SB 5926
In CommitteeSenate
Child care providers/PRA
Expanding the public records exemption for personal information of family home child care providers to all licensed or certified child care providers.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
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 expands privacy protections for child care providers by making personal identifying information exempt from public disclosure under Washington’s Public Records Act—not just for in-home providers, but for all licensed or certified providers, including those in centers and school-age programs. It aims to reduce risks like harassment, doxxing, and threats to personal safety.
- Extends existing public records privacy protections—previously only for in-home child care providers—to all licensed or certified child care providers, regardless of setting (e.g., centers, school-age programs).
- Exempts from public disclosure personal information including names, home addresses, GPS coordinates, personal phone numbers, email addresses, Social Security numbers, driver’s license numbers, bank account details, emergency contacts, and private photographs.
- Clarifies that business-related information (e.g., business address, program capacity, inspection results, licensing status) remains publicly available under the law.
- Requires the Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF) to update licensing materials, privacy guidance, and mandatory reporter training to reflect the new protections.
Who is affected
- Child care providers (all licensed or certified by DCYF) — Child care providers working in licensed centers, family homes, school-age programs, and other settings covered by DCYF licensing will have their personal contact and identifying information protected from public disclosure under state public records law, helping reduce risks like harassment, doxxing, and targeted retaliation.
- Families and the general public seeking child care information — Families and the public will continue to have access to important safety and quality information—such as business addresses, licensing status, inspection results, and program capacity—but will no longer be able to access providers' private personal details.
- Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF) — The agency responsible for licensing and regulating child care programs must update internal guidance, communications, and training materials to reflect the new privacy protections.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (4)
The bill significantly reduces the risk of harassment, doxxing, stalking, and targeted retaliation against child care providers—including those in center-based settings—by preventing disclosure of highly sensitive personal identifiers (e.g., home address, SSN, bank info, personal photos), thereby enhancing personal safety and job security for frontline workers.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(a)-(l) and Sec. 1 (Findings)By extending privacy protections to all licensed providers—not just in-home providers—the bill helps stabilize the child care workforce, especially in areas facing severe staffing shortages, by reducing burnout and attrition driven by safety concerns and privacy violations.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 2(2)(a)-(d)The requirement for DCYF to update training and guidance materials ensures consistent implementation across counties and supports frontline staff in applying the law correctly—reducing errors and complaints, and improving compliance confidence among providers.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 3The explicit preservation of public access to business addresses, licensing status, inspection results, and capacity ensures families retain meaningful tools to evaluate provider quality and safety—balancing privacy with transparency in a way that protects both providers and children.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(3)
Potential Concerns (4)
By shielding provider names, addresses, and contact details from public disclosure, the bill may reduce transparency for families seeking to assess provider backgrounds and community-level safety risks; however, this is limited because core safety and licensing data (e.g., inspection reports, capacity, violations) remain public, and providers are still subject to DCYF oversight and background checks.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(a)-(l)While the bill clarifies that business-related information remains public, it may increase administrative burden on local licensing offices and DCYF staff to respond to public records requests and distinguish between exempt personal data and non-exempt business data—especially in cases where a provider’s home address is also used as a business address.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 2(3)The exemption for “private photographs” not publicly distributed by the provider may create ambiguity for enforcement and could inadvertently shield images used in marketing or on licensing applications, potentially limiting public awareness of facility conditions or provider qualifications.
Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(k)While the bill protects individuals, it does not extend the same privacy protections to independent contractors or unlicensed providers who may still be working in the child care sector—potentially creating a two-tiered system where only licensed providers benefit, while others remain exposed.
Business & EmploymentLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(2)(d)
Who Is Most Affected
Child care providers in licensed centers, school-age programs, and other non-residential settings gain strong privacy protections, reducing exposure to harassment, stalking, and doxxing. This is especially impactful for low-wage providers who lack legal or corporate support to defend against online attacks.
Families retain access to licensing status, inspection reports, and business details, but lose the ability to independently verify provider identity or background beyond what is publicly disclosed—potentially increasing reliance on state oversight for safety assurance.
DCYF gains clearer statutory authority to protect provider privacy and must invest in staff training and system updates, but avoids costly litigation over public records disputes over provider personal data.
Child care advocacy and labor organizations benefit from stronger protections for providers, especially women and people of color who dominate the sector and face disproportionate safety risks. However, the bill does not address unlicensed providers, who remain vulnerable.
Local law enforcement may see reduced reports of harassment related to provider doxxing, but could face challenges in identifying suspects if provider identity is shielded from public records—though internal access via court order remains possible.