It's going on seven long years since the last WAC revision to the Family Home Child Care Business Regulations. It's dragged on and on and on and on.
On July 7, 2011 the Washington State Supreme Court issued their decision about what is paramount about licensed day care...and it's the child.
In my last blog I identified SEIU 925's focus as one of "self interest" and not a real interest in the children per my analysis of their website. Now as I read the latest comments copied in below from SEIU 925 on the WAC revisions demonstrates these folks don't understand child development.
SEIU wrote (I put their comments in italics):
WAC 170-296A-1725 Providers must have high school diploma or equivalent by January 2015.
Concerns: There are many providers who completed their high school education outside of the US and, due to civil war in these countries, are not able to obtain their records. What will happen in this situation? We also believe that new providers should have two years to obtain their GED. The reason for this is that once they are licensed, they can access the scholarship fund to minimize the financial burden of this new WAC.
My response: The Department of Early Learning was created with the idea of learning, learning related to working with the children, not a learning, training program using vulnerable children as guinea pigs, not as a scholarship fund for people looking for an education funded by the state.
WAC 170-296A-7075 Infants must be in the licensed area “approved for infants”
Concerns: This is not appropriate-many infants are not able to sleep when they are in such close proximity to other kids. We propose this WAC should say sight or sound or in an adjoining room and need to be checked on a regular basis and not include toddlers. Research shows that sleep is critical to young children.
My response: SEIU educate yourselves on SIDS.
WAC 170-296A-1525 Must report licensee, staff or household member if alleged to have committed … abuse or neglect…then screened in as complaint.
Concerns: A neighbor could call in a complaint and the provider would not know about it or a family member could do something and not tell the provider… how would provider have knowledge of all issues/circumstances. You can’t report if you don’t know about the complaint. What if the person is innocent? An allegation should not have to be reported, only if the person is charged or convicted, same as in (2)(a).
My response: Allegations must be reported so an investigation can be done to ensure DEL can make a determination if children were hurt or at risk.
WAC 170-296A-1175 Basic 20 hours of training prior to receiving license
Concerns: We would like to keep current WAC because in order to access the scholarship funds, a provider needs to be licensed.
My response: This represents to me a core issue about SEIU providers. Rather than stating add a subsection that reimburses someone if and after they are granted a license, SEIU supports giving licenses to folks who are not trained first. I believe this was an RCW. You can't simply change RCW because you don't like the law the legislators passed.
WAC 170-296A-2275(2,a,i) Report “reasonable expectation” illness or incapacity of Provider within 24 hours (2,b,i) Report charge or conviction for a crime reasonably related to providing care for children
(2,f) Report to DEL change in required policies within 24 hours
Concerns: Over reporting—providers cannot predict the future. What is the definition of reasonable expectation? Could vary from provider to provider.
My response: If you're not sure what "reasonable" means and you feel ill call DEL or the Health Department to get their input. If someone gets arrested call DEL.
WAC 170-296A-5775(1,2,3) Licensee absence – expected outside work schedule – must inform DEL before employment
Concerns: How does this improve the health and safety of children? Why does the licensor need to know?
My response: If you have to ask maybe watching vulnerable, innocent children may not be what you should be doing. I could go into detail with examples about this one. One provider, 3 different children, 3 different broken bones, a child came to her day care one morning with long hair and left with short without any adult noticing...why...provider was at her other job.
WAC 170-296A-5850, 5875, 5900 Must notify DEL of absences, closures, staffing changes, licensee’s potential absences.
Concerns: Providers would be on phone with DEL staff endlessly & providers would require a crystal ball to address potential absences. This is way too invasive and nosy as small business owners. If Providers are meeting staff qualifications, ratios, and following their policies and procedures, that’s all DEL should be requiring.
My response: As a former licensor the excellent providers on my caseload (the ones with no complaints, violations or injuries) were at their daycare minding to the needs of the children, the kids were having fun, they were having fun, the children were still alive when the parents came to pick them up. One provider I'd visit...every time she asked me, "Why do you let them keep a license? The regulations aren't hard?" The answer? The managers and supervisors wouldn't allow it.
WAC 170-296A-6125 Must prevent harmful or aggressive acts by other children or immediately intervene
Concerns: Sometimes things happen so quickly that a provider only has a reative time to intervene and children can still be hurt.
My response: This a most concerning and revelatory statement. SEIU providers do not know child development, don't know how to create an environment and how to work with children. There was and I suspect still a major issue with being overcapacity. If you can't keep the number of children you have health, safe, happy and protected, and alive you have too many kids.
WAC 170-296A-6400(3) Inform parents of planned off site activities at least 24 hours before activity – even if in policies and procedures
Concerns: This would be in policies and procedures and parents have a copy. It takes the spontaneity out of a child’s day.
My response: SEIU doesn't understand structure, consistency and planning. It doesn't take the spontaneity out of a child's day, it may prevent the provider from hauling the kids around while she runs errands.
WAC 170-296A-6450(2) Requirement of cell phone for off-site activities
Concerns: Need financial impact study.
My response: SEIU doesn't all ready know the answer to that question? After seven years you don't know who in your community doesn't have a cell phone?
The Washington State Supreme Court affirmed the legislature's intent that the health, safety and well-being of the child, the welfare of the child in licensed day care is paramount over the right of someone to care for a child in licensed care.
The legislature, the Attorney General and the highest court in the State of Washington has spoken up for the child and by doing that they spoke up for that child's parent. It's come back full circle to 1995.
Now DEL managers will have to be educated on what they don't know so that licensing is highly professional, knowledgeable and consistent in their practices.
No comments:
Post a Comment