Complaint·February 12, 2026

Licensee encouraged C1’s representatives to purchase a teething necklace to divert C1’s focus from toys and various other items found in the facility. Licensee stated that children are diapered in the facility every 2 hours with the exception of an immediate need. Licensee stated that the facility documents diaper changes on a binder in the diaper changing area which is transferred to the Brightwheel App. Licensee stated the documentation includes whether the diaper was wet or if child had a bowel movement and if cream was applied. Four staff members (S1-S4) were interviewed on 11/25/25 and 2/10/26. All staff indicated that young children initially transitioning into the preschool classroom from the infant classroom have a tendency to put things in their mouth. All staff stated they have observed children putting items in their mouth inside and outside. All teachers stated they have removed rocks from children’s mouths on multiple occasions. All teachers shared there had been a child, C1 that was orally fixated and attempted to consume multiple items both inside and outside which they had removed and documented in the Brightwheel App. All staff shared that children in the preschool are diapered every two hours or as needed. Staff stated they also encourage children to sit on the toilet before they are diapered if children are currently being potty trained. Staff indicated that diaper changes are documented on a white board indicating whether it was wet or if child had a bowel movement and if cream was applied. Staff shared that information is then transferred to the Brightwheel App to communicate daily diapering activity to the children’s representatives. Seven parents were interviewed on 1/15/26 and 1/16/26. One parent (P1) indicated they have seen children put items in their mouth. None of the other parents interviewed had knowledge of their child putting items in their mouth. All parents stated that based on their observations the facility operates in ratio. One parent (P4) had concerns about supervision with regards to minor injuries their child had sustained in care. P4 stated they are not informed of injuries that occur at the facility. All other parents interviewed stated they are informed about incidents through the Brightwheel App. Two parents (P4 & P6) had concerns with regards to diapering. P4 stated their child is potty-trained now, but when their child was in diapers, they would find fecal matter after they had been changed. P4 shared their child has had a lot of diaper rashes. P6 stated they had picked up their child and found the staff didn’t wipe them properly. All other parents interviewed stated they had no other concerns regarding diapering and appreciated the center’s support with potty-training. All parents except for P4 indicated that they are notified of diaper changes throughout the day and the notification includes whether their child has a wet or BM diaper in addition to whether diaper rash cream is applied. On 11/18/25 LPA received documentation regarding a timeline of events from the reporting party. LPA received documentation from the Licensee communicating to C1’s representatives that C1 had a history of putting various items in their mouth including kinetic sand, toys and foam. LPA received photos of C1 putting various items in their mouth. LPA received documentation of C1’s diaper changes as well as conversations regarding C1’s diaper rash and steps the facility took to resolve the issue. LPA reviewed copies of the employee’s schedule and children attending during the incident and was able to determine the facility was operating within licensed capacity and ratio requirements. Based on interviews and document review it cannot be determined if there was a lack of supervision resulting in child eating hazardous items and if staff are not meeting day care child’s diapering needs. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred, and the findings are unsubstantiated. Exit interview conducted and report was reviewed with the licensee Michelle Nitzen. Appeal rights were provided. 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.