La Petite Academy
Data last updated · May 2026
Quality Indicators
See Methodology →- Overall QualityCombines daily care quality (interactions, learning, environment) with structural features like staff-to-child ratios and teacher qualifications.4 / 5
- Process QualityThe quality of daily care — caregiver-child interactions, learning activities, and the emotional climate. Drawn from the state QRIS rating, accreditations, and Head Start CLASS observations.4 / 5
- Structural QualityMeasurable features like staff-to-child ratios, group sizes, license status, and teacher qualifications. Provider-level data when available; otherwise the state regulatory baseline.5 / 5
Why this rating
This daycare earned 4 out of 5 stars overall. Process quality reflects a Quality First rating of Level 4 (out of 5). Structural quality reflects a license in good standing. The structural rating also includes Arizona's licensing baseline — what every licensed daycare in the state must meet. Arizona caps infant ratios at 1:5, toddler ratios at 1:6, and preschool ratios at 1:15. Lead teachers must hold a High School Diploma. Teachers must complete 18 hours of annual training.
Quality Recognitions & Accreditations
- State Quality Rating
- Quality First Level 4 (Max 5) Learn more →
- Accreditations
- National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC)Not Accredited
- National Accreditation Commission (NAC)Not Accredited
- National Early Childhood Program Accreditation (NECPA)Not Accredited
- National Association for Family Child Care (NAFCC)Not Accredited
Facility Info
- Facility type
- Child Care Center
- Age groups served
- Infants, Toddlers, Preschool
- Licensed capacity
- 181
- Teacher-child ratios & group sizesState Minimum Displayed
Age Max ratio Max group Infants 1:5 Not Regulated Toddlers 1:6 Not Regulated Preschool 1:15 Not Regulated
Teacher Credentials
- Lead teacher credentialState Minimum Displayed
- High School Diploma
Inspection History
Across 7 inspections since 2024, the issues cited most often were Licensing & Administrative Compliance (7). None of the 7 findings were critical.
See All 7 Inspection Visits
Apr 7, 20261 Finding1 Important
- The Purpose of the Inspection Was to Conduct a Complaint Investigation for Case #00164887 on 04/07/2026Complaint
The purpose of the inspection was to conduct a Complaint Investigation for case #00164887 on 04/07/2026. A full inspection was not conducted at this time. The Compliance Officer provided the facility with a paper copy of the Notice of Inspection Rights at the start of the inspection. Ratios observed were: Ones and Twos - 2:12 Threes - 1:8 Threes and Fours - 1:13 Fours - 1:15 There were 6 staff member(s) interviewed during this investigation. There were 3 children interviewed dur
Jan 6, 20261 Finding1 Important
- The Following Deficiencies Were Observed at the Time of the Annual Compliance Inspection Conducted on January 06, 2026,…Compliance (Annual)
The following deficiencies were observed at the time of the Annual Compliance Inspection conducted on January 06, 2026, and are subject to changes pending programmatic review. The Compliance Officer provided the facility with a paper copy of the Notice of Inspection Rights at the start of the inspection. A full inspection was conducted at this time. 2 of 2 fingerprint clearance cards were verified to be valid through the DPS website during the time of the inspection. Please complete
Dec 1, 20251 Finding1 Important
- The Purpose of the Inspection Was to Conduct a Complaint Investigation for Case # 00151554 on December 1, 2025Complaint
The purpose of the inspection was to conduct a Complaint Investigation for case # 00151554 on December 1, 2025. A full inspection was not conducted at this time. The Compliance Officer provided the facility with a paper copy of the Notice of Inspection Rights at the start of the inspection. Ratios observed were: Staff : Children Infants: 1 : 3 Ones/Toddlers: 1 : 5 Twos: 2 : 14 Preschool: 1 : 13 PreK: 1 : 15
Oct 16, 20251 Finding1 Important
- The Purpose of the Inspection Was to Conduct a Complaint Investigation for Case #00147802 on October 16, 2025Complaint
The purpose of the inspection was to conduct a Complaint Investigation for case #00147802 on October 16, 2025. A full inspection was not conducted at this time. The Compliance Officer provided the facility with a paper copy of the Notice of Inspection Rights at the start of the inspection. Ratios observed were: Staff : Children Infants: 1 : 4 Ones/Twos: 1 : 5 Twos: 2 : 14 Threes/ Fours: 1 : 13 PreK:
Mar 19, 20251 Finding1 Important
- A Complaint Investigation Was Conducted for Case #00122001Complaint
A Complaint investigation was conducted for Case #00122001. A full inspection was not conducted at this time. Ratios observed were: Staff : Children Infants: 1 : 1 Toddlers: 1 : 6 Two year olds: 1 : 8 Early Preschool: 1 : 8 Preschool: 1 : 11 PreK: 1 : 12 There were seven staff members interviewed during this investigation. Upon completion of the Complaint investigation, it was determined from observati
Jan 16, 20251 Finding1 Important
- The Following Deficiencies Were Found at the Time of the Compliance Inspection Conducted on January 16, 2025, and Are…Compliance (Annual)
The following deficiencies were found at the time of the compliance inspection conducted on January 16, 2025, and are subject to changes pending programmatic review. Two of two fingerprint clearance cards were verified to be valid through the DPS website during the time of the inspection. Compliance Officer 1: Laurie McKenna Compliance Officer 2: Katie Corrow Please complete the Plan of Corrections via the online Portal within 10 days of receipt of this Statement of Deficiencies.
Jan 30, 20241 Finding1 Important
- The Purpose of the Inspection Was to Conduct a Complaint Investigation for Case #66494, 68268, and 66492 on 1/30/24Complaint Compliance (Annual)
The purpose of the inspection was to conduct a complaint investigation for case #66494, 68268, and 66492 on 1/30/24. A compliance inspection was also conducted. Compliance Officer #1: Katie Corrow Compliance Officer #2: Laurie McKenna Ratios observed were: Infants 7 to 2 Ones 13 to 2 Twos 8 to 1 3-4's 11 to 1 4-5's 14 to 2 2-3's 15 to 2 There were 6 staff members interviewed during this investigation. There were 2 staff files reviewed during this investigation. There was 1