Summary: A viral exposé alleged Minnesota daycare centers were empty and collecting millions, prompting federal freezes and state inspections, while mainstream outlets offered conflicting takes as investigators continued reviews.
NBC’s take on the Minnesota daycare story landed like a punchline, and not a good one. Somali-run centers were accused of taking government money while not serving kids, a YouTuber’s video went viral, and the feds stepped in to pause payments. That sequence left a lot of people asking how official responses and media coverage could be so wildly out of sync.
The clip that set this off showed centers with few or no children and adults idling, which is why it grabbed attention. The footage got millions of views, brought on FBI scrutiny, and forced the Department of Health and Human Services to halt federal child care payments to the state. People on both sides of the aisle wanted answers fast, and the initial reporting raised serious red flags about oversight and accountability.
Investigators quickly swarmed the scene, doing the kind of checks taxpayers expect when big sums are on the line. Critics argued the mainstream press moved slowly and sometimes assumed the worst of the whistleblower while giving local officials the benefit of the doubt. That tension—between citizen reporting and official statements—became the story almost as much as the alleged fraud itself.
Minnesota’s Department of Children, Youth, and Families on Friday said that investigators have found child care facilities at the center of recent fraud allegations were operating as they should.
[…]
The department said in the statement that investigators with its Office of Inspector General conducted compliance checks at nine centers referenced in the viral video.
“Investigators confirmed the centers were operating as expected, gathered evidence and initiated further review,” the department said in a statement Friday.
“Children were present at all sites except for one — that site, was not yet open for families for the day when inspectors arrived,” it said.
The department said it has ongoing investigations into four of the centers, and 55 investigations into providers that receive funding from the Child Care Assistance Program, which it oversees.
Following Shirley’s video, which gained traction in right-wing circles, the federal Department of Health and Human Services said Tuesday that it was freezing all federal child care payments to Minnesota.
The nine centers in the video received a total of $17.4 million in CCAP funding in the 2025 fiscal year, the department said. One of the centers has been closed since 2022, it said.
Those findings read like a mixed bag: compliance checks completed, possible irregularities still under review, and a headline number that will make taxpayers uncomfortable—$17.4 million in CCAP funds tied to the nine centers during the 2025 fiscal year. The state says children were present at most sites, and that investigations remain open in several instances, which keeps the whole matter unresolved for now. None of that stops critics from asking why systems designed to prevent fraud apparently missed so much for so long.
The video also included scenes of empty rooms and a few adults watching TV, and at least one operator claiming records had been stolen in a burglary. That explanation didn’t land well with anyone who thought assurances should be backed by documentation and transparency. When public funds are involved, a missing attendance sheet and a vague burglary story don’t inspire confidence—especially after so much attention and a federal payment freeze.
Mainstream outlets scrambled to verify details, with some reporters treating a single phone call or a brief inspection as conclusive proof that everything was fine. That kind of leap frustrates people who saw the original footage and wanted thorough answers, not quick headlines. Skepticism toward rapid, surface-level reporting is only natural when the stakes are taxpayer money and vulnerable children.
This whole episode exposes weak links in oversight and a news cycle that sometimes favors speed over depth. It also shows how citizen journalists and viral videos can force official action that might otherwise be delayed or ignored. Meanwhile, the investigations are ongoing, and the public deserves a full accounting of how millions in child-care funds were distributed and monitored.
The media’s performance here has been a mixed bag at best: defensive when officials say everything’s fine and tepid when confronting uncomfortable gaps in oversight. That posture fuels distrust and leaves people wondering whether major outlets are protecting institutions instead of holding them to account. Until investigators finish their work and the findings are transparent, skepticism is the reasonable position.
