Skip to main content

Inspection visit

complaint

NOBIS PRESCHOOLLicense 3043708462 citations on this visit
2 citations recorded

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

(Page 2) During the investigation on 10/20/2025, LPA toured the facility, obtained and reviewed the classroom sign in/out sheet. LPA also conducted interviews with the reporting party, five staff members, and four parents. LPA attempted to interview children, but was unable to due to their verbal development. Regarding allegation (1) Child was left unattended. During the staff interviews, S1 stated S1 recalled on one occasion, as children were being transitioned from the playground into the classroom, S1 realized C1 was not in the classroom. When S1 was looking for C1, S1 was told by a parent that C1\342\200\231s was already picked up by C1\342\200\231s representative. Three (3) out of five (5) interviewed staff stated they were aware of this incident. When interviewed, C1\342\200\231s representative stated they came to pick up C1 and found C1 was left alone in the playground. They asked S1 and S1 responded that it was a good thing that the playground gate was closed. On 11/24/2025, LPA conducted parent interviews. The interviewed parents did not divulge any information pertaining to the allegation or express any concerns regarding care of the children. Regarding allegation (2) Staff did not follow proper reporting requirements. During interviews, Director and Acting Director confirmed that they were made aware of the incident when C1 was left alone in the playground, however they did not report the incident to the Department or any other involved agencies. On 11/24/2025, LPA conducted parent interviews. The interviewed parents did not divulge any information pertaining to the allegation or express any concerns regarding care of the children. During record review, there was no incident report that were submitted to the Department regarding this incident on 10/8/2025. (Continue to page 3) (Page 3) Based on LPA\342\200\231s interviews and record review, the preponderance of evidence has been met; therefore, the allegation of: (1) Child was left unattended (2) Staff did not follow proper reporting requirements, was found to be Substantiated. California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 12, Chapter 101229(a)(1) and 101212(d) is being cited. See LIC9099D for deficiencies cited. This report cites a Type A violation and shall be provided to parents/guardians of children currently enrolled and to parents/guardians of children newly enrolled at the facility during the next 12 months. Parents/guardians must sign Form LIC9224 to be kept in each child's file. Exit interview was conducted. Notice of Site Visit was posted during the visit. Facility representative was informed that the notice of site visit must be posted for 30 consecutive days. Failure to post will result in civil penalties of $100. Appeal Rights were explained. The Director was provided with a copy of the appeal rights (LIC 9058) 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

2 citations recorded*CCLD

What does Type A vs Type B mean?

Type A. Serious citation. Imminent or substantial risk to children. The regulator requires corrective action immediately and may impose a civil penalty.

Type B. Lower-severity citation. Corrective action required, no imminent risk. The regulator monitors compliance on the next visit.

  • 1011212Type B

    101212(d)(1) below, a report shall be made to the Department... within the Department's next working day... in addition, a written report containing the information specified...(d)(2) below shall be submitted to the Department within seven days...This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on interview and record review, the facility did not comply with the section cited above. The Director and Acting Director did not report the incident to Department after being informed of the incident which poses a potential health, safety, or personal rights risk to persons in care.

  • 101229Type A

    101229(a) The licensee shall provide care and supervision... (1) No child(ren) shall be left without the supervision of a teacher at any time... Supervision shall include visual observation.This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on interviews, S1 stated they realised C1 was not in the classroom after transitioning the children from the playground into the classroom; and C1's representative stated they found C1 was left alone in the playground, which poses an immediate health, safety, or personal rights risk to persons in care.

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the December 19, 2025 inspection of NOBIS PRESCHOOL?

This was a complaint inspection of NOBIS PRESCHOOL on December 19, 2025. 2 citations were issued: 1 Type A (serious) and 1 Type B.

Were any citations issued to NOBIS PRESCHOOL on December 19, 2025?

Yes, 2 citations were issued (1 Type A, 1 Type B). The first citation was for: "101212(d)(1) below, a report shall be made to the Department... within the Department's next working day... in addition,..."

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.