Skip to main content

Inspection visit

Complaint

Clean visit · 0 citations

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

Page 2 The Department received a complaint on 03/19/2024 alleging 1) Child #1(C1) sustained an unexplained injury while in care, 2) Staff did not ensure reporting requirements were followed, 3) Staff do not ensure adequate care and supervision is provided to children in care. Reporting party (RP) disclosed they were concerned the staff are not properly supervising the children in care due to the multiple injuries C1 sustained while in care. During the investigation LPA Odom interviewed the reporting party, and 3 staff members. LPA reviewed the children\342\200\231s roster, personnel records, ouch reports, text messages, and pictures taken. LPA did not interview children; children had limited vocabulary did not qualify for interview. During an interview on 03/27/2024, Staff #3 (S3) stated on 02/05/2024 Staff #1 (S1) notified S3 that C1 was bit by another child, in which, it left a bit mark on C1. S1 took a picture of the bite mark and sent it to S3. At 9:59am S3 sent the picture of C1\342\200\231s bite mark along with a statement of the incident to RP. S3 addressed the incident with both children\342\200\231s authorized representatives. S3 stated on 03/18/2024 they were on a vacation, and they left S1 all the children\342\200\231s emergency contact information in case of an incident to communicate with the authorized representative. That evening RP called S3 and told S3 that they were going to report the incident to police department. S3 spoke with staff regarding C1\342\200\231s injury. S1 told S3 that C1 was running outside on the playground, tripped and fell face forward, C1 had a bloody lip, S1 cleaned the wound, took a picture of the wound, and wrote the incident on C1\342\200\231s daily report that was provided to RP at the end of the day. RP decided to remove C1 from care on 03/18/24, so S3 was not aware C1 received medical attention to report the incident to licensing. S3 stated staff are trained to give children activities to keep the infant busy. LPA Odom interviewed 2 staff members on 03/21/2024 and 03/27/2024. S1 stated on 03/18/2024 the children went outside for outdoor play, S1 observed C1 running around when C1 fell on the synthetic grass face forward and hit their bottom lip. Staff #2 (S2) immediately cleaned the wound, placed an ice pack, gave C1 a hug to comfort child and S1 took a picture of the injury. S1 stated they wrote the incident on the daily report to give to RP at the end of the day. Continue to page 3 Page 3 S1 stated they do recall the incident on 02/05/2024, staff observed when another child bit C1, staff separated the children, S1 took a picture of the injury and sent it to S3 because S3 will immediately send the picture along with a written incident report of the injury to parents. Staff #2 (S2) stated on 03/19/2024 they recall C1 was running on the synthetic grass when C1 fell and hit their bottom lip. S2 stated when they picked up C1 they observed C1\342\200\231s lip was bleeding a little bit. S2 cleaned the wound, placed an ice pack on lip, but C1 cried for a moment but C1 was fine the rest of the day during meals times, nap time, C1 did not show signs of pain. Staff monitored the wound throughout the day and C1 did not complain. S2 stated S1 wrote the incident report. All the staff disclosed they do receive training on supervision. Based on LPA\342\200\231s facility inspection, observations, interviews conducted with reporting party, 3 staff and records reviewed it was determined there was insufficient evidence that Staff were not supervising C1 when child sustained the injuries. Although the allegations may have happened or are 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 was conducted with Director Manoja Weerakon. Notice of Site Visit was posted during the visit. Director 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. Director was provided a copy of their appeal rights (LIC 9058 01/16) and their signature on this form acknowledges receipt of these rights. First level appeals should be sent to the regional manager to the address listed above.

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 April 17, 2024 inspection of LA HABRA MONTESSORI PRESCHOOL?

This was a complaint inspection of LA HABRA MONTESSORI PRESCHOOL on April 17, 2024. The inspection found no deficiencies and no citations were issued.

Were any citations issued to LA HABRA MONTESSORI PRESCHOOL on April 17, 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.

Share this reportEmail

Next steps

If this is your facility,claim this pageand correct anything the record gets wrong. Free.

Researching this visit professionally?Book a 15-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.