VARGAS PATRICIA ANNE (Pat's FunCare Daycare)

Observation

The front room window and the dining room window (one large room) have blinds/shades on the windows of the top down, bottom up style. If the top portion is lowered down, inner cords are exposed. Licensor tested to see if the cords could be manipulated to form a loop, which they do. Provider has done research with the company to ensure the blinds were safe. She also has found out that there is a weight in which the cords would break free if a child were to mess with them. The inner cords remain fairly taught unless the bottom of the shades are lifted while the inner cord is pulled out. Dispute Description: Dispute Request: March 17, 2023 Cordless Shades purchased during the Pandemic: (This is not a dispute between provider and licensor. I respect my licensor and we do have many discussions about various rules and regulations. We might even disagree here. This “Violations” process is what I am Disputing and would like assistance from management.) The idea that a provider who researched and followed up with safety guidelines with the manufacturer and the well-known and respected store “Costco” has a “Violation” record now for the purchase of what was considered “Safe” on record is harsh and unreasonable. I am that provider disputing this process. During the pandemic, I had to take it upon myself to be absolutely sure the shades were safe. I supplied my licensor with the sales receipt indicating that I purchased, “Cordless shades” as stated on the receipt. I had discussions with Alana Comer, Office Manager of Jet City Blinds supplier for Costco to be sure they are safe. She like Graeber Manufacturer said I purchased “Cordless shades”. What I received was cordless shades that lift up or pull down. When lifted up there is no cord that shows anywhere. However, when pulled down there is a small narrow thin cord that shows on top. The shades are not in reach of young toddlers. I as an adult can barely reach them myself. Unless WA state determines that infants and toddlers can borrow a ladder and pull the shades down and endanger themselves, then the shades I purchased are safe. Now for the detailed research and investigation I did to be sure I am correct on this. When the shades were installed during the pandemic, I was surprised to see the inner cord only when shades are pulled down which we normally do not do. I immediately called the supplier and the manufacturer. I was given brochure information how the company is required by law to build safe shades for children. It is the law. It was explained to me that “anyone “who tries to pull down the cord (It is thin and fragile barely able to hold up the light weighted shades) the cord would immediately snap and break for safety reasons. Why would I think a major manufacturer who provided me this information can possibly lie? Why would they lose their business license over a simple correction if needed. Why would Costco use this major company to supply the shades if they are not safe for children. Legally the brochure cannot state what is not true. I did my homework to make sure I purchased safe shades. The tone from the manufacturer and store supplier was quite direct and actually angry at my persistence of making sure this is a safe shade. My licensor Jeni knows me and how detailed I am regarding my daycare and my persistence on making sure the rules are followed. I do challenge some of the rules regarding daycare on a day-to-day business. This rule that was created for the safety of the children should have some reasonable exceptions. For me my dispute is Not regarding changing any rules or making any exceptions. It is the fact that I researched and was given written information and spoke to managers regarding the safety of the shades I purchased during the pandemic. I provided this information to my licensor. That information that was given to me over a year ago and was given to me again recently when the shades were in question. The only way to have a “VIOLATION” on my record would mean I didn’t do all things possible to be sure children are safe. I went above and beyond during a very difficult pandemic. My daycare home is safe, and the shades are safe for their children who cannot reach the top part of the shades to bring them down in any way. The assurance from the manufacturer that provided me information that these shades are safe was never questioned by the government. Not knowing the shades would not “Pass” WA inspection after all the safety features presented to me, I feel it should have been a discussion and a warning to work with me on solving this issue. I do not agree with any danger issue here but when in question my first response is to make a change that will work. I did not know any change would be required after all my research. “Now” that I understand the unreasonable measures that you expect from a provider regarding these shades, I have taken more action again. I requested a retrofit kit to assist me in securing the top of the shade to not pull down for anyone including myself an adult. I am not a handyman. I needed an installer from the supplier from Costco to assist me. The manufacturer was informed and after many phone calls and emails, the manufacturer offered to replace all my shades at no cost rather than retrofit the shades. I was shocked and please that this same manufacturer who stands by the safety of their products decided to extend even more by offering me more than I even asked for. I will have to absorb the $300+ installation cost for the new shades that will arrive soon. This is upsetting but doable compared to replacing all the shades myself at cost. This is an unreasonable expense but again I will do whatever necessary. This is an action of a provider who does not deserve a “Violation” regarding safety for children. The children were never in danger. Going above and beyond Is what I do. Do you honestly think that the manufacturer would have replaced all these shades for free if I was not persistent in resolving any issues regarding the safety of the children. The pandemic brought up many issues and discussions for providers. If anything, providers who remained open put their own lives in danger by potentially getting Covid even when the vaccine was still not available. I remained Open. I had to research safety on my own. I did not have visits to discuss any of these issues in person. To be honest I always research and question everything as Jeni can attest. The safety guidelines and the law seemed to fit here: honestly, they do fit here. I am absolutely appalled that providers do not receive “Warnings” for items like these that are questionable and confusing given the circumstances of these particular “Violations. Please consider my dispute as reasonable and allow me to clear the “Violation” off my record while I work with my licensor on this issue. I understand you follow the rules and I follow the rules as well. I can’t change some of the rules but there is in question the safety feature that I was given should be taken into consideration. Having this on Child Care Check can deter parents who may think I am not a safe daycare. I won’t be able to explain these circumstances. My record for safety ruined. I appreciate your help and understanding that I want to maintain an excellent record. I work hard to do this every day for the last 31 years! This is a reasonable request. Please remove the “Violation” status on Child Care Check and work with me to resolve the shade issue. Thank you for your attention to my request. Patricia Anne Vargas Other Minor Violations possibly on my record now but not on Child Care Check: I want to Dispute that as well. Just to be sure the facts are included. 1) Attendance- Kinder Connect My other “violations” are not reasonable at all. Again, some items should be addressed and corrected with discussion and warnings. Mistakes are made by both good providers and very good licensors. Jeni didn’t see my Kinder Connect sign in and sign out on the computer for staff. It is only myself and my assistant husband Leon. We both live here. Daycare doesn’t open unless I am here. It can’t close unless I am here. My previous worksheets showing who was here was incorrectly done by not adding the time factor. I was informed by attending wonderful informative zoom classes weeks prior to inspection. I corrected and included staff on Kinder Connect to show start times and end times which by the way is on my Parent Handbook. Once I realized I had done it incorrectly it was corrected recently before my licensor came to visit. My old records which are required to be available for your licensor was on display for her and anyone to see. I keep my Clean up and all my Important information log sheets visible for parents, licensors and potential families to see. My sign in and out times for staff is on the computer. Is this not allowed. I was informed it is allowed. I get a “Violation” for this. Not a discussion/warning for something like this? 2) Fence My fence broke off the boards during that horrific windstorm that just happened right before Jeni came to visit. We do also have a chain link fence behind it for security installed by the school behind me. Leon has to keep the fence from falling again until we replace the fence with the assistance of the WA Department of Commerce. The assistance was granted since last year, but the funding is not available until end of April when I have a contractor assigned to replace it. Actions are being done and no other provider could have done more. The fence breaking right at the time of a windstorm doesn’t deserve to have a Violation but a warning and discussion on solving this situation quickly after an Act of God windstorm occurred. Leon my assistant corrected it. No children were allowed anywhere near the fence. We supervise 3-5 children with two adults. That is above and beyond protection provided. Discussion/Warning should have been implemented here not a “Violation”. So harsh and unreasonable. 3)Changing Table: I had a changing table border made specifically for my changing station: I installed a 3 1/2inch border for my changing table as required. Every child has their own individual clean and disinfected Waterproof pad placed on “top “of a soft towel for a child’s comfort since the table is on a hard surface. On “top” of the waterproof pad, I also included a thick Disposable waterproof paper pad on top of the Waterproof changing pad. Two layers of protection. Not one layer that is required. Two layers of waterproof protection. The disposable waterproof paper pad covers the entire changing area. I purchased those from Costco as well. These are placed on top of the towel for comfort. I did this for the comfort of each child. Each child has their own individual towel that is stored separately in individual bags and individual changing waterproof pads, and each use their own disposable paper pad and dispose it in the trash. I wash each towel daily and use more than one towel if needed for those messy diapers. Even though I know the waterproof protection should not dirty the towel I just do it as an extra protected step as I do by using two layers of waterproof protection. This is above and beyond protection for each child. The question and discussion are regarding not the steps I provide for cleanliness and disinfecting procedures but the use of a towel for individual comfort. I am fine not using the towel, but this is another example of being able to discuss and plan a solution to an issue that is quite debatable. Instead, I receive a “Violation”. I am not sure if I need to contact the manufacturers from both the Waterproof Pads and the Disposable Paper Pads companies to let them know their products are not waterproof in the eyes of the State of WA if you believe the towels are not able to stay clean with two layers of protection on top. This is not against my licensor. She is detailed with her work and follows the guidelines as she interprets them. We at times can interpret differently and I appreciate discussion which we do. I enjoy working with my licensor. The rules for violations and not warnings are horribly wrong. This is why warnings and discussions are needed when violations are not always necessary. I was told the minor violations will not go on Child Care Check but that doesn’t matter to me. My own record and work ethic is important to me. As you can see, I am not a fan of violations when not needed. The process is wrong. Thank you for reading my dispute and I respect this process. Licensed for Thirty-one years and still working with you together to do it right. Patricia Anne Vargas Pat’s FunCare Daycare 3509 252nd Pl SE Sammamish WA 98029 STARS # 310929960