Please correct my understanding

Conclusion: ratio is not accurate(5:1)

Options:
A. Same ratio so reject of 5: 1.
B. child caring ratio for age more than 3 years is triple to other classes.
C. Fixed ratio : reject
D. Parents ratio included hence reject irrelevant information.
E. Too extreme. Negative.

Is it correct?

Somehow I feel that this question is quantitative reasoning related/
Consumer Advocate: Happy Smiles Daycare, a popular child-care facility in Rolling Hills, boasts an average child-to-caregiver ratio of 5: 1, a number it cites as the lowest in the county. Furthermore, the daycare claims that compared to some other daycare centers in the county, it doesn’t include helpers, or those who are involved in cleanup and diaper changing, when computing the ratio. Yet Happy Smiles Daycare’s claim that parents with children aged 1– 3 will find no other facility with such a low child-to-caregiver ratio isn’t accurate.
In order to back up the conclusion, which stated that HSD's claim that they provides the lowest average child-to-caregiver ratio for 1-3 yrs kids in the county isn't accurate, we need evidences that there is the same or lower class ratio elsewhere.
Which of the following, if true, provides the best justification for the Consumer Advocate’s position?

A. Happy Smiles Daycare has two rooms, one for children 1– 2 years old and another for those 2– 3 years old, both of which have a child-to-caregiver ratio of 5: 1.
This actually support HSD's claim, which is opposite of CA's position
B. Kenton School, which has fewer than 100 students and a legitimate child-to-caregiver ratio of 6: 1, provides classes for each year up to age 6, though the classes for those over 3 years old have a child-to-caregiver ratio more than three times that of the other classes.
Kenton school, with an overall child-to-caregiver ratio of 6:1, and 3-6 yrs kid class ratio triples that of 1-3 yrs kids, will have a ratio of 3:1 for 1-3 yrs kids, and 9:1 for 3-6 yrs kids. Therefore, there is proof that in this county, at least 1 other school has the same class ratio for 1-3 yrs kids as HSD
C. The number of students enrolled in Happy Smiles Daycare remains relatively fixed throughout the year.
It is not conclusive
D. Tiny Tots Daycare, which boasts a 4: 1 child-to-caregiver ratio, includes any adults who are in a classroom throughout the day.
TTD's classroom ratio is higher than that if HSD, CA's claim is still not justified.
E. Looming budget cuts indicate that Happy Smiles Daycare may not be able to sustain such a low child-to-caregiver ratio in coming years.
The conclusion is about a claim boasted in the past.

Magoosh is mostly so far-fetched

Usually, all the NON-official material is so. Both Gmat and GRE.

They do not have the beauty and stylish of the official material. Their fluidity.

Regards

Any other schools mentioned here can be located in another country, on another side of the Earth. So without the additional connection to the argument, the answers with info about other schools kind of out of scope. No?

I am not sure I understood what you asked for

Ideally yes, without additional information regarding the location as you said, would be treated out-of-scope. Option should have been along the lines: Kenton School, a popular school in the county or Tiny Tots Daycare, run by the county, => i.e. something to indicate its location is within the county. I assume official questions would have such info.

But, at the same time, given this question there should be more convincing options at hand, lets assume we rule out B & D and look at A, C & E =>
A. Happy Smiles Daycare has two rooms, one for children 1– 2 years old and another for those 2– 3 years old, both of which have a child-to-caregiver ratio of 5: 1.
=> doesnt give any justification for why the ratio is low, rather additional info on the premise (ratio of 3:1) which is already present.

C. The number of students enrolled in Happy Smiles Daycare remains relatively fixed throughout the year.
=> doesnt affect the argument in any manner

E. Looming budget cuts indicate that Happy Smiles Daycare may not be able to sustain such a low child-to-caregiver ratio in coming years.
=> same as above

A,C & E are easily ruled out without raising a second-thought. Now we are forced to look at options B & D and take the assumption that Kenton School & Tiny Dots are present in the county. Just for humor, lets look at the options


B. Kenton School, which has fewer than 100 students and a legitimate child-to-caregiver ratio of 6: 1, provides classes for each year up to age 6, though the classes for those over 3 years old have a child-to-caregiver ratio more than three times that of the other classes.
=> This actually makes a good case. So now we have Kenton school claiming a lower ratio < 3:1, which was Happy Smiles Daycare claim that theirs is the lowest in the county. so it is justifying the Customer Advocate's claim.

D. Tiny Tots Daycare, which boasts a 4: 1 child-to-caregiver ratio, includes any adults who are in a classroom throughout the day.
=> we dont know how the ratio will get affected by including adults, since we dont have information about them, it may very well be 3.1:1 (higher) or 2.9:1 (lower)

So if you look at B - solid reasoning, in line with the argument => constitutes a good answer, rather a better answer when considering the options. So would have gone for this.
As you said, with location information provided, option B would have been a perfect answer. Hope this makes sense

Hello from the GRE Prep Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GRE Prep Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.