Exhibit 2 - North Dakota.pdf

Study of Child Care Provider Licensing Final Report

May 27, 2026

Table of Contents Executive Summary

Members

Child Care Services Advisory Committee Chair

Child Care Services Advisory Committee Members

Early Childhood Services Advisory Board Members

Department of Health and Human Services

Background

North Dakota’s Current Child Care Landscape

Studying Child Care Provider Licensing

Statewide Provider Input

Local Ordinances and Impact on Child Care Businesses

Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP)

Child Care Assistance Program

Streamlining the Child Care Licensing Framework

Qualifications for Teaching Staff, Supervisors and Directors

Training Requirements

Ratio and Group Size

Change Takes Time

Final Recommendations

Recommendation 1 – Streamline into Three Provider Types and a Preschool Designation

Recommendation 2 – Ratio and Group Size

Recommendation 3 – Qualifications for Teaching Staff, Supervisors, and Directors

Recommendation 4 – Training Requirements

Recommendation 5 – Age of Children Served

Recommendation 6 – Local Ordinances

Appendix…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………27

Executive Summary The Legislative Management Study of Child Care Provider Licensing was established through House Bill 1119 during the 69th legislative session to review and provide input on the laws, administrative rules, and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) policies relating to child care licensing. The legislative management study was required to include input from HHS, a child care services advisory committee, and child care providers.

The Child Care Services Advisory Committee selected by Legislative Management met jointly with the Early Childhood Services Advisory Board authorized by NDCC 50-11.1-15.

The Early Childhood Services Advisory Board is charged with advising the department each time early childhood services rules are reviewed; conducting an analysis of and making recommendations to the department regarding the department’s review of early childhood rules, and on an ongoing basis make recommendations to the department regarding changes and revisions to the early childhood services rules.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) provided staffing and administrative services for this study. HHS consulted with the Office of Child Care Quality and Business Support Center to provide technical assistance along with facilitation and solicitation of provider feedback from around the state.

Members

Child Care Services Advisory Committee Chair Senator Kyle Davison

Child Care Services Advisory Committee Members Representative Macy Bolinske Representative Brandy Pyle Senator Todd Beard Ms. Debra Beard – Group Child Care Provider, Williston Ms. Kenzi Brown – Coyote Pups Learning Den, Willison Ms. Keely Ihry – Child Care Aware® of North Dakota Ms. Verla Jung – Child Care Aware® of North Dakota Ms. Kari Kapp – Group Child Care Provider, Jamestown Ms. Lorrie Thoemke – YMCA of the Northern Sky, Fargo Ms. Kaila Wentz – Multiple Licensed Provider, Bismarck

Early Childhood Services Advisory Board Members Ms. Rhoda Elmi – Jasmin Child Care and Preschool, Fargo Ms. Kirsten Hopp – Bottineau Children’s Academy, Bottineau Ms. Catherine Heyd – LaMoure Church of the Nazarene Preschool, LaMoure Ms. Tania Zerr – YMCA of the Northern Sky School Age Learning Centers, Fargo Ms. Linda Schroeder – homebased provider – West Fargo

Department of Health and Human Services Ms. Kay Larson, Early Childhood Director Ms. Carmen Traeholt, Child Care Licensing Administrator Ms. Mariah Hill, Co-CCDF Administrator Ms. Coreen Ruona, Child Care Licensing Supervisor Ms. Kelsey Dobitz, Child Care Licensing Supervisor Ms. Jasmin Schmidt, Child Care Licensing Supervisor Ms. Alissa Palkrabek, Child Care Licensing Supervisor

Background HHS commissioned a comprehensive external evaluation of North Dakota’s current child care licensing laws, rules and policies as follow up to conversations that occurred in and around the time of the 2023 Legislative Session. During the interim Dr. Kelli Odden, Chair of Mayville State University’s Education Department, completed a crosswalk and comparison study of the laws, rules, and policies relevant to North Dakota’s child care infrastructure. The study identified areas of redundancy within the program types and recommended streamlining program types defined in law and the associated regulations to reduce administrative challenges and better support child care providers.

As a result of the external evaluation, HB 1119 was brought to the 69th legislative assembly at the request of the department, proposing a proactive approach to strengthening North Dakota’s child care infrastructure. The bill, which would make necessary changes in statute, allowing the department to streamline program types, was seen as a significant change to the state’s child care licensing framework. Since definitions reside in North Dakota Century Code, this bill was the first step in the change process and necessary before streamlined administrative rules could be created.

While most providers saw the positive potential of the proposed changes, policy makers struggled to digest the changes. As a result, the original intent of HB 1119 was sidelined and rewritten to include a legislative management study of child care provider licensing, consideration of a program evaluation of the Department of Health and Human Services child care services, and creation of the child care services advisory committee to review and provide input on the laws, administrative rules, and HHS policies relating to child care licensing.

North Dakota’s Current Child Care Landscape The Child Care Development Block Grant (CCDBG) and Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) explicitly connect child care licensing and subsidy as interdependent elements of the same system. The law and federal regulations (45 CFR Part 98) make clear that licensing is both a safeguard for children and a condition for receiving public child care funds (child care assistance). The CCDBG and CCDF provide federal guidelines that states must follow to establish child care licensing requirements, ensuring health and safety standards for child care providers. States have the flexibility to create their own regulations within these federal frameworks, which helps improve the quality and accessibility of child care services.

North Dakota Century Code (NDCC) Chapter 50-06 states that the Department of Health and Human Services shall act as the official agency of the state for licensure of early childhood programs. NDCC Chapter 50-11.1 contains the formal legal requirements for Early Childhood Services.

In addition, North Dakota currently has seven administrative code books, rules written to instruct providers how to meet the requirements of the law, and nine provider types:

family, group in a home, group in a facility, center, preschool, school-age, multiple licensed program (group/preschool or center/preschool), self-declaration, and in-home provider.

Administrative Codes include:

• 75-03-07 In-Home Child Care Early Childhood Services

• 75-03-07.1 Self-Declaration Providers Early Childhood Services

• 75-03-08 Family Child Care Early Childhood Services

• 75-03-09 Group Child Care Early Childhood Services

• 75-03-10 Child Care Center Early Childhood Services

• 75-03-11 Preschool Early Childhood Services

• 75-03-11.1 School-Age Child Care Program Early Childhood Services

HHS must ensure standards exist and monitoring of compliance is occurring. Adherence to federal requirements and the state’s triennial CCDF plan which includes the law, rules, and policies for early childhood services are monitored by the Office of Child Care. Often findings result in HHS bringing these items to the legislature during session and in the legislative rule making process to bring North Dakota into compliance.

Studying Child Care Provider Licensing

Statewide Provider Input The joint committee solicited input from providers across the state. HHS consulted with Lisa Brochard, Lead Technical Assistance Specialist with the Child Care Quality and Business Support Center. She developed questions to solicit feedback, created notetaking templates for facilitators, managed a survey option for providers and hosted two virtual listening sessions. Child Care Aware of North Dakota hosted regional in-person listening sessions.

Providers not only offered feedback on the pain points, but they also discussed common themes that may inform future recommendations. These included:

• Consolidating and simplifying rules

• Reforming training requirements

• Updating ratio, age bands, and the points system

• Reducing barriers to staffing and substitutes

See summary of listening sessions in the appendix.

Local Ordinances and Impact on Child Care Businesses Committee members identified that many communities have local ordinances that providers identify as barriers to child care licensing. These included limiting the number of children or program types in certain zones, restricted parking, fire suppression, operation of a home-based business in residential zoning, special use fees and more.

The committee enlisted help from the ND League of Cities, Vision West, and Economic Development Association of North Dakota to distribute a survey to learn more about the presence of local ordinances related to child care. HHS also targeted city administrators and auditors in each region’s major cities. Response was low; however, represented both large and small communities across the state.

Findings included the presence of

• zoning approval or letters

• special or conditional use permits or city council approval

• building modifications or inspection

• fire sprinkler requirements

• ordinances restricting certain program types

• and occasionally, exemptions or reduced requirements and incentives for establishment or growth of child care

Survey limitations noted include single responses from a locality may not reflect all ordinances or policies that may impact child care programs, in some cases HHS was aware of existing local policies that weren’t reflected in survey responses, and a survey is not a formal review of what policies are on the books.

Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) The Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) is a federal program that provides reimbursements for nutritious meals and snacks to eligible children and adults who are enrolled for care at participating child care centers, child care homes, and adult care centers.

The North Dakota Department of Public Instruction (NDDPI) in accordance with the Food and Nutrition Service of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), administers child nutrition and food distribution for the following eligible programs:

• Nonresidential, licensed public or private, nonprofit child care centers

• For-profit child care centers may participate if at least 25 percent of the participants in care are:

• Eligible for free or reduced-price meals, or

• Receive child care assistance.

• Head Start, outside-school-hours programs meeting the CACFP requirements are also eligible.

NDDPI’s Child Nutrition and Food Distribution unit administers the program through Family Child Care Home Sponsors for the following eligible programs:

• Any licensed home-based child care provider who cares for at least one child is eligible so long as the care takes place in the provider’s own residence, the private residence of another, or a rented or unoccupied private residence.

Child Care Assistance Program The Child Care Assistance Program (CCAP) helps pay a portion of the cost of child care for working families, or families in training or education programs. Allowable monthly maximum payment rates vary depending on provider types and ages of children served.

To qualify a child must be under the age of 13, live in a household whose family income does not exceed 85% of the state median and reside with a parent or parents who are working or attending a job training or education program. Lead Agencies may expand eligibility to certain populations such as children older than 13 with disabilities. The federal government sets the eligibility ceiling for families to participate; in North Dakota the household income threshold is lower than 85% state median income. State policy exists allowing children older than 13, but under age 19, to receive CCAP if they are physically or mentally incapable of caring for themselves as verified in writing by a physician or a licensed/certified psychologist.

A core tenet of the program is parent choice, allowing families to select the child care setting that best fits their specific needs. Current state law defines early childhood services for children through the age of eleven. This means there are no choices for children older than eleven.

During the last legislative session, HHS proposed a change to North Dakota Century Code Chapter 50-11.1-02.1 regarding the number of children in a program and how that number is determined which states “all children present on the premises and under the age of twelve years must be counted”. The proposed change, “children present on the premises and under the age of thirteen years must be counted” would align with the CCDF subsidy eligibility for children under the age of 13 and offer those families that need care for children twelve years of age a CCDF eligible child care option. There were several definitions that also would have needed revision to include children through the age of twelve.

North Dakota’s current law has an allowance for homebased providers, “providers’ own children over the age of eleven are exempt for the purposes of determining the number of children receiving early childhood services under this section.”

Ultimately the original intent of HB 1119 was changed to suggest a study of child care licensing. The Child Care Assistance Program (CCAP) had been paying for children through the month of their thirteenth birthday and effective April 1, 2026, to align CCAP policy with state law, CCAP began making payments through the month a child turns 12 years old. The following month, families were no longer eligible to request a subsidy for that child.

Streamlining the Child Care Licensing Framework A streamlined licensing framework can create a system that is easier to understand, easier to administer, and easier to comply with – while maintaining strong health and safety protections for children.

Benefits for Providers

1) Easier to understand and navigate

• Providers face less confusion about which license category fits their program model.

• Application, renewal, and expansion processes become more straightforward.

2) Reduced Administrative Burden

• Fewer distinctions between license types can reduce paperwork, duplicative requirements, and time spent interpreting regulations.

3) More operational flexibility

• Providers may have greater ability to adapt services to community needs without needing to change program types.

4) More equitable regulatory expectations

• Similar programs are held to similar standards, reducing perceptions that requirements vary unnecessarily across program types.

5) Better access to support and technical assistance

• Clearer categories make guidance, training, and compliance resources easier to develop and easier for providers to use

Benefits for Regulators

1) Greater clarity and consistency in oversight

• Fewer program types offer greater clarity and consistency in oversight, reducing complexity in interpreting statutes, regulations, and policy guidance

2) More efficient administration

• Simplified license structures reduce administrative burden for both licensing specialists related to processing applications, renewals, and compliance monitoring.

3) Stronger focus on health, safety, and quality

• Licensing specialists can spend less time navigating license distinctions and more time supporting compliance, technical assistance, and continuous quality improvement.

4) Clearer communication with the field and public

• Families, providers, and partners can more easily understand what license types mean and what standards apply

Recognizing that simplification requires careful balancing, the Committee reviewed a crosswalk of key licensing standards (see appendix) to examine regulatory distinctions that remain meaningful and opportunities for alignment while considering operational realities, regulatory intent, and potential tradeoffs for providers and the state.

The committee identified that streamlining program types could change the Child and Adult Care Food Program sponsor type that a provider works with for reimbursement and in some cases affect a provider’s current reimbursement rate.

The committee also acknowledged combining approved relative license exempt programs with other program types issued a certificate would provide the required monitoring and oversight required of all CCDF eligible providers. Any current approved relative would need a comprehensive background check that includes fingerprints, additional preservice training, and annual announced and unannounced visits. Although this move has more requirements, families would be eligible for a higher state max child care assistance rate, which may positively impact the revenue for these providers. In fact, the allowable monthly maximum rates for parents participating in the Child Care Assistance Program would not decrease due to streamlining program types, in some cases, eligible families may receive a higher benefit rate.

Additionally, the committee discussed that standalone preschool programs holding a current license under Administrative Code Chapter 75-01-11.19 on or before January 1, 2022, are exempt from providing a minimum of seventy-five square feet of appropriate outdoor play space, unless the owner’s license lapses for more than six months.

The committee also recognized perceived concerns some providers might have such as loss of program identity, one-size-fits all regulations, or uncertainty with transition and how their current program type maps to a new structure.

Qualifications for Teaching Staff, Supervisors and Directors Current administrative rules specify several ways that individuals can qualify for different roles including teaching staff, supervisor or director. For example, a child care center director shall meet at least one of the following qualifications:

a. A bachelor's degree in the field of early childhood education or child development;

b. A bachelor's degree with at least six months of experience in a child care center or similar setting and one of the following:

1) Eight semester hours or twelve quarter hours of department-approved early childhood education or child development;

2) One hundred twenty hours of department-approved early childhood training;

or

3) A director's credential approved by the department;

c. An associate's degree in the field of early childhood education or child development with at least six months of experience in a child care center or similar setting;

d. An associate's degree with at least one year of experience in a child care center or similar setting and one of the following:

1) Eight semester hours or twelve quarter hours of department-approved early childhood education or child development;

2) One hundred twenty hours of department-approved early childhood training;

or

3) A director's credential approved by the department;

e. A teaching certificate in elementary education with at least six months of experience in a child care center or similar setting;

f. A current certification as a child development associate or successful completion of a department-approved diploma program with emphasis in early childhood or child care, with at least one year of experience in a child care center or similar setting; or

g. Certification from a Montessori teacher training program with at least one year of experience in a Montessori school, child care center, or similar setting and at least one of the following:

1) Eight semester hours or twelve quarter hours of department-approved child development or early childhood education;

2) One hundred twenty hours of department-approved early childhood training;

or

3) A director's credential approved by the department

Bachelor’s degree qualifications may strengthen professional knowledge, instructional leadership, and program quality in early care and education settings. At the same time, the committee addressed concerns with degree-based requirements when considered alongside workforce availability, compensation realities, access to higher education, and the value of multiple pathways for demonstrating competency in the field.

Degree Significance in Early Care and Education Settings – Potential Benefits Deeper content knowledge A bachelor’s degree may provide a stronger foundation in child development, instructional practice, and developmental appropriateness.

Program quality and leadership capacity Degree-qualified staff may strengthen curriculum planning, mentoring of staff, family partnerships, and program administration.

Professionalization of the workforce Degree requirements can elevate recognition of early childhood education as a skilled profession requiring specialized knowledge.

Alignment with research and quality initiatives Higher educational attainment is often associated with stronger understanding of evidence-based practice, quality improvement systems, and child outcomes.

Career pathway development Degree qualifications can create advancement pathways for teachers into lead teacher, director, coaching, or policy roles.

Degree Considerations in Early Care and Education Settings Workforce supply constraints Degree requirements may narrow the candidate pool in a sector already facing staffing shortages. Committee members noted challenges with finding school age supervisors and in smaller communities finding qualified directors.

Access to higher education Cost, time, and geographic access to higher education can create barriers—especially for rural providers, incumbent workers, multilingual staff, and nontraditional students.

Experience vs. credentials A degree is one measure of preparation; it may not fully capture practical skill, relationship-building, or years of high-quality experience.

Compensation alignment Without wages and benefits that reflect qualification expectations, degree requirements may be difficult for providers to sustain and workers to pursue.

Multiple pathways matter Credentials, apprenticeships, CDA, stackable certificates, and demonstrated competency may also prepare effective educators.

A sub-committee of HHS staff and providers from the joint committees met to discuss qualifications for teaching staff, supervisors and directors. They explored the coach membership model which is based on evaluating four components: formal education, ongoing professional development, experience, and demonstrated competencies. The sub-committee offered a rough construct of a qualification framework (see appendix) which considers a combination of education, work experience, training and professional development instead of relying solely on education to determine if an individual meets qualifications for certain roles. This framework is currently in the early stages of development and will require further refinement, pilot testing, and evaluation to ensure the scoring methodology is reliable, consistent, equitable, and aligned with licensing standards and workforce expectations.

Training Requirements Responsive, well-qualified adult caregivers are one of the most important factors in children’s development and learning in child care settings. Teacher-child interactions and relationships, strategies to engage children and their families, and use of curriculum and assessment to inform practices with children are key components of quality child care.

These require a competent, skilled, and stable workforce.

The Child Care and Development Fund require states to have a framework for training that includes preservice training on mandated health and safety topics and a minimum number of annual hours of training for the child care workforce. Preservice training must be completed within 90 days of employment.

In North Dakota, all child care providers and staff must complete Getting Started, a 15-hour course which covers critical health and safety standards required by CCDF and child development including the major domains of cognitive, social, emotional, and physical development and approaches to learning.

These standards include:

• Infectious disease prevention

• Safe sleep practices

• Medication administration

• Food allergy management

• Physical premises safety

• Abusive head trauma

• Emergency preparedness

• Handling hazardous materials and bio contaminants

• Child abuse reporting

All staff members responsible for caring for or teaching children must be certified within 90 days of employment and prior to staff members having unsupervised access to children under care in infant and pediatric CPR and the use of an automated external defibrillator and pediatric first aid. State law also requires all staff who care for infants to complete one hour of department-approved safe sleep training before caring for infants and once each year after that. In addition, all providers and staff must complete mandated reporter training every year.

Ongoing training requirements depend on the provider type and how many hours are worked. Providers may not complete the same training within three years except for safe sleep training and mandated reporter training which must be taken every year.

Committee discussion focused on how required annual training may be all that some staff ever take to satisfy licensing requirements. While mandated annual training establishes a baseline for compliance and core safety practices, reliance on required topics alone may limit exposure to the full spectrum of professional competencies needed for high-quality practice. Without intentional opportunities for learning across competency domains, workforce development may become uneven, leaving gaps in knowledge, skill application, and professional growth. It was also noted that regardless of staff schedule, staff should demonstrate core competencies essential to health and safety, child development, family engagement, and more. All children deserve well-trained adults for every hour of care.

Ratio and Group Size Ratio and group size are two of the most influential structural factors in early childhood because they directly shape child safety, quality interactions, and the ability of providers to respond to individual needs.

Safety and supervision

Lower child-to-staff ratios increase the level of supervision available per child. In practical terms:

• Fewer children per adult means faster response to injuries, conflicts, or emergencies

• It reduces the likelihood of children being unsupervised even briefly

• It is especially critical for infants and toddlers, where risks (choking, climbing, unsafe exploration) are higher and constant proximity is needed

Quality of interactions

Ratios strongly affect the type of interactions adults can have with children:

• Smaller ratios allow for more responsive, one-on-one communication

• Educators can engage in richer “serve-and-return” interactions that support language and cognitive development

• Teachers are less focused on crowd management and more able to support learning in the moment

Individualized attention and developmental support

Early childhood is a period of rapid developmental variation. Smaller ratios enable:

• More tailored support for developmental milestones

• Early identification of delays or emerging needs

• Better accommodation of diverse learning styles and behavioral needs

• More consistent emotional support and attachment-building

Group size and classroom dynamics

Even when ratios are appropriate, large group sizes can still undermine quality:

• Larger groups increase noise, overstimulation, and behavioral complexity

• Peer conflicts become harder to mediate effectively

• Classroom routines become more rigid and less responsive

• Children may receive less direct engagement even if staffing ratios meet minimums

Workforce strain and educator effectiveness

Ratios and group size also affect adults:

• Lower ratios reduce burnout and physical/mental strain

• Teachers can spend more time teaching and less time managing behavior

• High ratios contribute to turnover, which disrupts continuity of care for children

Including All Children

Appropriate ratios are particularly important for:

• Children with disabilities or developmental delays

• Dual language learners

• Children experiencing trauma or high stress

• Smaller ratios increase the likelihood that their needs are noticed and supported early.

The Committee recognized that child-to-staff ratios and group size requirements are among the most significant regulatory drivers of both program quality and operating cost.

While lower ratios and smaller group sizes are associated with improved supervision, more responsive caregiving, and stronger developmental outcomes, they also require higher staffing levels and increased operational expenditures. Accordingly, these standards reflect a central tradeoff in licensing policy between enhancing quality and maintaining affordability, workforce feasibility, and access to care.

The Committee pointed to both the National Association for the Education of Young Children and the National Institute for Early Education Research and their benchmarks for maximum class size. Both suggest a class size of 20 children or lower for preschool aged children.

The Committee raised the complexities of North Dakota’s current ratios, group size, and points system and discussed ways to simplify the calculations. Simplification would reduce administrative burden for providers in determining how many children they can serve at any given time and make it easier for regulators to monitor. The committee reflected on the points system and how the first adult can care for a combination of children in a mixed age group that totals 1.34 points, but the fractional amount is dropped for each additional adult.

For reference, staffing and group size requirements for child care centers are as follows:

1. The number of staff members and their responsibilities must reflect program requirements and individual differences in the needs of the children enrolled, and may permit mixed-age groups, if necessary. Service personnel engaged in housekeeping and food preparation may not be counted in the child to staff ratio for periods of time when they are engaged in housekeeping or food preparation.

2. Ratios and Point System

a. The operator shall ensure that the child care center is sufficiently staffed at all times to meet the child to staff ratios for children in attendance and that no more children than the licensed capacity are served at one time. The minimum ratio of staff members responsible for caring for or teaching children to children in child care centers and maximum group size of children must be:

1. For children less than eighteen months of age, one staff member may care for four children, a ratio of .25 in decimal form, with a maximum group size of ten children;

2. For children eighteen months of age to thirty-six months of age, one staff member may care for five children, a ratio of .20 in decimal form, with a maximum group size of fifteen children;

3. For children three years of age to four years of age, one staff member may care for seven children, a ratio of .14 in decimal form, with a maximum group size of twenty children;

4. For children four years of age to five years of age, one staff member may care for ten children, a ratio of .10 in decimal form, with a maximum group size of twenty-five children;

5. For children five years of age to six years of age, one staff member may care for twelve children, a ratio of .08 in decimal form, with a maximum group size of thirty children; and

6. For children six years to twelve years of age, one staff member may care for twenty children, a ratio of .05 in decimal form, with a maximum group size of forty children.

b. When there are mixed-age groups in the same room, the operator shall ensure:

1. The maximum group size is consistent with the:

a) Age of the majority of the children; or

b) Highest number of children in the youngest age group;

2. When children age zero to eighteen months are in the mixed-age group, the maximum group size does not exceed ten children;

3. The mixed-age group does not exceed the acceptable ratio pursuant to subdivision d of subsection 2 of section 75-03-10-08 and the maximum number of children per staff member pursuant to subdivision a of subsection 2 of section 75-03-10-08; and

4. If the mixed-age group contains the maximum number of children per staff member pursuant to subdivision a of subsection 2 of section 75-03-10-08, the mixed-age group may only contain additional older children.

c. When there is a mixed-age group, the number of children in each age category is multiplied by the corresponding ratio number, converted to decimal form, and carried to the nearest hundredth. To determine the number of staff members responsible for caring for or teaching children necessary at any given time, numbers of staff members for all age categories are added, and any fractional staff member count is then rounded to the next highest whole number whenever the fractional staff member count amounts to thirty-five hundredths or more. If lower than thirty-five hundredths, the fractional amount is dropped.

Age bands were discussed at length. There was consensus around moving the age band for infants down from “for children less than eighteen months of age” to “under age 1”.

There is less consensus on what constitutes a school age child. Some committee members felt that school age should mean the child has attended their first day of kindergarten or first grade, others thought any child five years of age could be considered school age. The committee developed two models to guide future discussion.

Ideally, they would like to see a consistent ratio and group size framework for both program type 2 home-based child care and program type 3 facility-based child care. Each model offers some flexibility.

Age Groups, Staff Ratio and Max Group Model 1

• Infants (under age 1) o Staff ratio: 1 adult for every 4 children o Point value: .25 o Maximum group size 10 children

• Toddlers: (1 through 2 years old) o Staff ratio: 1 adult for every 5 children o Point value: .20 o Maximum group size 10 children

• 3 years old o Staff ratio: 1 adult for every 7 children o Point value: .14 o Maximum group size 14 children

• 4 years old o Staff ratio: 1 adult for every 10 children o Point value: .10 o Maximum group size 20 children

• 5 years old and have not yet attended school o Staff ratio: 1 adult for every 12 children o Point value: .08 o Maximum group size 24 children

• School Age: (5 through 11 years) o Staff ratio: 1 adult for every 20 children o Point value: .05 o Maximum group size 40 children

The weighted points system allows programs to combine age groups safely, operate more efficiently, maintain enrollment stability, and serve rural communities. This was seen as a beneficial model for facility-based programs that are more apt to run most of their day in like age instead of mixed age classrooms. The committee expressed interest in revisiting the point values in multiples of five to make it easier to calculate.

Age Groups, Staff Ratio and Max Group Model 2

• Infants (under age 1) o Staff ratio: 1 adult for every 4 children o Maximum group size: 12 children

• Toddlers (1 through 2 years old) o Staff ratio: 1 adult for every 5 children o Maximum group size: 15 children

• 3 through 5 years old o Staff ratio: 1 adult for every 10 children o Maximum group size: 20 children

• School Age (through 11 years) o Staff ratio: 1 adult for every 20 children o Maximum group size: 40 children

This model for age group, staff ratio and max group size was desirable for home-based programs who typically serve children of mixed age groups in the same classroom/space.

Provider and regulatory staff clarity remained an important consideration throughout discussions.

Change Takes Time Should recommendations from the Child Care Licensing Study lead to change, the committee knows that it will take time. A bill would need to be introduced to the 70th legislative assembly beginning January 2027 to change definitions in NDCC Chapter 50-

11.1 Early Childhood Services and Chapter 50-33 Child Care Assistance, with these changes not taking effect unless administrative rules are passed.

HHS would need to draft administrative rules by December 26, 2027. The draft rules must then be reviewed and approved by the HHS Commissioner before being placed for publication. A rule hearing and public comment period would open in March 2028. An administrative rules hearing would be held in June 2028, and the new administrative rules would take effect July 1, 2028. Providers would be operating under both old and new rules until all licenses are renewed or June 30, 2029, whichever comes first.

Final Recommendations The recommendations, the goal of which is to streamline and improve the quality of early childhood services licensing, seek to balance the need for rules that ensure safe quality child care with the need to revise or eliminate rules that create unnecessary barriers for providers.

Recommendation 1 – Streamline into Three Provider Types and a Preschool Designation This recommendation would require changes to ND Century Code.

Program Type 1 – Regulated, Licensed Exempt This would combine the current approved relative providers, in-home providers, and self-declaration providers into a single provider type. Under current regulations these provider types are not allowed to care for more than five children or three under 24 months of age. This group is license exempt and receives a certificate.

Care may take place in the child’s home if the child’s health is at risk or a child has a disability such that taking the child to an outside provider creates an undue hardship. Written documentation is required.

Program Type 2 – Home-based Child Care This would combine the current family, group in a home, and residentially based group in a facility (which is most often a home).

Program Type 3 – Facility-based Child Care This would combine the current non-residentially based group in a facility (often in a repurposed community building or strip mall), center, and school age.

Preschool Designation This would replace the current preschool license and allow a preschool designation to layer on top of either program type 2 or program type 3 so long as the program had qualified staff and preschool curriculum as determined by the department.

Furthermore, the committee recommends the outdoor minimum space requirement exemption for programs having held a standalone preschool license on or before January 1, 2022, be carried forward unless the owner’s license lapsed for more than six months.

Recommendation 2 – Ratio and Group Size This recommendation would require administrative code changes.

Change the age band for infants from “children less than eighteen months of age” to 0 through 11 months and toddlers from “children eighteen months of age to thirty-six months of age” to 12 through 35 months.

When points are calculated for mixed age groups, the first adult and each adult thereafter should be able to care for 1.34 points instead of dropping the fractional amount for each additional adult. Consideration should be given to assigning points in multiples of five.

Square footage requirements still play into the overall max group size in any one classroom.

In addition to using point value during the first hours after opening and during the last hour before closing in programs that operate most of their day in classrooms of like aged children to help manage lower attendance periods safely, add preparation for lunch.

Continue discussion and consideration of a simplified framework for determining ratio and max group size.

Recommendation 3 – Qualifications for Teaching Staff, Supervisors, and Directors This recommendation would require administrative code changes.

The current system can make it difficult for experienced staff to qualify if they do not have formal degrees. Instead of requiring only certain degrees or education levels, staff could qualify for different roles based on a combination of education, work experience, and training and professional development. Staff would need to earn points in each of these areas to meet qualification requirements. This change would recognize hands-on experience, allow more pathways into the early childhood workforce, support rural communities that may struggle to hire qualified staff, and encourage career growth for current employees.

Recommendation 4 – Training Requirements This recommendation would require administrative code changes.

It is recommended that ongoing training requirements be in addition to annual safe sleep training and mandated reporter training.

For Program Type 1 Regulated, Legally Unlicensed, CCDF Eligible providers, three additional hours of department approved training, for a total of 4 to 5 clock hours of training, depending on if caring for infants.

For Program Type 2 Home-based and Program Type 3 Facility-based,

• providers working 25 or more hours would need 10 additional hours of department approved training, for a total of 11 or 12 clock hours of training, depending on if caring for infants

• providers working 24 or less hours would need 7 additional hours of department approved training, for a total of 8 or 9 clock hours of training, depending on if caring for infants.

It is also recommended that current policy for Volunteers and Emergency Designees/Substitutes be communicated more widely. Individuals who are identified as substitutes or emergency designees must complete required preservice training and thereafter keep their pediatric CPR/AED and pediatric 1st Aid certification current, plus complete annual Safe Sleep training if working with infants and annual Mandated Reporter Training. No additional training hours are required. Some volunteer types are required to complete training, and some are not.

Recommendation 5 – Age of Children Served This recommendation would require changes to ND Century Code.

To align Child Care Assistance Program subsidy eligibility with CCDF, revisit the proposed change, “children present on the premises and under the age of thirteen years must be counted” when determining the number of children in program. The committee recommends keeping the exception for the homebased program type. In addition, to actually expand eligibility to certain populations such as children older than 13 with disabilities and ensure care options are legally available, the definition would need to add children older than 13, but under age 19, if they are physically or mentally incapable of caring for themselves as verified in writing by a physician or a licensed/certified psychologist.

There may be other definitions that need revision to include expanding availability of care options for families based on these recommendations.

Recommendation 6 – Local Ordinances HHS Licensing specialists and vendors with quality coaching staff should encourage providers to work closely with their local municipalities to determine if there are ordinances that apply to the operation of a child care business.

Prepared for North Dakota Child Care Services Advisory Committee

Prepared by Lisa Brochard Technical Assistance Specialist Child Care Quality and Business Support Center

Disclaimer This report reflects feedback and suggestions shared by child care providers across North Dakota. While all input is included to accurately represent provider perspectives, some suggestions may not align with Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) requirements.

Table of Contents Executive Summary

Purpose and Context

Outreach Methods and Participation

Cross-Cutting Themes from Providers

Provider-Type Specific Findings

Nonpolicy Pain Points and Suggestions

Recommendations to Support New or Potential Providers

Provider Recommendations for Consideration

Conclusion

Help Shape North Dakota’s Child Care Rules Provider Outreach Findings and Recommendations

February 2026

Help Shape North Dakota’s Child Care Rules: Provider Outreach Findings and Recommendations

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Between January and February 2026, the Child Care Quality and Business Support Center (CQBSC) conducted a statewide provider outreach effort to inform the North Dakota Child Care Services Advisory Committee’s review of child care licensing rules. Input was gathered through statewide virtual meetings, eight in-person regional sessions facilitated by Child Care Aware of North Dakota, and a comprehensive provider survey. More than 500 licensed providers participated, representing all major license types.

Across outreach methods, providers expressed strong support for child health and safety protections and a shared commitment to delivering high-quality care. At the same time, providers consistently described a licensing system that is overly complex, fragmented, and difficult to navigate. Regulatory complexity, duplicative requirements, unclear guidance, and inconsistent interpretation were cited as placing significant strain on programs, diverting time and resources away from children and families, and contributing to workforce burnout, reduced capacity, and program closures.

Survey findings reinforced themes raised in meetings and highlighted system-wide challenges related to rule clarity and consolidation, training, staffing, ratios and the point system, administrative burden, square footage, and technology issues. Providers across license types reported that similar requirements appear in multiple sections with slightly different language, increasing the risk of noncompliance and inconsistent enforcement.

Training requirements emerged as the most frequently cited concern. Providers described confusion created by calendar-year training rules, repetitive annual requirements, limited differentiation by role or hours worked, and insufficient recognition of equivalent education or credentials. Staffing shortages are further compounded by licensing requirements that make it difficult to hire, onboard, and retain substitutes staff, particularly in rural communities. These barriers directly affect providers’ ability to maintain ratios and keep classrooms open.

Ratios, age bands, and the point system generated particularly detailed feedback. While providers affirmed the importance of infant safety and appropriate supervision, many described the current system as confusing, rigid, and misaligned with child development and day-to-day operations. Fractional point values, broad age bands, and unequal staff point assignments were reported to reduce usable capacity and require frequent waivers for routine situations.

Providers—especially in home-based settings—also highlighted administrative and documentation burdens created by duplicative paperwork and non-integrated digital systems.

Licensing portals, background check systems, training registries, and subsidy platforms often do not communicate, increasing error risk and compliance anxiety. Square footage rules were described as inconsistently applied and sometimes in conflict with quality initiatives, resulting in unexpected capacity reductions.

This report synthesizes provider feedback into cross-cutting themes and provider-type-specific findings and offers actionable, flexible recommendations for the Advisory Committee’s consideration. Collectively, the findings point to a clear opportunity to modernize North Dakota’s licensing framework by simplifying and clarifying rules, reducing unnecessary burden, improving consistency and communication, and better aligning requirements with the realities of providing care—while continuing to protect and strengthen child health and safety. While the report reflects the full range of provider input, not all suggested changes may align with federal Child Care and Development Fund requirements; the findings are intended to inform the Committee’s deliberations.

PURPOSE AND CONTEXT

The Early Childhood Licensing Unit, in partnership with the North Dakota Child Care Services Advisory Committee created under House Bill 1119 (69th Legislative Assembly), is beginning a multi-year process to review and update North Dakota’s child care licensing administrative rules. The goal is to develop rules that are clearer, less complicated, and better aligned with the realities of providing care—while continuing to protect the health and safety of children.

Provider outreach was intentionally designed to ensure that this process is grounded in the lived experience of licensed providers across the state, including home-based and center-based programs, urban and rural communities, and single-site and multi-site organizations.

OUTREACH METHODS AND PARTICIPATION

Provider engagement occurred through three primary methods. Feedback opportunities were communicated multiple times, with several reminders issued to encourage participation.

1. Virtual Provider Meetings (January 8, 2026)

Two statewide virtual meetings were held at 1 p.m. and 7 p.m. CT to maximize accessibility for all providers. A total of 100 providers participated (75 in the afternoon meeting and 25 in the evening meeting).

2. In-Person Regional Meetings (January 14–29, 2026)

Eight in-person meetings were held across the state in morning, afternoon, and evening formats, again to fit provider work schedules. These sessions engaged 78 providers, as well as 4 government and community members.

3. Statewide Provider Survey (January 5–February 6, 2026)

An online survey collected structured and open-ended feedback related to simplifying and clarifying licensing rules, challenges with implementation, and suggestions for improvement.

The survey asked providers to identify ways to support high‑quality child care while reducing burden for existing providers and new providers or individuals considering becoming providers.

https:/…