Skip to main content

Inspection visit

complaint

NOBIS PRESCHOOLLicense 304370846
Clean visit · 0 citations

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

Page 2 On 08/16/21 the Orange County Child Care Office received a complaint with allegations stating children were left unsupervised on the school playground and facility personnel unknown. During the initial intake of the complaint, the reporting party (RP) states that on 08/10/21 at approximately 4pm during pick up, RP observed children on the school playground without staff supervision for approximately 5 minutes. A teacher then came out, RP asked who was in charge, the teacher stated the Director was not available and informed RP the teacher did not know who was in charge at that moment. During the investigation LPA conducted interviews on 08/26/21, 09/17/21, 09/23/21, 10/05/21, and 10/12/21. LPA interviewed 8 staff, 2 of the 8 staff interviewed were not present during the 08/10/21 allegation, 1 staff left at 2pm, and 1 staff goes to the infant program in the afternoon and was not present at 4pm the time of the allegation. Present at the time and date of the allegations were S1, S2, S3, and S4. LPA also interviewed 8 parents, 5 children and reviewed copies of children's rosters, staff roster, sign-in/sign-out sheets for staff and children, LIC 700, schedule of activities for children, and weekly staff schedule. Interviews revealed that during the month of August 2021, director was in Costa Mesa assisting this facility\342\200\231s sister site training a new director, director was back and forth between this facility and Costa Mesa. All 8 staff interviews revealed staff knew director would be gone as it was in the weekly staff schedule but 3 of the 8 staff interviewed did not have prior knowledge who would be left in charge when Director was gone and only found out when they arrived at the facility. Children\342\200\231s sign-in/sign-out sheets were reviewed and reveal there were 12 children still present after 4pm on 08/10/21. Director states during this time children are in the play yard for outside play while waiting for parents to pick up, this information was corroborated by a review of the children\342\200\231s daily schedule of activities. LPA interviewed staff who were present on 08/10/21 at 4pm, 2 interviews reveal S2 is a floater and took over for S1 with the preschool at 4pm with S4 assisting starting at 3pm, while another interview revealed S2 was with the toddlers but does not remember if S2 went to the preschool room at 4pm, another interview revealed S4 was with the toddlers all day but 2 staff revealed S4 was in the preschool room at 3pm. There is also a discrepancy with S3\342\200\231s timesheet which shows employee clock out at 4:08pm but is scheduled until 5pm on the weekly staff schedule. Employee states it is an error and was at the facility until 5pm on 08/10/21. Director states there have been times employees have picked up someone else\342\200\231s timecard and erroneously checks the person out. All 8 staff interviewed stated children are never left unsupervised. (Continued on page 3) Page 3 Parents and children were also interviewed. All 8 of 8 parents interviewed stated staff were always present during drop off and pick up and 7 of 8 parents would recommend this facility to another family. All 5 children interviewed stated staff were always watching them. Interviews conducted do not show definitively who took over the preschool class at 4pm, whether it was S2 or not due to S2 being a floater and conflicting statements received. There are also conflicting statements whether staff knew who was left in charge when the director was not at the facility. Although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are unsubstantiated. Exit interview conducted and report was reviewed with director Ashley Nietzke. Appeal Rights were explained, Director was provided a copy of her Appeal Rights and signature on this form acknowledges receipt of these rights. Director was informed all appeals must be in writing and received by the Regional Office within 15 business days. A notice of site visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days. Failure to post will result in civil penalties of $100.00. The Notice of Site Visit must be posted on or adjacent to the door.

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 November 5, 2021 inspection of NOBIS PRESCHOOL?

This was a complaint inspection of NOBIS PRESCHOOL on November 5, 2021. The inspection found no deficiencies and no citations were issued.

Were any citations issued to NOBIS PRESCHOOL on November 5, 2021?

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.