Skip to main content

Inspection visit

complaint

Clean visit · 0 citations

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

Interviews conducted with the Director and staff had aligning statements that the discipline policy utilizes positive reinforcement and re-directing, children are checked visually for any illness when dropped off and monitored throughout the day for irregular behavior, and that children wash hands and faces before/after transitions and as needed throughout the day. LPA observed staff interacting and guiding children in a calm, positive manner while using a respectful tone of voice of an appropriate volume. LPA observed staff helping children wash hands, faces, and clothing when needed. LPA observed staff calling parents for illness when a child displayed symptoms of illness. Interviews conducted with children and authorized representatives did not reveal information that would corroborate the allegations. LPA did not obtain any pertinent evidence through observation, record review, or interview during the investigation to prove the above allegations occurred. Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted. Report reviewed with Facility Representative, Niecy Rhone. Appeal rights were provided. A notice of site visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days.

Citations

2 citations 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.

  • TEACHER-CHILD RATIO

    101216.3 Teacher-Child Ratio(b) The licensee may use teacher aides in a teacher-child ratio of one teacher and one aide for every 15 children in attendance.This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure compliance with the section cited above by having 17 children with a teacher and an aide, which poses an immediate Health,Safety, or Personal Rights risk to persons in care.

  • RESPONSIBILITY FOR PROVIDING CARE AND SUPERVISION

    The licensee shall provide care and supervision as necessary to meet the children's needs.No child shall be left without the supervision of a teacher at any time..Supervision shall include visual observation.This requirement is not met as evidenced by: Based on interview, the licensee did not ensure compliance of the section cited above by not visually supervising children at all times, which poses 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 July 18, 2024 inspection of KINDERCARE LEARNING CENTER - PARK (PS)?

This was a complaint inspection of KINDERCARE LEARNING CENTER - PARK (PS) on July 18, 2024. The inspection found no deficiencies and no citations were issued.

Were any citations issued to KINDERCARE LEARNING CENTER - PARK (PS) on July 18, 2024?

No citations were issued during this inspection. The facility was found to be in compliance with all applicable regulations.

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.

SourceView on CCLDView original report

Share this reportEmail

Next steps

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

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.