Skip to main content

Inspection visit

Complaint

Clean visit · 0 citations

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

An unannounced subsequent complaint investigation inspection was conducted by Licensing Program Analyst Jennifer Velasco (LPA), who met with Director Carrie Robinson (D1). It has been alleged facility staff are not propertly supervising day care children. D1 denied the allegation(s) and stated staff are focused on supervising and providing care to infants at all times infants are in care. During today’s inspection, LPA toured the facility, conducted interviews, reviewed facility documents, and observed six classroom staff providing care to 20 children. During the investigation, LPA toured the facility, observed facility staff provide care to children, conducted witness interviews, and requested and reviewed pertinent documents and materials. Witness statements, document reviews, and LPA observation failed to corroborate the allegation that facility staff failed to supervise infants in care. Based on interviews and facility documents, the preponderance of evidence standard has not been met; therefore, the above allegation(S) is/are found to be UNSUBSTANTIATED. This report was reviewed and discussed with D1. Appeal Rights were provided and exit interview was conducted. All licensing reports are public information and must be made available upon request for at least three years. D1 was provided with a Notice of Site Visit (NOS) to be posted in the facility for 30 days.

Citations

1 citation 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.

  • OBSERVATION OF THE CHILD

    Any unusual behavior, any injury or signs of illness requiring assessment and/or administration of first aid by staff shall be reported to the child's authorized representative and recorded in the child's record. This requirement was not met a evidenced by: Multiple witness statements corroborating the allegation that facility staff was aware an infant (C1) was ill and had a fever but did not take C1's temperature or notify C1's authorized representative that C1 was ill. This presented a potential health and safety risk to children in care.

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the September 15, 2022 inspection of KINDERCARE LEARNING CENTER - VEHICLE (INF)?

This was a complaint inspection of KINDERCARE LEARNING CENTER - VEHICLE (INF) on September 15, 2022. The inspection found no deficiencies and no citations were issued.

Were any citations issued to KINDERCARE LEARNING CENTER - VEHICLE (INF) on September 15, 2022?

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.