Opinion: Using comprehensive data shows better path forward for licensing Colorado outdoor preschools

A recent defense of Colorado’s proposed outdoor preschool licensing rules (“Opinion: Requiring licensing for Colorado outdoor preschool programs isn’t a barrier, it’s a breakthrough,” July 10) presents a compelling personal story but overlooks crucial evidence that should inform this policy debate. As directors and advocates representing Colorado’s diverse outdoor nature-based education landscape, we believe regulations must be grounded in comprehensive data, not on single-program experiences.

The story is more complex than one perspective suggests. One program completed the referenced pilot and was granted a unique license type, but they are not the only program that worked with the state during that time. Licensed programs found ways to add ONB content and experiences through hybrid models. 

The work was expensive and often challenging as providers and licensing specialists worked to find common ground on how to interpret beneficial risk and apply regulations. The pilot program used a more traditional indoor space, a choice enabled by Denver infrastructure; but it was not the only path. Other ONB programs made innovative choices to operate safely in diverse natural spaces.

When the data findings from the pilot were not made public, there were lingering questions from parents and legislators about safety and viability. That led to our study of 20 Colorado outdoor nature-based programs — representing Front Range, mountain and Western Slope regions, and many operating models and community contexts. Our results were shared with the legislature, the public and the state to provide transparent, evidence-based insights into how diverse programs actually operate.

Our multiprogram study tracked many children’s experiences and there were no serious incidents or need for emergency response. Programs averaged just 1.8 weather-related closures annually, demonstrating remarkable resilience across Colorado’s variable climate zones. Programs showed they know how to be prepared, yet 95.8% of the emergency shelters these programs used to keep kids safe wouldn’t meet the Department of Early Childhood’s requirements (proposed rules in red). 

This isn’t about avoiding accountability — it’s about matching regulations to proven safety data from Colorado programs instead of using one-size-fits-all standards requiring advanced building infrastructure that many communities simply don’t have access to. A building like a “library, fire station, recreation center, or licensed child care facility” within a child’s walking distance that has space and willingness to partner with a program is a big and expensive “ask” in many parts of the state.

The July 10 opinion column also frames opposition as resistance to equity, but we are very mindful about this topic. Many of the 20 programs serve diverse communities through innovative “pay what you can” approaches, making ONB’s accessible regardless of economic status. Others, including one of the authors of this essay, specifically serve the special needs, neurodiverse and autism spectrum community. 

The proposed rules threaten this accessibility by imposing costly infrastructure requirements that ignore the realities of rural, mountain and economically diverse communities.

As licensed program directors, we understand regulatory compliance. Our programs demonstrate that safety comes from professional expertise, dynamic benefit-risk assessments, and proven protocols — not from requiring “as safe as possible” limitations while also allowing a lack of foundational knowledge in basic operating principles. 

The data shows using community partnerships, mobile shelters and other creative solutions achieve strong safety outcomes while serving families across Colorado and allowing children rich learning experiences in environments that understand how to be as safe as necessary.

This evidence shows that Colorado can lead nationally by creating evidence-based regulations that protect children while preserving the diversity and accessibility that make our outdoor programs special. Twenty programs have shown the way, operating safely in different counties, zones and regions. They can teach us about how to make these programs more than safe … they can be amazing places for children to spend their days.

We should develop regulations that:

• Recognize proven emergency protocols don’t require permanent buildings; 

• Allow flexibility in shelter arrangements based on demonstrated safety outcomes; 

• Support various program models that serve different geographic and economic contexts; 

• Focus on professional training and safety protocols rather than infrastructure requirements.

  
  

The Colorado Collective for Nature-Based Early Education submitted this white paper to the governor’s office, attorney general’s office and executive director of the Colorado Department of Early Childhood. We are hopeful that state officials will listen to the educators, families and communities who have built Colorado’s successful outdoor preschool movement across all regions, and to comprehensive data that shows these programs are already keeping children safe. 

Since the findings from the 2018 pilot have not been shared publicly, we encourage CDEC to use our data to frame their decisions and to engage with the full spectrum of Colorado’s outdoor education expertise.

We don’t need to choose between safety and accessibility. We can have both.

Jennifer Kollerup, of Colorado Springs, is the mycelium director of the Colorado Collective for Nature-Based Early Education.

Lorene Wapotich, of Lafayette, is the director of Thorne Nature Preschool, a fully licensed outdoor preschool.

Tamara Wineland, of Black Forest, is founder and director of AdventureMe Forest School, a fully licensed therapeutic-based program serving the special needs community. 

Tami Montoya, of Pueblo, is cofounder and director of Earthkeeper Nature School, a fully licensed program operated within the Nature and Wildlife Discovery Center.