View Comment

< Back to comment page

The table below shows comments received at this web site about the following rule:

New Licensing Rules
Child Outcomes sections of aligned licensing rules that will replace current center and family home child care rules, chapters 170-295 and 170-296A. Weights that appear with the rules are only informational ... there is more work to be done before weights are finalized.

DEL uses these comments, and other input during the rule making process, to help us write and adopt the permanent rules. For proposed rules only, DEL will prepare one response to all of the comments received, in what is called a “concise explanatory statement” required by RCW 34.05.325. The department sends the concise explanatory statement to everyone who commented or testified on the proposed rule, and to anyone who asks for it.

Agree/Disagree: Disagree

Comment: I hope that DEL will provide these materials for us to pass along. We are already struggling with all the increased administration paperwork.

Date Submitted: 6/27/2018 10:15:58 PM

Agree/Disagree: Disagree

Comment: The state is interfering at a level that goes way beyond regulating to ensure the children are in a healthy and safe environment. Furthermore, the state is granting access for the colleges to dictate that the employees of this industry be forced into the college system. At whose expense? Sure, EA may have some scholarship dollars, but not enough. AND what about those that are not interested in attending college? Well, the parents and children will lose out on their trusted caregiver who will have to leave the industry. The centers will lose employees - who will replace everyone that chooses to leave and find work that doesn't force them to spend evenings taking college classes?? There aren't enough people entering this workforce as it is - now they'll be told they must be on a professional development plan with college on the horizon?? No - they'll just go work at the grocery store. It may be less fulfilling for them, but it pays the bills.

Date Submitted: 6/27/2018 9:53:32 PM

Agree/Disagree: Disagree

Comment: Overall, I oppose the draft version of the standards alignment for the following reasons: They are unduly burdensome, They are difficult to navigate, They stifle cultural and economic equity, They may push providers and members of the current workforce who have proven competency via Early Achievers or other assessment systems out of the field because of the set professional development requirements without a clear equivalency pathway, The economic impact (particularly true of the standards related to professional qualifications, furniture and facilities) will inevitably raise the cost of care to Washington families without a clear route to how the standards improve child outcomes. Combined, these factors threaten to push early learning sites out of the field at a time when many areas are already struggling with a shortage of early learning programs. The providers most impacted by these pressures are those serving low-income and diverse populations who already operate on thin margins with extremely limited resources. We do not need someone to regulate our every move. We know how to run our own businesses.

Date Submitted: 6/27/2018 9:47:58 PM

Agree/Disagree: Disagree

Comment: Overall, I oppose the draft version of the standards alignment for the following reasons: • They are unduly burdensome, • They are difficult to navigate, • They stifle cultural and economic equity, • They may push providers and members of the current workforce who have proven competency via Early Achievers or other assessment systems out of the field because of the set professional development requirements without a clear equivalency pathway, • The economic impact (particularly true of the standards related to professional qualifications, furniture and facilities) will inevitably raise the cost of care to Washington families without a clear route to how the standards improve child outcomes. Combined, these factors threaten to push early learning sites out of the field at a time when many areas are already struggling with a shortage of early learning programs. The providers most impacted by these pressures are those serving low-income and diverse populations who already operate on thin margins with extremely limited resources.

Date Submitted: 6/27/2018 6:35:22 PM

Agree/Disagree: Disagree

Comment: 0065-1 This should be applicable to preschool age children, not all children.

Date Submitted: 6/27/2018 12:27:22 PM

Agree/Disagree: Disagree

Comment: Children are people, not outcomes. This is their childhood and it should not be exploited for economic or political purposes. As with all the proposals, who is paying for this? Providers must pass the cost on to parents. Do parents want this and are they willing to pay for the costs? Providers need to have the authority to choose what services to provide within the financial constraints of their business. For family homes and very small programs, where is the staff time to come from and what will suffer as time is diverted from direct care?

Date Submitted: 6/26/2018 9:18:35 AM

Agree/Disagree: Disagree

Comment: This should not be a requirement for Family Childcare. We are not Preschool. This whole section should be thrown out. Parents will not like the intrusion.

Date Submitted: 6/26/2018 7:32:59 AM

Agree/Disagree: Disagree

Comment: How did we get from licensing and certifying for the health and safely of children in out of home care to "foundational standards" with an incredible increase in the direct costs, administration, and bureaucracy of child care? This is such a regulatory overreach and an attempt to alter reality for families who are simply trying to have their children taken care of by loving, responsible providers at a cost they can afford. The state wanting to build a system and expand its prestige doesn't change the economic realities of parenthood.

Date Submitted: 6/25/2018 4:55:32 PM

Agree/Disagree: Disagree

Comment: How did we get from licensing and certifying for the health and safely of children in out of home care to "foundational standards" with an incredible increase in the direct costs, administration, and bureaucracy of child care? This is such a regulatory overreach and an attempt to alter reality for families who are simply trying to have their children taken care of by loving, responsible providers at a cost they can afford. The state wanting to build a system and expand its prestige doesn't change the economic realities of parenthood.

Date Submitted: 6/25/2018 4:55:03 PM

Agree/Disagree: Disagree

Comment: I strongly feel any outdoor licensed program should be on private land or land that is leased to the school exclusively through the parks department. Brick and mortar schools need to lease space and these schools should too. Once leased the school owner would be liable for injury ad not the taxpayers. It would also limit the DEL liability I would assume? State taxpayers should not be the defendants in a lawsuit if someone gets injured at a private business on state land. What is to prevent a child from coming in contact with bodily fluid (blood, urine, feces) left behind by an animal or another person? DEL should not be responsible for overseeing this high risk environment, There are too many homeless people in parks to make these programs safe at this time. I see homeless people bathing, drinking, and using needles in and near park bathrooms; the should not be shared spaces with preschool children in supervised groups with rations of 10/1.

Date Submitted: 6/9/2018 8:36:26 AM

Agree/Disagree: Disagree

Comment: I am very tired of the Big Brother aspect of this section. NO, we do not need to rate children. We provide for them learning environments and then let them go! Children should play and play and play. That is their job and when allowed to do it without formal instruction being shoved down their throats, they do very well!

Date Submitted: 6/6/2018 4:13:40 PM

Agree/Disagree: Disagree

Comment: no comment

Date Submitted: 6/4/2018 12:44:40 PM

Agree/Disagree: Agree

Comment: Providing parents with guidance and resources on child development and kindergarten readiness is in my opinion, part of our job as early childhood educators. I agree with this WAC.

Date Submitted: 5/24/2018 3:07:09 PM

Agree/Disagree: Disagree

Comment: The title of this section alone is biased toward an essentialist educational philosophy. Children are not outcomes, they are human beings.

Date Submitted: 5/15/2018 7:31:38 PM

Your comments will become part of the public record for this rule. DEL reserves the right not to post any comment for public view that contains offensive content.