On 6/10/2025 at or around 8:40 am, the LPA observed four (4) children in room seven (7): children C6, C7, C8, and C9. Two children had nasal discharge: Child C6 had clear discharge and C9 had white discharge. Children C7 and C8 had dry mucus around the nose and upper lip. The LPA heard Children C8 and C9 coughing. Child C8 had a cough with phlegm, and Child C7 had a dry cough. All four children were in Room 7, which is used for care and supervision. The LPA did not observe any more discharge on C6’s nose after it was wiped; C6 did not exhibit any other symptoms of illness. Based on a Child Supervision Record provided by S6, C9 was at the facility for about 2.5 hours. C6, C7, and C8 were in the facility for about 7 Hrs. or more.
During an interview with Staff S5, S5 stated that he/she observed the children’s symptoms on 6/10/25. During an interview, Staff S6 said that S6 and S7 conduct the morning health checks, including touching the children’s skin, observing the children’s appearance and disposition, and if necessary, asking parents questions about the children’s health. When asked about communication with the parents regarding the children’s symptoms, S6 stated the parents had not been contacted. According to S6, C8 was taking cough medication at home and C9 had an ear infection.
Allegation: The staff did not notify a parent of a child's illness.
On 5/15/2025, the LPA interviewed six facility staff about the allegation above. All six staff members stated that when they observe a child who is ill, they inform the director, and the director notifies the parents. Staff #4 stated he/she calls the parents if a child is sick. Staff #6 said he/she sends an electronic notification to the parents and follows up with a phone call if a child is sick.
On 5/16/2025, the LPA called seven parents requesting an interview. Parents P1, P3, P4, P5, P6, and P7 were reached and interviewed. The parents interviewed did not provide any information that could corroborate the allegation. The rest of the parents couldn’t be reached or did not return the Department’s request for an interview.
On 5/15/2025, the LPA closely observed infants who were present at the facility. Child C3 and C5 had runny noses with clear discharge, which the director stated was due to teething. C3 appeared to be experiencing discomfort, shown by crying with a raspy tone, a grimace, an arched back, and difficulty settling. The director took the temperature of C3, C4, C5. The temperature readings were 98.7, 98.6, 98.4, and 98.6 for C3, C4, and C5, respectively. No other symptoms, such as blisters, cough, sneezing, or colored discharge, were observed. The rest of the infants did not have any symptoms or other signs of illness.
On 6/10/25, the LPA observed children C6, C7, C8, and C9 in room 7 with illness symptoms including nasal discharge, cough, and physical discomfort as expressed by excessive crying. The director took the temperature of all four children. C6, C7, C8, and C9 had temperatures of 98.1, 99.0, 97.6, and 97.8 degrees Fahrenheit, respectively. All four children were in room 7, supervised by a qualified staff. The nose of C6 was wiped while the LPA was present and nasal discharge did not return during the visit. C6 did not exhibit other illness symptoms aside from clear discharge.
Based on a review of records, the family handbook obtained from the S6 on 6/10/25 includes a clause stating, “should your child become ill during their time at the center, the child will be removed from the classroom upon notice and kept in an area where there will be no direct contact between them and other children. You will be contacted for the pick-up and removal of the ill child from the center within one hour of notification.” At the time of the visit on 6/10/25, the LPA observed children C6, C7, C8, and C9 in contact with one another. Per S6, the parents/family had not been notified of the children’s symptoms and were notified only after S6 was interviewed about communication with the parents regarding the children’s illness. S6 stated the parents were not called because the children didn’t have a fever of 100 degrees or higher. Based on a records review, C6, C7, and C8 were not picked up on 6/10/25. C9 was picked up and removed from the center about 2.5 hours after arrival.
Allegation: Facility staff did not report a child being transported from the facility to the emergency room.
On 5/15/2025, the LPA interviewed six facility staff about the allegation above. Staff #1 (S1) disclosed the ambulance was called because Child #1 (C1) had respiratory problems. S1 added that one time the paramedics took C1, and another time “they came and checked C1 and didn’t take C1, and said C1 was okay” the second time. Staff #4 (S4) stated, “C1 threw up,” and the director requested 911. “911 came and checked C1, and C1 went to the hospital.” S4 disclosed that C1 was at the hospital for two or three days. Staff #6 (S6) stated the parents were called because C1 was not feeling well, and S6 called 911. S6 added that C1 went to the hospital with a fever and breathing problems, on a breathing machine. S6 disclosed that the Licensing Division was not informed, and a report was not written. S6 stated they did not have a specific date of the incident because no written record of the incident was created. Staff #3 stated they heard about the incident but had no information about it. The rest of the staff did not have any information about the allegation.
On 5/16/2025, the LPA called seven parents requesting an interview. Parents P1, P3, P4, P5, P6, and P7 were reached and interviewed. The parents interviewed did not provide any information that could corroborate the allegation. The rest of the parents couldn’t be reached or did not return the Department’s request for an interview.
Children were not interviewed about any of the allegations above because they are non-verbal due to young age.
Based on the LPA’s observations, interviews, and records review, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the allegations that he day care accepted sick children, the staff did not notify a parent/parents of a child's illness, and the facility staff did not report a child being transported from the facility to the emergency room are found to be SUBSTANTIATED. A substantiated finding means that the complaint is substantiated, and the allegations are valid.
Per California Code of Regulations Section 101212(d) Reporting Requirements, Upon the occurrence … of any of the events specified in (d)(1), a report shall be made to the Department by telephone or fax within the Department's next working.
Per California Code of Regulations Section 101226 Health-Related Services (a) The licensee shall immediately notify the child's authorized representative if the child becomes ill, and Section 101226.1 Daily Inspection of Illness (a) The licensee shall be responsible for ensuring that children with obvious symptoms of illness … are not accepted.
Director Vasegghi was informed that this licensing report dated 6/30/2024 documents one “Type A” citation. Type A citations must be posted for 30 consecutive days during the hours that children are in care as there is/are immediate risk(s) to the health, safety, or personal rights of children in care. LPA further informed the director that a copy of this licensing report must be provided to parents or guardians of all clients currently enrolled by the next business day or by the next day the children are in care, a copy of this report must be provided to the parents or guardians of all newly enrolled clients for 12 months from the date of this report, and signed Acknowledgement of Receipt of Licensing Report (LIC 9224) form, or another written equivalent statement, must be placed in the child's file for verification of receipt of the report.
An exit interview was conducted with Director Mojgan Vasseghi. The Notice of Site Visit was posted during the visit. The director was informed that the Notice of Site Visit must be posted for 30 consecutive days. Failure to post will result in civil penalties of $100. The director was provided a copy of their appeal rights (LIC 9058 01/16) and their signature on this form acknowledges receipt of these rights. First-level appeals should be sent to the regional manager to the address listed above.
