ESHB 1395
SignedHouse
Home care worker background
Streamlining the home care worker background check process.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill streamlines background checks for home care workers by allowing individuals with certain past convictions to be considered for jobs after a set waiting period, instead of being automatically disqualified. It requires employers to conduct a discretionary review of character, competence, and suitability—and permits workers to begin providing care for up to 30 days while that review is pending, with client notification. It also limits when repeat background checks are required.
- Allows home care workers and providers with certain past convictions (e.g., cannabis sales, theft, robbery, assault) to be considered for employment if a set number of years have passed since the conviction—3 years for cannabis sales, 5 years for robbery, extortion, or assault in the second or third degree, and 10 years for first-degree theft.
- Prohibits automatic disqualification based on those convictions alone; instead, employers must conduct a discretionary character, competence, and suitability review to decide if the person can work with vulnerable adults or children.
- Allows workers to begin providing care for up to 30 days while a character, competence, and suitability review is pending—only if no disqualifying findings appear in the initial background check—and requires written notice to clients or guardians before services begin.
- Limits repeat background checks: Employers do not need to recheck workers if they’ve already done a review for the same conviction, the worker has a Certificate of Restoration of Opportunity, more than 10 years have passed since the last conviction, or the background check only shows minor, non-harm-related offenses.
- Requires the Department of Social and Health Services to develop new rules for conducting character, competence, and suitability reviews, including standards to ensure safety and fairness.
- Clarifies that fingerprint-based background checks are only required at initial hire (or under specific circumstances), not every time a worker changes jobs—unless the worker has moved out of state since the last fingerprint check.
Who is affected
- Home care workers and individual providers — Home care workers and individual providers who have past convictions for certain nonautomatically disqualifying crimes (e.g., cannabis sales, theft, robbery, assault) may now be considered for employment if sufficient time has passed, and employers must conduct a discretionary review rather than automatically disqualifying them.
- Home care agencies and employers — Home care agencies and other employers must follow new rules about when to conduct or skip character, competence, and suitability reviews, and must notify clients before a worker begins providing care during a 30-day temporary period.
- Clients and their families/guardians — Clients (vulnerable adults or minors) and their guardians must be informed in writing if a worker is providing care while a character, competence, and suitability review is pending, and they can decline to receive services from that worker.
- Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) — The Washington State Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) must develop new rules and standards for conducting character, competence, and suitability reviews and may need to hire or train staff to implement the changes.
Pro/Con Analysis
Potential Benefits (5)
Expands the pool of eligible home care workers by removing automatic disqualifiers for certain past convictions (e.g., cannabis sales, theft, assault) after waiting periods (3–10 years), allowing workers to begin providing care for up to 30 days while a discretionary review is pending. This directly addresses Washington’s severe home care workforce shortage—estimated at over 10,000 vacancies—and could improve access to in-home care for seniors and people with disabilities, especially in rural and underserved communities where staffing gaps are most acute.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1)(a)-(f) & Sec. 1(7)(a)Limits repeat background checks for workers with a Certificate of Restoration of Opportunity, >10 years since last conviction, or minor/non-harm-related offenses, reducing administrative costs and time-to-hire for employers. This is especially beneficial for small agencies and individual employers (e.g., consumer-directed employers) who lack HR departments and rely on manual processes, potentially lowering turnover and increasing job stability for workers.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 1(6)(a)(ii)-(iv) & Sec. 2(c)(i)(A)-(C)Requires employers to conduct a discretionary character, competence, and suitability review (rather than automatic disqualification) and mandates written client notification before a worker begins care during the 30-day pending period. This balances rehabilitation with transparency, allowing individuals with demonstrated rehabilitation to reenter the workforce while preserving client awareness and agency—key for vulnerable populations who rely on home care.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(5) & Sec. 1(7)(b)(i)(A)Removes automatic lifetime or long-term bans on employment for nonviolent, non-harm-related offenses (e.g., cannabis sales, theft >10 years ago), promoting rehabilitation and reducing collateral consequences that disproportionately impact low-income and minority communities. This aligns with Washington’s existing Certificate of Restoration of Opportunity (CRO) framework and reduces structural barriers to employment for people with convictions.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1)(a)-(f)Exempts workers from repeat fingerprint checks if they’ve been employed by the same employer and have not moved out of state since the last check, reducing redundant costs and administrative delays. This helps small agencies and individual employers (e.g., consumer-directed employers) retain trusted workers without reprocessing, supporting workforce stability in a tight labor market.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 2(c)(ii)
Potential Concerns (5)
Allows workers with certain past convictions (e.g., assault, theft, robbery) to begin providing care to vulnerable adults/children for up to 30 days while a character, competence, and suitability review is pending—only if the initial background check is clean—requires written client notification, but does not require consent or delay in service initiation if the client declines. This creates a narrow but real window where individuals with recent, serious offenses could provide unsupervised care before discretionary review concludes, potentially exposing vulnerable clients to harm before employers complete their assessment.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(7)(a) & (b)(i)Reduces administrative burden and costs for employers by limiting repeat background checks when a worker has a Certificate of Restoration of Opportunity, >10 years have passed since the last conviction, or the worker has not moved out of state since the last fingerprint check. This streamlining benefits agencies and individual employers by reducing redundant checks, but applies equally to all employers regardless of size and does not disproportionately favor large or small entities.
Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 1(6)(a)(i)-(iv) & Sec. 2(c)(ii)Expands eligibility to work in home care for individuals with certain past convictions (e.g., cannabis sales, theft, assault) after waiting periods (3–10 years), but does not require employers to hire them—only prohibits automatic disqualification. While the bill includes client notification and a 30-day temporary work period, the risk of harm to vulnerable adults/children is elevated for those with recent convictions (e.g., assault in 2nd/3rd degree after only 5 years), especially since the discretionary review is employer- and discretion-based and not standardized across providers.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1)(a)-(f) & Sec. 1(7)(a)Excludes Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF) positions and most state department employees from the new rules, preserving existing stricter standards for those roles. This maintains a consistent safety standard for high-risk child welfare positions and avoids regulatory creep into other state functions.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 1(2) & (3)Requires written notice to clients/guardians that a worker is providing care during the 30-day pending review period and offers them the opportunity to decline services—but does not require the client to decline or delay care, nor does it prohibit service initiation if the client chooses to proceed. This places the burden of risk assessment on the client (often elderly or disabled), who may lack capacity, resources, or awareness to meaningfully decline care, especially in rural or underserved areas with limited provider alternatives.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(7)(b)(i)(B)
Who Is Most Affected
Home care workers with past convictions for nonautomatically disqualifying crimes (e.g., cannabis sales, theft, assault) gain a pathway to employment after waiting periods (3–10 years), reducing barriers to reentry and supporting rehabilitation. However, they must still pass a discretionary employer review and may face client refusal, so outcomes vary by employer discretion and client acceptance.
Home care agencies and employers gain flexibility in hiring and reduced administrative burdens (e.g., no repeat checks for stable workers), but must implement new review processes, document client notifications, and absorb liability risk during the 30-day pending period. Small agencies may struggle with implementation costs despite streamlining benefits.
Clients and guardians gain transparency (written notice before care begins) and the right to decline services during the 30-day pending period, but may lack capacity or alternatives to meaningfully exercise that choice—especially elderly, cognitively impaired, or rural clients with limited provider options. Risk of harm is elevated during the 30-day window.
DSHS gains authority to develop new rules and standards for character, competence, and suitability reviews, but must allocate staff time and resources for rulemaking, training, and oversight. The agency may face increased liability if harm occurs during the 30-day pending period, though the bill includes a rebuttable presumption of appropriate discretion.