Three states license child care three different ways, and only one of them mentions insurance.

Oregon's child care rule books run to roughly 126,800 words across the five current editions the Department of Early Learning and Care publishes: certified centers, certified family child care, registered family child care, the general rules for all facilities, and the health and safety rules for license-exempt subsidy providers. Searched for insurance, liability, surety, bond and indemnify, they return seven matches between them, and every one is about vehicle insurance for a provider who transports children (DELC rule books CCLD-0084, CCLD-0085, CCLD-0086, CCLD-0731 and UnL-0221, editions effective between December 2023 and January 2026; searched by Vantage Point Risk on August 7, 2026). ORS chapter 329A, the child care statute itself, contains the word insurance exactly once, and it is a records cross-reference to HIPAA.

Two very different operations sit under one word

"Child care" covers a provider caring for four toddlers in her living room and a 90-child center with a commercial kitchen and a van. They aren't the same business, they aren't licensed the same way, and past a certain point they aren't insured the same way either. Every state in the Northwest draws the line differently.

Oregon runs two home categories and a separate center category. A registered family child care home is a solo provider capped at 10 children, and Division 210 sets no duties or qualifications for assistants and carries no volunteer rule of its own, reaching volunteers only through the general caregiver requirements at OAR 414-210-0300. A certified family child care home can reach 16, is measured room by room on floor area at 35 square feet of indoor activity space per child up to 12 and 50 square feet for each of the next four, and has its own rules for the qualifications of assistants and for volunteers (OAR 414-210-0400, effective July 1, 2025; OAR 414-360-0800 and 414-360-0320, updates effective January 1, 2026). That is a solo licence and a staffed licence wearing the same name.

Washington runs one rule chapter, WAC 110-300, across homes and centers. The licence trigger for a family home is a single unrelated child cared for on a regular and ongoing basis (WAC 110-300-0010(3), chapter last updated July 1, 2026). Capacity runs to 12 and is gated on how many years the provider has been doing the work, with a waiver to 16 available at three years of experience and only with a full nonexpiring licence and local building-code documentation (WAC 110-300-0355 and 110-300-0358, under RCW 43.216.692). Washington also licenses a category the other two states do not have at all: outdoor nature-based child care, under RCW 43.216.742 and WAC 110-302.

Idaho runs a head count. Six children or fewer is a "family daycare home" and it is not licensed. Seven to twelve is a "group daycare facility" and it is. Thirteen or more is a "daycare center" (Idaho Code 39-1102(4), (5), (8) and (9), as amended in 2025 and 2026). A provider caring for four or more still has to complete a criminal history check under Idaho Code 39-1114, and a home under seven can choose to be licensed if it wants to, but nothing forces it.

Where insurance is written into the rules, and where it is not

This is the fact worth carrying away from the whole page, and it is the reason the state pages further down exist.

Oregon writes none. Not for a registered home, not for a certified home, not for a center. There is no proof-of-coverage condition on registration or certification, no minimum limit, no abuse and molestation requirement, no bond, and no duty to tell a parent whether coverage exists. The one insurance sentence in the Oregon rules is about the vehicle: a provider who transports children must carry "current vehicle insurance that covers the driver, the vehicle, and all occupants," and proof has to sit in the vehicle as well as at the home (OAR 414-210-1200, and the identical rule at OAR 414-360-1200).

Washington writes it in twice, differently. Under RCW 43.216.700(1), every licensed child day care center and outdoor nature-based provider must give the department proof of day care insurance "at the time of licensure or renewal and at any inspection." There is no alternative and no opt-out. Under subsection (2), a licensed family day care provider may instead give parents written notice of her insurance status on a department form. The limit, $100,000 per occurrence with no aggregate stated, comes from RCW 48.88.050, enacted in 1986 and never amended since. It binds a center unconditionally. It binds a family home only where the provider chose the proof route, because subsection (2)(c) attaches the limit to "(a)(i) of this subsection," which is the proof election.

Idaho writes it in once, at rule level, with no number. Idaho Code Title 39 chapter 11, the whole daycare licensing statute, contains no insurance provision. The requirement lives in the administrative rules: "The applicant must provide proof of current fire and liability insurance coverage for the daycare facility" (IDAPA 16.06.03 section 121.04, stamped 7-1-24). Two things about that sentence matter. It asks for fire as well as liability, which no other state in the Northwest does, so property coverage on the building and its contents is part of the Idaho test. And it names no limit at all, so a $25,000 policy and a $2,000,000 policy both satisfy it on paper.

The Idaho rule was tested this year and survived. A full chapter rewrite, docket 16-0603-2501, was declared null and void by Senate Concurrent Resolution 128 at the Department of Health and Welfare's own request, and no successor docket appears in any 2026 bulletin or in the index of active rulemakings current through August 5, 2026 (Idaho Administrative Bulletin Vol. 26-7, July 1, 2026, and Vol. 26-8, August 5, 2026). The rule is unchanged.

The exposure that decides most claims is the one nobody licenses

Read the three regimes side by side and the gap is obvious. The rules are about ratios, square footage, background checks, fire extinguishers and pool fences. The claims are about a child hurt on your watch, a supervision failure, an allegation involving an adult in the building, and a car.

For a home-based provider the first problem is the house. A home policy is written for a residence, and liability arising out of a business conducted from that residence is generally limited or excluded. That is a policy question rather than a state question, which is exactly why it goes unanswered: nothing in an Oregon registration, a Washington licence or an Idaho application makes anyone raise it with you. The endorsement versus commercial policy page works through the two instruments and what each is actually built to do.

The second is who counts as an insured and who counts as an exposure. Oregon's Central Background Registry reaches past staff and into the household: every resident of the child care home aged 18 or over has to be enrolled before a registration issues, residents under 18 must enrol by their eighteenth birthday, and confirmation is required before anyone 18 or over can reside in the home, stay overnight for more than 14 consecutive days, work there or volunteer (OAR 414-210-0310, with parallel rules at 414-360-0310 and 414-305-0310). The regulator has drawn its screening line around the household. That is the same population a home policy won't respond for.

The third is abuse and molestation, which sits outside every licence in all three states. Washington's statute defines "day care insurance" as coverage for liability arising out of "death or injury of any person as the result of negligence or malpractice in rendering professional service" (RCW 48.88.020(2)). That definition names no abuse and molestation coverage. Neither does any Oregon or Idaho rule. It comes up anyway, because contracts ask for it. The abuse and molestation page covers where it is demanded and what it generally does.

The fourth is the car. All three states have a transport rule and all three are worded differently, which changes whether a personal auto policy satisfies them. That is on the transporting children page.

"Bonded and insured" is a marketing phrase, not a compliance statement

Providers ask about this constantly, usually because a competitor's flyer says it or a parent asked. Here is the honest answer, with its edges intact.

We searched the child care statutes and rule sets in all three states for bond, surety and indemnify. Oregon's five DELC rule books and ORS chapter 329A return nothing. Idaho Code Title 39 chapter 11, all 19 sections, returns nothing substantive. Nothing in Washington's child care licensing requires one either. At state level, in all three states, no child care operator is required to post a surety bond.

Two qualifiers travel with that, and they are not decoration. First, we did not sweep city and county business licence rules, and a municipal licence bond is exactly where a "bonded and insured" claim would come from, so if your city licenses home businesses, ask the city. Second, a bond is not insurance in the first place. A surety bond guarantees your performance to somebody else and the surety can come back to you for what it pays. A liability policy pays a third party on your behalf. If a parent asks whether you are bonded, the useful answer describes what you actually carry.

What drives eligibility and price

We don't publish premium figures for a business type, because a real number comes from your operation rather than from an industry average. What we can tell you is what an underwriter is looking at when you send a child care submission in.

• Licensed capacity and the ages you take. Infants move the exposure more than any other single input. Oregon caps a registered home at six children preschool age or younger with only two under 24 months; Washington's center ratio for infants is one staff member to four children with a maximum group of eight; Idaho's statutory point system produces roughly one to six for children under 24 months and sets no group cap at all (OAR 414-210-0400, WAC 110-300-0356(5), Idaho Code 39-1109(4)).
• Whether anyone works for you. A solo registered Oregon provider and a certified home running assistants are different risks and different payroll questions.
• Whether you transport children, in what, and how often.
• The premises. Pools, hot tubs, trampolines and play structures, and in Idaho the fenced-and-latched standard the statute writes out in detail.
• Claims and licensing history, including any enforcement action by the licensing agency.
• What your contracts require. A subsidy grant, a landlord, an employer-sponsored arrangement or a school district partnership can each set limits that the licence never mentions.

Carrier appetite is the other half of eligibility, and it is a yes or no before it is a price. We can tell you quickly whether a given operation is straightforward or awkward to place. We cannot promise coverage, placement or eligibility before a market has looked at it.

How a market check usually plays out

We are an independent agency, so we aren't tied to one carrier's appetite. On a new placement we take the operation description, the licence category and the capacity, put it in front of the markets that write this class, and compare what comes back on the same set of facts. On an existing policy we read the declarations page against what you actually do, which for child care is usually where the business-use problem surfaces. Where a policy is bound, it is paid in full or financed, whichever suits the cash flow. Nothing on this page is a quote and none of it guarantees coverage, placement or eligibility.

Questions to ask, and documents to send

Ask your current agent, or us:

• Does my current home policy exclude liability from a business conducted at the residence, and where is that wording?
• Am I covered for the professional service itself, or only for someone tripping on my step?
• Is abuse and molestation on the policy, at what limit, and on what trigger?
• Do defence costs come out of the limit or sit outside it?
• Who is an insured, and does that reach my assistants, my volunteers and the adults living in the house?
• What responds if I am driving children and I am at fault?
• If a parent or a grant asks for a certificate, what can this policy actually evidence?

Send us the licence or registration and its category, your capacity and age mix, whether anyone works for or volunteers with you, any vehicle used for the children, your current home and business declarations pages, any contract or grant that names insurance, and your loss history.

The three states side by side

Child care centers

Everything above applies to a licensed center as well as a home, with one difference that matters more than the rest. In Washington a center has no opt-out. It proves insurance at licensure, at renewal, and at any inspection, and the $100,000 limit attaches unconditionally because subsection (1)(b) says the limits "under this subsection" are the ones in RCW 48.88.050. A family home reaches that limit only by electing the proof route. That single asymmetry is the cleanest line between the two operations in Washington law, and it is worked through in the family home versus center article.

In Oregon and Idaho, a center's insurance answer is the same as a home's, from the same rule chapter. Oregon requires nothing of either. Idaho asks both for fire and liability with no limit. What changes between a home and a center in those two states is capacity arithmetic, plumbing fixture counts and staff ratios, and none of that changes which form responds when something happens.

By state

The three states differ enough that each has its own page for family child care homes. Centers share the same answer in Oregon and Idaho, and a different one in Washington, which is covered above and in the article linked from it.

Richard Sweet, owner of Vantage Point Risk and an independent insurance advisor. Last reviewed August 10, 2026. How we review this.