Skip to main content

Inspection visit

complaint

CHILDREN'S CENTER AT CALTECHLicense 198017956
Clean visit · 0 citations

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

LPA Lopez measured the distance from the platform to the woodchips - which is the distance C1 jumped. The distance measured 3 feet 8 inches Staff 3 - 8 (five staff) corroborated that even though they do not stop children from jumping, if they observe a child is hesitant to jump or not jumping properly, they will talk to the child and access the situation. Staff 6 - 8 (three staff) corroborated that C1 is a newer child to the facility and on the younger side. Both staff further stated that taking those two factors into consideration, they would talk to the child and encourage them to jump from a lower step. Staff 3 – 8 (five staff) corroborated that when a child is on the structure the structure is always directly supervised - stating that the area where they stand is in front of the structure where the opening is, as that is the area that children use for jumping. Staff 1 - 8 (eight staff) corroborated that C1 did jump off the structure injuring their leg. Per Staff 4, they were sitting at the snack table with two children who were finishing snack, when Staff 4 states that they observed C1 jump successfully off the structure before getting injured. Staff 4 states that they were positioned behind the area of the structure from where C1 jumped. C1 had their back facing Staff 4 when they jumped. Staff 4 could not see Child 1’s facial expression when they jumped off the structure. C1 jumped off the platform of the structure and began to cry and Staff 4 went to help C1. Per Staff 4 they were not directly supervising the structure as they were sitting down at a table behind the structure supervising snack. Staff 4 observed C1 falling through the bars on the structure. Per Staff 3 they were by the tire swing when they heard C1 cry. LPA observed the tire swing to be approximately 30 feet from where C1 jumped. Staff 3 turned to look at C1 and observed Staff 4 helping C1. ------------------------------------------------------ pg.2 of 3 ----------------------------------------------- Staff 2, 3, and 4 corroborated that Staff 4 called the front for help. Staff 3 provided ice once Staff 2 arrived. Staff 2 remained with the child, and campus security and C1’s parents were called. C1 was assessed by campus security who advised the parent to take C1 to the emergency department since C1 was not able to move their leg and might need an X-ray. LPA conducted interviews with 5 children. Children 1-5 corroborated that they are allowed to jump off the structure and that there’s always a teacher supervising the structure area. Additionally, LPA conducted interviews with parents. Parent # 1 and 2 corroborated they had no concerns. Parent # 3 expressed concern regarding the structure and children being allowed to jump off as it seemed to high. Based on LPAs observations and interviews which were conducted and record review(s), the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation(s) is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. California Code of Regulations, (Title 22, Division & Chapter number) A technical violation was given please attached LIC 9102 Technical Violation form. On the day of the incident, the structure was not directly supervised. Staff 3 – Staff 8 corroborated that the structure is an area that is always directly supervised to observe the children’s jumping ability and assess any hesitation by a child. LPAs observed an empty chair in this area during visits conducted on 09/26/2022, 11/10/22 and 12/15/2022. Staff 6 and Staff 8 corroborated that C1 was newer to the facility and on the younger side. The facility failed to provide proper supervision to be able to observe any hesitation or assess the situation of a younger child jumping to prevent injury. 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. Exit interview conducted and report was reviewed with Director Susan Wood and Assistant Director Olivia Garcia. -------------------------------------pg. 3 of 3 ------------------------------------------------------------

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 December 15, 2022 inspection of CHILDREN'S CENTER AT CALTECH?

This was a complaint inspection of CHILDREN'S CENTER AT CALTECH on December 15, 2022. The inspection found no deficiencies and no citations were issued.

Were any citations issued to CHILDREN'S CENTER AT CALTECH on December 15, 2022?

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.

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.