Skip to main content

Inspection visit

Complaint

Clean visit · 0 citations

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

The Reporting Party (RP) stated that on Tuesday 01/20/2026, RP observed the child #6 (C6)’s ear to be very bruised along with a bump, and that C6’s wrist was red as well. RP further reported that C6 disclosed that Staff #1 (S1) grabbed C6’s hand in a rough manner trying to pull C6 back and caused C6 to hit C6’s ear on the door. During the investigation, LPA toured the facility, reviewed the video footage, and obtained pertinent documents. LPA also conducted interviews with the Reporting Party, 5 Staff Members, 5 Parents, and 5 Children. Regarding the allegation of “Staff handled a day-care child in a rough manner resulting in injury.” During the physical plant inspection today,1/28/2026, LPA reviewed the video footage. However, the footage was too blurry to clearly observe the interaction between S1 and C6. During the staff interview, 5 out of 5 staff denied the allegation of Staff handled a day-care child in a rough manner resulting in injury. All staff stated that they never touch or grab the children in care when they are not following directions and rules. When children are misbehaving, staff will redirect them to do a different activity that the children like. S1 stated that S1 never pulls, grabs, or pushes C6 under any circumstance. During the parent interview, all 5 interviewed parents did not divulge any information pertaining to the allegation or express any concerns regarding the care of the children. During the children interview, all 5 children did not disclose any information pertaining to the allegation. Based on LPA’s observations, interviews, and records review, the preponderance evidence of Staff handled a day-care child in a rough manner resulting in injury has not been met. Although the allegation 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. Page 2 of 3 Exit interview was conducted and report was reviewed with the facility representative Agreda Flor Adriana. Notice of Site Visit was posted during the visit. The 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 facility representative was provided with a copy of the 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. Page 3 of 3

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 March 24, 2026 inspection of HAPPY FACE CHILDCARE AND PRESCHOOL INC.?

This was a complaint inspection of HAPPY FACE CHILDCARE AND PRESCHOOL INC. on March 24, 2026. The inspection found no deficiencies and no citations were issued.

Were any citations issued to HAPPY FACE CHILDCARE AND PRESCHOOL INC. on March 24, 2026?

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.