Skip to main content

Inspection visit

complaint

ABC DEVELOPMENT PRESCHOOL #1License 300613949
Clean visit · 0 citations

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

(page 2) Reporting Party (RP) disclosed concerns with Child #1 (C1) coming home on multiple dates with unexplained injuries from the facility. RP states on 05/14/2024, C1 was kicked in the face by another child and the child\342\200\231s face was bruised. RP also disclosed on 07/08/2024, C1 came home with a huge knot on their forehead and only received an ouch report, but no phone call. RP states that on 08/07/2024, C1 had scratches on their neck, arm, and back. RP states that when they asked staff about the injuries, staff stated they didn\342\200\231t know how those injuries occurred. RP also stated on 08/14/2024, child had black eye and bruise on his nose and was not provided with an ouch report or a phone call. RP states that C1 always comes home with mosquito bites all over their legs and notices other children in care with mosquito bites as well. During the investigation, LPA Lucero interviewed 6 staff, 4 parents, 3 children, reviewed the facility roster, and obtained a copy of ouch reports and parent handbook. During staff interviews conducted on 08/26/2024, Staff #1 (S1) disclosed recalling C1 hitting their forehead on a chair in the classroom and recalled another incident were C1 was playing ball with Child #2 (C2) and when C1 went to go retrieve the ball, C2 went to go kick it and accidentally kicked C1 in the face. S1 stated C1\342\200\231s parent were notified regarding both incidents. S1 stated observing some marks on C1\342\200\231s neck but no teachers were aware of how C1 obtained the marks. S1 stated it is typical for C1 to disclose to staff or cry when they\342\200\231ve been injured but no disclosures from C1 were made regarding the marks. S1 stated having no concerns regarding staff supervision. S1 denied being aware of mosquitos at the facility. S1 stated it is possible C1 sustained mosquito bites when they attend the elementary school in the mornings. S1 also stated there are a couple children with mosquito bites, but when S1 asks the teachers, teachers would state their parents would say they went somewhere and they got bit, but it wasn\342\200\231t from the facility. Staff #2 (S2) disclosed C1 has had a few incidents at the facility and staff fill out ouch reports. S2 recalls being made aware of an incident where a child was going to kick the back and accidentally kicked C1 because C1 was trying to grab the ball. S2 also recalled C1 having a knot on their forehead but is unsure what happened because C1 was in another class. S2 denied observing any scratches on C1. S2 stated having no concerns regarding staff supervision. S2 also stated there are a few mosquitos outside, but they come from the big field from the elementary school. S2 stated there have been a couple children and staff that they have seen with bites. (continue to page 3) (page 3) Staff #3 (S3) disclosed C1 was running in the classroom and S3 kept telling C1 to stop and C1 ran underneath the chair and hit their forehead on the side of the chair and a big knot formed. S3 stated parents were called, a report was written, and parents came to pick up C1. S3 recalled another time C1 went to go pick up the ball and C2 went to go kick the ball and C2 kicked C1 in the eye and C1 sustained a black eye from it. S3 stated parents were notified of both incidents. S3 denied observing any scratches on C1. S3 stated having no concerns regarding staff supervision. S3 also stated they have seen a mosquito here and there but has not been bit at the facility. S3 stated they have only observed children at the beginning of summer coming back with mosquito bites. Staff #4 (S4) denied observing C1 with any black eyes, scratches, or bumps on C1\342\200\231s forehead. S4 also denied observing mosquitos at the facility. S4 stated having no concerns regarding staff supervision. S4 also stated children arrive at the facility with mosquito bites but denies seeing children getting bit at the facility. S4 stated children come with mosquito bites from home. Staff #5 (S5) disclosed being aware of an incident where C1 was running around and went under the chair and hit their head and sustained a bump on their head. S5 stated parents were notified of the incident. S5 denied being aware or observing C1 with any scratches or black eye. S5 stated having no concerns regarding staff supervision. S5 denied observing mosquitos at the facility but has observed children with mosquito bites, but when S5 asks children, children tell S5 it happened at home. On 10/23/2024, LPA interviewed Staff #6 (S6) and 3 children. S6 denied observing C1 with any black eyes, scratches, or bumps on C1\342\200\231s forehead. S6 stated they have no con cerns regarding staff supervision. S6 also denied observing mosquitos at the facility. S6 stated children arrive at the facility with mosquito bites. LPA Lucero conducted interviews with 3 children. 3 out of 3 children made no disclosures regarding the above allegations. (continue to page 4) (page 4) LPA obtained copies of C1\342\200\231s ouch reports. LPA observed the facility wrote an ouch report dated 07/08/2024, regarding C1 running in the classroom, ran under the chair and sustained a bump on their forehead. LPA observed C1\342\200\231s legal guardian sign the ouch report. LPA also reviewed several other ouch reports with C1\342\200\231s legal guardian signature. LPA interviewed 4 parents. Parents interviewed made no disclosures in regards to the allegation. Based on the interviews and record review, there is insufficient evidence to corroborate the above allegations that (1) day care child sustained unexplained injuries while in care, (2) staff caused injury to day care child, and (3) child sustained mosquitos bites at facility. Although the allegation(s) may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation(s) did or did not occur, therefore, the above allegation(s) are found to be UNSUBSTANTIATED. Exit interview conducted and report was reviewed with the Director Valerie Mora. A notice of site visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days. Appeal Rights were explained. The Director was provided a copy of appeal rights (LIC 9058 01/16) and their signature on this form acknowledges receipt of these rights. All appeals must be in writing and received by the Regional Office within 15 business days. First level appeals should be sent to the regional manager to the address listed above. End of Report.

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 October 23, 2024 inspection of ABC DEVELOPMENT PRESCHOOL #1?

This was a complaint inspection of ABC DEVELOPMENT PRESCHOOL #1 on October 23, 2024. The inspection found no deficiencies and no citations were issued.

Were any citations issued to ABC DEVELOPMENT PRESCHOOL #1 on October 23, 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.

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.