Washington Day Care Insurance: Family Home vs Child Care Center

Almost everything written about Washington child care insurance treats it as one rule with one number. It is not. RCW 43.216.700 does two different things in two subsections, and if you read only the summaries you will get both of them wrong in the same direction: too strict for family homes, too vague for centers.

This article takes the section apart. It matters if you run either kind of program, and it matters most if you are moving from one to the other.

The mechanism: two subsections, and the four words that separate them

Start with subsection (1), which is the center rule.

“Every licensed child day care center and outdoor nature-based child care provider shall, at the time of licensure or renewal and at any inspection, provide to the department proof that the licensee has day care insurance as defined in RCW 48.88.020, or is self-insured pursuant to chapter 48.90 RCW.”

Three obligations sit in that sentence. Proof, not a notice. Three trigger points, including any inspection. And a named alternative that is not “nothing,” it is self-insurance under a different chapter.

Now subsection (2)(a), the family home rule.

“Every licensed family day care provider shall, at the time of licensure or renewal either: (i) Provide to the department proof that the licensee has day care insurance as defined in RCW 48.88.020, or other applicable insurance; or (ii) Provide written notice of their insurance status on a standard form developed by the department to parents with a child enrolled in family day care and keep a copy of the notice to each parent on file. Family day care providers may choose to opt out of the requirement to have day care or other applicable insurance but must provide written notice of their insurance status to parents…”

Two trigger points, not three. An either/or rather than a requirement. And the legislature saying out loud that opting out is permitted.

Then the limits. Both subsections point at the same figure and reach it differently:

• Centers, (1)(b): “Liability limits under this subsection shall be the same as set forth in RCW 48.88.050.”
• Family homes, (2)(c): “Liability limits under (a)(i) of this subsection shall be the same as set forth in RCW 48.88.050.”

That difference is the whole article. A center’s limit hangs off the subsection, so it applies to every center. A family home’s limit hangs off the election, so it applies only to a provider who chose to insure. The structure is confirmed by (2)(b), which likewise opens by describing “any licensed family day care provider that provides to the department proof that the licensee has insurance as provided under (a)(i) of this subsection.”

The figure itself is RCW 48.88.050: the joint underwriting association must offer a policy “with liability limits of at least one hundred thousand dollars per occurrence.” Enacted in 1986. Never amended. No aggregate stated anywhere in the chapter.

The circumstance that changes the answer

You move from a family home licence to a center licence. This is the one that catches people. Every element flips at once: the opt-out disappears, the inspection trigger arrives, and the limit becomes unconditional. If you were operating on the notice route, there is nothing to convert.

You are an outdoor nature-based provider. You are on the center side of the statute. RCW 43.216.700(1) names outdoor nature-based providers alongside centers, so the mandatory proof and the unconditional limit both apply. The licence category itself comes from RCW 43.216.742 and its rules sit in WAC 110-302, and Washington is the only Northwest state that has it.

Your coverage terminates mid-term. Termination is reportable within 30 calendar days under WAC 110-300-0425(10), filed April 14, 2026 and effective May 15, 2026. Read closely, that is a duty to tell the department, attached to whatever coverage you had. For a center, losing coverage also means failing the next inspection, because the proof requirement is live at every inspection. For a family home on the notice route there is nothing to terminate.

You are self-insured. The statute contemplates it for centers, under chapter 48.90 RCW. We haven’t read that chapter and aren’t going to describe its qualification standard from memory, so if you are considering it, read it or ask someone who has.

What this looks like in practice

Two licensed providers on the same street in Spokane. One has a family home licence for eight children. The other converted to a center two years ago.

At the annual licensing visit the center is asked for evidence of coverage, because subsection (1) makes that a live requirement at any inspection, and the coverage has to carry at least the RCW 48.88.050 limit. The family home provider isn’t asked, because subsection (2)(a) attaches proof to licensure and renewal only. If she took the notice route, what she has on file is a signed form telling each family she carries none, and that is a complete answer under Washington law.

Neither of them is doing anything wrong. They are in different subsections. The reason this scenario is worth spelling out is that they will tell each other what the rules are, and one of them will be describing a rule that doesn’t apply to the other.

What to do about it

If you run a center. Treat proof of coverage as an inspection-ready document, not a renewal task. Keep the certificate where you keep the licence. Confirm the limit meets the statutory figure, and then ask the separate question of whether the statutory figure is enough for your program, because it was set in 1986 and has not moved.

If you run a family home. Decide the route deliberately rather than by default. The notice route is lawful and the statute says it cannot be used as evidence of liability. It also means every allegation is funded out of your own pocket. If you take the proof route, the $100,000 is a floor from four decades ago, not a target.

If you are converting. Sort the insurance before the licence, not after. A center licence with no coverage in place is a compliance problem on the first inspection.

Either way, read what the coverage actually is. Washington’s statutory definition of “day care insurance” is narrower than the phrase suggests, and it is worth understanding before you decide that meeting the statute settles the question. That is what Washington means by day care insurance.

Where to go next

The state-level picture for home providers is on the Washington family child care insurance page. The coverage program behind all of it is on the family child care pillar, and the two triggers a policy has to answer are on the liability insurance page.

Two questions sit next to this one and neither is settled by the statute. Whether the coverage belongs on your home policy or on a separate business policy is on the endorsement versus commercial policy page, and driving children is a separate policy in every state, covered on transporting children in your care.

For the neighbouring states, Oregon requires nothing of either kind of program and Idaho does not license a home below seven children. Both sit under the child care hub.

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