Skip to main content

Inspection visit

Complaint

Clean visit · 0 citations

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

The allegation that \342\200\234Adult is using drugs while providing care and supervision\342\200\235 could not be verified. There were no corroborating statements or documentation, supporting visual evidence, nor direct witness to support the allegation. The allegation that \342\200\234Licensee is not abiding to Admission Procedures and Parental Rights\342\200\235 could not be verified. Records review and interviews were conducted to investigate the allegation and its associated details. The allegation that \342\200\234Uncleared adults are in the home while daycare children are present\342\200\235 could not be verified. Based on LPA observation, interviews, and records review, the adults present in the home during operating hours were background cleared and associated. The above allegations are found to be UNSUBSTANTIATED . Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove or disprove that the alleged violations occurred. No deficiencies are cited. Exit interview conducted and report was reviewed with the licensee Briksam Gad. A Notice of Site Visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days. Failure to comply with posting requirements shall result in an immediate civil penalty of $100. Appeal rights were provided.

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.

  • OPERATION OF A FAMILY CHILD CARE HOME

    Based on LPA observation, licensee left accessible: medication, incense packages, and cigarette lighters in two unlatched, kitchen drawers, which poses a potential health, safety or personal rights risk to persons in care.

  • 102417(g)(9)(A)1Type B

    Based on licensee statement and LPA review of facility records, the licensee has not performed a fire drill every 6 months as required and was unfamiliar the difference between conducting emergency drills vs. testing fire alarms. This poses a potential safety risk to children in care.

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the July 22, 2024 inspection of GAD, BRIKSAM FAMILY CHILD CARE?

This was a complaint inspection of GAD, BRIKSAM FAMILY CHILD CARE on July 22, 2024. The inspection found no deficiencies and no citations were issued.

Were any citations issued to GAD, BRIKSAM FAMILY CHILD CARE on July 22, 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.