Skip to main content

Inspection visit

Complaint

Clean visit · 0 citations

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

It was alleged that a child sustained unexplained bruises while in care due to staff neglect/lack of supervision. Facility Representative and seven staff members denied the allegation. Facility Representative and staff stated that there are two staff members in each classroom supervising the children. Staff members stated that although they are present in the classroom, incidents with the children do occur. Facility Representative and staff members stated that children fall and attempt to hit each other, but that staff are always present and intervene when near enough to the child, to avoid any child from being hurt. Reporting Party (RP) reported that the child in question sustained unexplained bruises due to staff not supervising the children and utilizing their cell phones while in the classroom. A witness reported that they observed Staff #1 (S1) and Staff #2 (S2) in a classroom conversating with each other and not supervising the children. The dates and times of the observation are unknown. It was alleged that staff pinched children in care. Facility Representative denied the allegation and stated that they are not aware of any children in care being pinched by any staff members. Staff members denied observing staff pinch any daycare children. Staff in question denied the allegation and stated that they would never hit or pinch a daycare child. It was alleged that staff yelled at children in care. Facility Representative denied the allegation and stated that Staff #3 (S3) does speak in a strong, stern loud voice; however, they have not been observed yelling or being verbally abusive to any daycare children. One out of seven staff members, and a witness stated that S3 yells at daycare children in a verbally abusive tone. A former staff member stated that S1 and S3 have been observed and heard yelling at daycare children in a verbally abusive tone. S1 and S3 denied the allegation and stated that they never yell at the daycare children. S3 acknowledged that their voice is stern and loud but that they are never yelling or being mean to any daycare children. One daycare child interviewed stated that the children yell at each but that the teachers are nice. It was alleged that staff did not prevent child in care from hitting other children. Facility Representative and staff denied the allegation and stated that daycare children are not allowed to hit each other. Staff stated that if children are not sharing, become upset or aggressive with each other, staff immediately intervene separating the children and redirecting them to other activities. LIC 9099C Continuation... It was alleged that staff did not provide sufficient food to children in care. RP reported that child in question was served a banana and a granola bar for lunch. Facility Representative and seven staff members denied the allegation. Facility Representative and staff stated that the facility provides breakfast, lunch and snacks for the children. Staff members stated that there is always sufficient food for any child that requests an additional serving of food. Day care parents interviewed did not express any concerns regarding the allegation. It was alleged that staff did not follow reporting requirements. Facility Representative and staff denied the allegation. Facility Representative and staff stated that incident reports are provided to daycare parents for injuries and incidents that occur at the facility. Facility Representative and staff stated that parents are notified of incidents by phone call, text message, documentation in the Brightwheel App and incident reports are provided to the parents during pick up. Facility Representative stated that incident reports are signed by the parents; however on occasion daycare parents have declined to sign the incident reports. Based on interviews conducted and review of documentation, there were no disclosures or evidence presented that corroborated the allegations. Interview statements are conflicting. 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. The LIC 811 Confidential Names List was provided to Facility Representative. No deficiencies cited. A notice of site visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days. Exit interview conducted and report was reviewed with the Facility Representative Verenicia Chavez.

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 21, 2026 inspection of ADVENTURE POINT EARLY LEARNING CENTER?

This was a complaint inspection of ADVENTURE POINT EARLY LEARNING CENTER on April 21, 2026. The inspection found no deficiencies and no citations were issued.

Were any citations issued to ADVENTURE POINT EARLY LEARNING CENTER on April 21, 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.