Skip to main content

Inspection visit

complaint

Clean visit · 0 citations

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

According to staff 1(S1), the day of the incident, child was dropped off at 7:30am by mother. Mother placed child on the highchair and left facility. When children were being served breakfast, another staff entered the classroom. Infant’s eyes were not tracking or following the staff. S1 immediately contacted the site supervisor. S1 believed child was having a seizure. Mother was contacted and arrived within ten minutes. Facility offered to call 911 however, mother opted to take child to the hospital. According to staff 2(S2), staff observed infant to be coherent. Staff was unsure if infant was having a seizure, but child was not responding to external stimulus while on highchair. Staff continued to observe child for two more minutes before making a decision to call child’s mother. S2 stated that 911 was not called because child seemed coherent, crawling and behaving like an infant. Mother arrived within five to ten minutes. According to staff 3(S3), when staff entered the classroom at 8:00am, there were other staff sitting next to the infant. S3 was only able to observe infant’s backside before infant was placed on the ground. While observing child on the ground, infant looked “shaky” while attempting to crawl. S3 stated that Site Supervisor were notified immediately. Staff 4(S4) also stated that infant appeared to be lethargic and slow-moving. According to infant’s primary doctor, it is believed that the preliminary false-positive results were “wrong or an error”. Pediatrician shared that it is possible that when an infant digests certain medications, they may test positive for meth adding that if the child was observed to be lethargic on 4/27/2023, it could have been because the infant was having multiple seizures and not digesting medications or drugs. Pomona Police Department was contacted, however, the case was closed due to insufficient evidence. Based on the above, although the allegations 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 allegations are unsubstantiated. An exit interview conducted with Crystal Darling, copy of report provided and Notice of Site Visit provided and shall be posted for 30 days in an area accessible for review.

Citations

No citations recorded on this visit

The inspector found no violations of California child care regulations during this visit.

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the August 2, 2023 inspection of L.A. COUNTY FAIR ASSOC. INFANT CENTER?

This was a complaint inspection of L.A. COUNTY FAIR ASSOC. INFANT CENTER on August 2, 2023. The inspection found no deficiencies and no citations were issued.

Were any citations issued to L.A. COUNTY FAIR ASSOC. INFANT CENTER on August 2, 2023?

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.