Skip to main content

Inspection visit

complaint

Clean visit · 0 citations

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

Page 2 RP stated C1 repeated the claim that evening. RP messaged Director and set a meeting with Director, Family Life Director Bonnie Worthen (FD), S1 and Parent #1. During the meeting on 09/23/2022, RP requested for C1 to be moved to another classroom. C1 was moved to another classroom on 09/26/2022. RP rescinded LPA\342\200\231s invitation to interview C1. During LPA\342\200\231s initial visit on 06/29/2023, LPA interviewed Family Life Director Worthen (FD) and 4 staff members. Director and FD stated they conducted an internal investigation and suspended S1 pending the outcome of the investigation. On 10/02/2022, FD concluded the investigation and notified RP via email that their claim was not corroborated. On 08/18/2023, LPA interviewed 2 additional staff members for a total of 6, including S1. During the staff interviews, 6 out of 6 staff were able to state the facility\342\200\231s discipline policies and provided examples of positive methods. 6 out of 6 staff listed the responsibilities of being a mandated reporter. 6 out of 6 staff denied ever seeing any employee at the facility become physically aggressive toward the children. Notably, S1 denied ever exhibiting physical aggression toward any child including C1. On 08/18/2023 LPA interviewed 3 children, but one child was not qualified. 2 out of 2 children did not make any disclosures pertaining to the complaint allegation. LPA was not granted permission to interview C1. LPA attempted to interview 7 parents, but 4 parents were unavailable and did not return LPA\342\200\231s call. 3 out of 3 parents provided positive feedback regarding the facility staff. Parents did not disclose any pertinent information related to the complaint allegation. Based on LPA\342\200\231s interviews conducted with RP, Director, FD, S1, 6 staff members including S1, 2 children and 3 parents, the allegation staff hit child in care 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 allegation is unsubstantiated. Exit interview was conducted with Director Jenn McClellan. The Notice of Site Visit was posted. Facility representative was informed that the Notice of Site Visit must be posted for 30 consecutive days. Failure to post will result in civil penalty of $100. Director was provided a copy of their appeal rights (LIC 9058) and their signature on this form acknowledges receipt of these rights. (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 August 30, 2023 inspection of FIRST CHRISTIAN PIERSIDE PRESCHOOL?

This was a complaint inspection of FIRST CHRISTIAN PIERSIDE PRESCHOOL on August 30, 2023. The inspection found no deficiencies and no citations were issued.

Were any citations issued to FIRST CHRISTIAN PIERSIDE PRESCHOOL on August 30, 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.