Home › MI › Traverse City › Central Day Care Center
Central Day Care Center
4100 Barnes Road, Traverse City MI 49684 · License #DC280315162 · Center
Contact
- Phone
- (231) 947-6131
- Website
- Add via profile claim
- Address
- 4100 Barnes Road, Traverse City MI 49684 · Directions
Hours
Care & schedule
When they operate
Ages served
- Licensed for 70 children
How this facility compares
Violations per inspection, 3-yrInspection history & violations
Source: Michigan MiLEAP, Child Care Licensing Bureau- Violation
There was insufficient evidence to show that Teacher 4 did not provide appropriate care and supervision.
- Violation
The exiting doors that are part of the recently installed divider walls in the Chipmunk room have deadbolt lock hardware on one side without a knob or lever-type that is n on-locking against egress.
- Violation
- Violation
- Violation
- Violation
- Violation
Evidence does not support the allegation that child care staff members failed to provide appropriate care and supervision of Child A when he sustained a wrist on 04/13/2023. Video footage shows that Child A hadwhat appeared to be a minor fall as he was pulling to stand at the classroom table. CCSM 2 immediately comforted him and checked him for injuries. Staff noted what appeared to be a minor bump on his head that went away a short time later. After the fall, Child A played with toys and used his right hand to pull up at a low shelf. He also used the same hand to grasp his mother's shirt when she arrived for pick up. Physician's statements indicate that it was possible the mechanism of injury was the result of a fall consistent with what was observed in the video. The orthopedic specialist noted that there was no clinical evidence of abuse or neglect related to Child A' wrist. .......
- Violation
Program director Ms. Matthews and child care staff members Mr. Dunne and Ms. McClary did not provide appropriate care and supervision of children at all times. On 01/20/2023, Child A was left unattended on the playground. Mr. Dunne and Ms. McClary did not know his whereabouts for a period of 1 minute 35 seconds. ..........
- Violation
On 03/09/2022, I conducted an unannounced onsite inspection. I interviewed, program director and licensee designee Ms. Corrine Nagel regarding the allegations. She stated that on 02/01/2022, she herself observed two infants asleep in their cribs while wearing snow gear that included full snowsuits. One of the infants had a snowsuit with a hood attached. Child care staff member Ms. MyKayla Houghton was the only staff member present in the room at the time. Ms. Nagel addressed the problem with Ms. Houghton and told her it was not ok. Ms. Houghton said that they had just come in from a walk and she did not want to wake the infants 2 up by removing their snowsuits. She told Ms. Nagle that she did not know it was a problem to allow infants to sleep with their snowsuits on. Immediately after observing the unsafe sleep situation, Ms. Nagel wrote Ms. Houghton up and placed her on probation. She also required her to retake safe sleep training. After that, Ms. Nagel talked to all of the infant room staff and told them that snowsuits must always be removed before putting infants down for a nap. She also made sure that all of the infant room staff completed safe sleep training again. On 03/09/2022, Ms. Nagel provided a copy of the write-up form. The document, dated 02/01/2022, stated that the concern involved a "second warning about children being left in full snow gear while sleeping causing unsafe sleep for infants." (First warning given by Savannah [Smith]. Must take safe sleep training course by 02/08/2022. If condition with training not met, you will be subjected to being moved to different classroom away from infants." The write-up was signed and dated on 02/01/2022 by both Ms. Nagel and Ms. Houghton. Ms. Houghton told Ms. Nagel that she completed the safe sleep training as required; however, she has yet to provide the documentation. During the onsite inspection on 03/09/2022, I spoke with infant room staff members Ms. Emily Hoxie and Ms. Brittany Fielder. They both reported that Ms. Nagel spoke to them about removing infants' snowsuits before putting them down for a nap. On 03/11/2022, Ms. Nagel provided documentation of Ms. Houghton's safe sleep training certificate. A review of MiRegistry showed that Ms. Hoxie retook safe sleep training on 02/06/2022. Ms. Fielder's initial safe sleep training was completed on 11/04/2021. Documentation showing completion of additional safe sleep training is required for Ms. Fielder.
- Violation
On 11/17/2021, I conducted an unannounced inspection at Central Day Care. I discussed the allegations with program director and licensee designee Ms. Corrine Nagel. She stated that she heard a similar complaint from a former employee came to her sometime in the fall when she was still employed. The staff member thought other toddler staff were too harsh with children and that they slammed children down to sit if they were not listening. At the time, Ms. Nagel felt the staff member had a personality conflict with the young toddler lead caregiver, CCSM 1 because she did not like the structure CCSM 1 provided. Some staff thought the toddler teachers were "mean" because they held children accountable, had rules, routines, and consequences, and kept to a schedule. Those staff would let toddlers do whatever they wanted and thought that because they were so young, it was ok to not have rules or routines. She tried to explain the importance of routines to staff who seemed to misunderstand the intent behind the lead toddler caregivers' structure. She also thought that some staff liked drama and would "stir the pot." Because of this, it often seemed like a "she said, she said" situation. She identified several staff members she thought might say negative things about the 3 younger and older toddler room staff because there were conflicts between them in the past. Ms. Nagel's office is located off of the younger toddler classroom. She often keeps her door open to monitor what is happening in that classroom. Sometimes CCSM 1 gets stressed out but overall, she is "not bad with children." Recently, CCSM 1 had a two-week vacation which seems to have helped her stress level. Since coming back, things are lot different and she seems less stressed. Ms. Nagel has not observed the use of time outs with children under age three, nor has she seen children slammed down. Toddler staff may pull children aside to talk to them if they hit others or engage in unwanted behaviors, but they do not call it a time out. There is a child in the older toddler classroom who is very emotional. Staff in that classroom sometimes put him on a rug to calm down, but they sit next to him and help him breathe through his emotions until he is calm. Ms. Nagel identified CCSM 6 as the lead caregiver in the older toddler Owl room. She believes CCSM 6 is appropriately firm with children about following the rules. Ms. Nagel reported having no concerns with any of the staff in the Owl room. During onsite inspections on 11/17/2021, 11/18/2021, 12/01/2021, 01/12/2022, and telephone calls on 11/19/2021, 11/23/2021, and 01/20/2022, I interviewed CCSM 1, CCSM 2, and CCSM 3, CCSM 4, CCSM 5, CCSM 6, CCSM 7, CCSM 8, CCSM 9, CCSM 10, CCSM 11, CCSM 12, CCSM 14, and CCSM 19 about the allegations. CCSM 1 identified herself as the lead caregiver in the young toddler room, which is called the Chipmunk Room. CCSM 1 stated, "People think I am too rough with kids." However, CCSM 1 felt like her discipline methods were appropriate. She tries to solve problems based on each child's needs to see what works for them. For example, she made a busy box for one child, and gave a child who was biting a box to push around. She described the discipline methods she uses as redirecting children by moving them to a different area, sitting down with them while saying and showing them "gentle hands," giving them a busy box to play with, or giving them "time in the kitchen." Kitchen time is mostly used when children are hitting others. When that happens, staff usually sit on the floor with the child and do an activity with them. Staff do not use time outs for children under age 3, nor do they call any of their discipline methods a "time out." CCSM 1 stated, "Some teachers don't like being the 'bad person' and just say `gentle hands,' then do nothing [to follow through.]" CCSM 1 has not slammed children down or engaged in harsh discipline of children, nor has she seen other staff members do those things. CCSM 2,
- Violation
On 11/17/2021, 1 discussed the allegation with Ms. Nagel. She stated that lunches are never withheld from toddler as a form of discipline. Staff may wait to give a child time to comply with a request to wash their hands or follow directions, but they are never completely deprived of a meal. Sometimes if a child arrives late, appears tired, and staff do not know whether or not they just ate, they may let the child take a nap before serving them lunch. In those cases, the child is still served their meal, it is just done at a later time. During onsite inspections on 11/17/2021, 11/18/2021, and 12/01/2021, and telephone calls on 11/19/2021 and 11/23/2021, I interviewed CCSM 1, CCSM 2, and CCSM 3, CCSM 4, CCSM 5, CCSM 6, CCSM 7, CCSM 8, CCSM 9, CCSM 10, CCSM 11, CCSM 12, CCSM 13, and CCSM 14. CCSM 1, CCSM 4, CCSM 6, CCSM 11, and CCSM 12, all reported that they have never seen staff completely refuse to give a child lunch as a form of punishment. CCSM 1 stated that if a child refuses to wash their hands, she will have them sit until they are ready to wash their hands. After about five minutes, she will help them wash their hands then give them their lunch. If a child does not want to eat, CCSM 1 will offer them lunch after nap. CCSM 4 stated that if a child seems tired or is cranky, staff let them take a nap and then offer them lunch after they wake up. 13 CCSM 6 stated that children are not deprived of lunch as a punishment. If a child refuses to wash their hands or if they start falling asleep, staff will give them lunch later. CCSM 11 has seen staff provide ample time for children to eat lunch. CCSM 12 stated that it doesn't happen very often, but if a child seems too tired, staff give them an option to have snack after nap. Staff ask the child if they want to lay down and give them the choice to lay down or eat lunch. If they say they want to lay down, staff will give them lunch for their afternoon snack. CCSM 2, CCSM 5, CCSM 7, CCSM 8, CCSM 9, CCSM 10, and CCSM 14 all stated that CCSM 1 will withhold lunches from children if they refuse to wash their hands. CCSM 2 stated that on three different occasions, Child 0 (two-year-old, male) was put down for nap without being given lunch. One of those times, he was not offered or given lunch after waking up from his nap. CCSM 8 stated that both CCSM 1 and CCSM 6 often withheld lunches from children all together as a form of discipline. Sometimes, CCSM 1 and CCSM 6 gave children lunch after naptime. They said the child was stubborn and should not get lunch until their hands were washed. CCSM 2, CCSM 5, CCSM 9 reported that CCSM 1 expected children under age two to wash their hands on their own without help. CCSM 9 stated that when Child K (two-year-old, male) was 18 months old, he still needed help sitting down and washing his hands. CCSM 1 yelled at Child K and said, "I am not sitting you down. I have seen you do it before." This went on for 20 minutes. CCSM 1 put Child K to bed without lunch. Ms. Nagel came in about half way through and saw that Child K was put to bed without lunch. Toddlers who play with their food also have their food thrown away. CCSM 9 and CCSM 14 reported that CCSM 13 also takes food and bottles away from infants in the baby room if they drop their bottle more than once or if they throw their food on the floor. On 12/01/2021, CCSM 13 stated that today she took Child L's (eleven-month-old, male) plate of food away because he was throwing it on the floor. He had already eaten most of his fruit. Once he started throwing his food, she thought he was done eating, so she dumped it in the garbage. Child L had taken a bottle earlier, so CCSM 13 did not think he was hungry at lunchtime. On 12/01/2021, I inspected Child L's remaining lunch as well as the contents of the garbage in the infant room. The lunchbox contained a half-full fruit cup, a half-full 14 cup of sliced black olives, an unopened single-serving package of cinnamon graham cracker snacks, and an empty sandw
- Violation
On 11/17/2021, I discussed the allegation with Ms. Nagel. She stated that the people who use to hold children down on their cots no longer worked at the center. She identified Child N (four-year-old, male) as the child with developmental delays who was allegedly taped to his cot. Child N no longer attends because he was recently accepted into a school-based program. Child N had a difficult time staying on his cot, so staff would let him read in the corner. Ms. Nagel was aware of a rumor that Child N was taped down to his cot, but she did not think it really happened. During onsite inspections on 11/17/2021, 11/18/2021, and 12/01/2021, and telephone calls on 11/19/2021 and 11/23/2021, I interviewed CCSM 1, CCSM 2, and CCSM 3, CCSM 4, CCSM 5, CCSM 6, CCSM 7, CCSM 8, CCSM 9, CCSM 10, CCSM 11, CCSM 12, CCSM 13, and CCSM 14 about the allegations. CCSM 1 stated that she has a lot of children who fight sleep and kick their legs on their cots. She may put her leg over a child and say "no" to the kicking; within two minutes they are asleep. CCSM 1 has never seen a child taped to their cot, but she heard about it happening. CCSM 3 and CCSM 6 stated that staff do not hold children down on their cots. Neither staff member saw Child N taped to a cot. CCSM 2 and CCSM 4 stated that in the past staff put their legs over children or held them down on their cots during rest time, but it does not happen any longer. CCSM 2 heard that CCSM 16 and CCSM 17 taped a child to his cot. She did not have any direct knowledge of it happening. CCSM 5, CCSM 9, CCSM 11, and CCSM 14 have not seen staff hold children down on their cots or put their legs over children to keep them on their cot during rest time. They did not know anything about a child being taped to a cot. CCSM 5 stated that some of the older children do not sleep, so staff may give them quiet activities on their cots. CCSM 7, CCSM 8, CCSM 10, all reported witnessing CCSM 1, CCSM 6, and CCSM 12 restrain children on their cots during rest time by putting their legs over children's bodies. CCSM 8 stated that she did not see Child N taped to his cot, but CCSM 16 and CCSM 17 said they did it. Ms. Nagel and CCSM 6 told CCSM 8 that putting a leg over a child to keep them on their cot was something she should do. 16 CCSM 12 stated that staff rub children's backs and pat them to help them fall asleep. If children sit up, staff may give them a book on their cot or take them to a table for quiet activities. Children are not forced down on their cots. Instead, staff may use more pressure with their hand when rubbing backs. CCSM 12 does not like putting her leg on children when they are on cots. It may still happen in other classrooms, but not in the Owl room. As of the date of this report, neither CCSM 16 nor CCSM 17 have returned my calls.
- Violation
On 11/17/2021, Ms. Nagel and I discussed the additional allegation that staff spray children in the face with water. Ms. Nagel stated that staff knew not to spray anyone with water because she talked to everyone about it. She explained that on water day this past summer, someone reported that a staff member sprayed another staff member with water from the hose. After that happened, she had a discussion with all of the staff that no one was allowed to spray anyone with water from then on. During onsite inspections on 11/17/2021, 11/18/2021, and 12/01/2021, and telephone calls on 11/19/2021 and 11/ 23/2021, I reviewed the allegation with CCSM 1, CCSM 2, and CCSM 3, CCSM 4, CCSM 5, CCSM 6, CCSM 7, CCSM 8, CCSM 9, CCSM 10, CCSM 11, CCSM 12, CCSM 13, and CCSM 14. CCSM 1, CCSM 3, CCSM 4, CCSM 5, CCSM 6, CCSM 7, CCSM 9, CCSM 10, CCSM 11, and CCSM 12 had no knowledge of children being sprayed in the face with water as a form of punishment. CCSM 2, CCSM 8, and CCSM 14 reported that CCSM 13 has sprayed infants with the rinse water bottle used for three-stepping the diaper area. She allegedly did it to get infants to stop doing something like banging on cribs, or if they were being "cry- babies." CCSM 8 and CCSM 14 told Ms. Nagel about what was happening and were aware that she talked to CCSM 13 about it. CCSM 8 and CCSM 9 heard CCSM 13 call infants "cry babies." They both reported that that CCSM 13 get aggravated with infants if they cry too much. CCSM 14 stated that on 11/30/2021, CCSM 13 sprayed Child M (eleven-month-old, male) in the face with water because he was banging on a crib. She took the spray bottle from the diaper area, turned the nozzle up to high, and squirted Child M in the face and chest from several feet away. Child M started crying after being squirted. It also happened to Child A when he was in the infant room. On 12/01/2021, I discussed the allegation with CCSM 13. She stated that if children bang on cribs, she tries to redirect them to appropriate things to bang on, such as drums or cause-and-effect toys. She did not recall using the words "cry-baby" to describe infants who were crying. CCSM 13 admitted to spraying Child M in the face with water recently. She did it because he was banging on a crib while was changing another child's diaper, so she was not able to go over to him right away to get him to stop. She could not recall which other children she sprayed with water. Ms. Nagel told her that it was not ok to spray children with water and she knew it was not acceptable. CCSM 13 apologized and stated, "I won't do it again. I care about children, and I care about my job." She did not know why she did it anyway, despite knowing it was wrong. On 01/20/2022, CCSM 19 stated that on 01/14/2022, she witnessed CCSM 1 spray Child P (1-year-old, male) in the face with water. CCSM 1's response was that it was on "mist" and that she has done it in front of Ms. Nagel before. When CCSM 19 saw CCSM 1 spray Child P with water, it was on the stream setting, not the mist setting. When I discussed the allegation with Ms. Nagel during the exit conference on 01/21/2022, she stated that when she confronted CCSM 1 about the incident, she said she was doing a sensory experience with the children misting the air above them with water. During a follow up conversation with Ms. Nagel on 02/08/2022, she stated that she wrote CCSM 1 up for the water spraying incident even though she did not think it was done maliciously.
- Violation
During the onsite inspection on 12/01/2021, Ms. Nagel and I discussed the allegation. She stated that if staff were keeping children awake on walks, it was likely due to a misunderstanding of the rule about children not falling asleep in unapproved equipment like strollers. During interviews with CCSM 7, CCSM 8, CCSM 9, CCSM 10, and CCSM 14 on 11/19/2021, 11/23/2021, and 12/01/2021, they all reported that toddlers are not allowed to sleep on demand. CCSM 7, CCSM 8, CCSM 9, and CCSM 14 all stated that CCSM 1 tries to keep toddlers awake by either clapping in their faces, jiggling their hands, yelling at them, or forcing them to take long walks outside. CCSM 9, and CCSM 14 reported that CCSM 1 tried keep all of the toddlers on the same nap schedule because she did not want to rearrange her schedule for one or two children who were tired. During the exit conference on 01/22/2022 and again on 02/08/2022, Ms. Nagel stated that she has never known a time when children under 18 months of age were not allowed to sleep if they were tired. During the first week of February, she observed at least two toddlers sleeping on cots when it was not nap time. She did not go on walks with staff she did not know if staff were clapping or yelling at children to keep them awake. Recently, she has seen staff coming back from walks when children fall asleep in the buggy. Note: On 09/28/2021, I conducted a licensing rules question and answer training for staff at the center. One of the questions that was submitted stated, "If a child is asleep on demand (under 18 months of age) are teachers allowed to try to keep them awake if it is not scheduled nap time (12:00-2:30)? For example, clapping in front of the child's face and or yelling the child's name?" During the training, I provided guidance on why this practice was unacceptable and inappropriate based on R400.8188(2). On 02/08/2022, I reviewed child information cards and attendance records for the young toddler room. I was unable to determine if any toddlers under 18 months of age were not allowed to sleep on demand.
- Violation
Ms. Nagel does not ensure that all staff provide appropriate care and supervision of children at all times. Child care staff members did not help young toddlers wash their hands. They took food and bottles away from infants when they were thrown on the floor.
- Violation
Ms. Nagel did not ensure that infant and toddler room staff did not deprive children of meals as a form of punishment. CCSM 2, CCSM 5, CCSM 7, CCSM 8, CCSM 9, CCSM 10, and CCSM 14 all stated that CCSM 1 withhold lunches from children as a form of punishment for not washing their hands or refusing to sit down when asked. CCSM 8 reported that CCSM 6 also withholds lunches from children. CCSM 9 and CCSM 14 stated that CCSM 13 takes food away from infants if they drop their cup more than once, or if they drop or throw their food on the floor. On 12/01/2021, it appeared that most of Child L's lunch was thrown away by CCSM 13 after he reportedly started dropping his food on the floor.
- Violation
There is insufficient evidence to support the allegation that staff restricted a child's movement by binding of tying them as a form of punishment. Ms. Nagel and several staff members reported that they heard CCSM 16 and CCSM 17 taped Child N to his cot. Ms. Nagel stated that it did not happen. None of the child care staff members witnessed the incident. As of the date of this report, CCSM 16 and CCSM 17 have not returned my phone calls. I
- Violation
Ms. Nagel did not ensure non-severe and developmentally appropriate discipline or restraint may be used when reasonably necessary, based on a child's development, to prevent a child from harming himself or herself or to prevent a child from harming other persons or property. CCSM 1, CCSM 6, and CCSM 12 used inappropriate restraint methods to hold children down on their cots. CCSM 1 stated that she may put her leg over a child if they are kicking while laying on their cot. CCSM 7, CCSM 8, and CCSM 10 observed CCSM 1, CCSM 6, and CCSM 12 put their legs over children to hold them down on their cots during rest time. CCSM 2 and CCSM 4 stated that in the past staff put their legs over children to keep them on their cots. I
- Violation
Ms. Nagel did not ensure that all staff members provided appropriate care and supervision of children at all times. CCSM 13 sprayed infants, including Child M, in the face and chest with water to get them to stop unwanted behavior. On 01/14/2022, CCSM 1 sprayed Child P in the face with water.
- Violation
Ms. Nagel did not ensure that child care staff members refrained from using corporal punishment. CCSM 13 sprayed infants, including Child M, in the face and chest with water to get them to stop unwanted behavior. On 01/14/2022, CCSM 1 sprayed Child P in the face with water.
- Violation
Ms. Nagel did not ensure that all staff members provided appropriate care and supervision of children at all times. There is a preponderance of evidence to support the allegation that staff failed to provide appropriate care and supervision of children by clapping in their faces or yelling at them to keep them awake.
- Violation
There is insufficient evidence to support the allegation that children under 18 months of age were not permitted to sleep on demand. Multiple staff reported that toddlers were not allowed to sleep on demand however it is unknown if any of those children were under 18 months of age.
Questions to ask on your tour
Generated from this facility's specific inspection record
- 1The May 29, 2026 inspection noted: “There was insufficient evidence to show that Teacher 4 did not provide appropriate care and supervision.” — what has changed since then?
- 2The Sep 25, 2025 inspection noted: “The exiting doors that are part of the recently installed divider walls in the Chipmunk room have deadbolt lock hardware on one side without a knob or lever-typ…” — what has changed since then?
- 3The Apr 18, 2023 inspection noted: “Evidence does not support the allegation that child care staff members failed to provide appropriate care and supervision of Child A when he sustained a wrist o…” — what has changed since then?
Data synced from Michigan MiLEAP, Child Care Licensing Bureau · Source records · Report an error