Children of The World Learning Centers LLC
A child day center in Chantilly, Virginia 20151
4451 Brookfield Corporation Dr., #201, Chantilly, Virginia 20151. (703) 956-6266.
Still to come
A provider in Fairfax County is still to be read, so how this one compares is still to come. Comparisons appear once all of Fairfax County’s providers are read.
Watch and the shortlist are kept with a free account, on every device. Your watch list. Virginia’s own record is on legacy.dss.virginia.gov.
The short answer
- 3 deficiencies in the last three years
- Oct 262026 the latest visit on record
- 114 children, its licensed capacity
Each figure’s source sits beside it, in its section below.
What these words mean4
- Inspection (survey)
- A visit by state inspectors, often unannounced, who check a place against the rules it must meet. For nursing homes and other places Medicare pays, CMS calls these visits surveys: a standard survey of a nursing home comes at least every 15 months, and a complaint survey whenever a complaint calls for one. Source: CMS; 42 CFR 488.308.
- Deficiency, citation, violation
- What inspectors write up when a place didn’t meet a rule: the rule, what they saw, and when. CMS calls it a deficiency; states may say citation or violation. It is the inspectors’ finding, not a court’s, and the place is usually asked for a plan to correct it. Source: CMS, statement of deficiencies (Form CMS-2567); each state’s licensing agency.
- Licence status
- Whether the state’s licence lets the place operate now, in the state’s own words: licensed, on probation (allowed to keep operating on conditions, after problems), provisional, pending or expired. Source: Each state’s licensing agency.
- Capacity
- The most people the licence or certification lets the place care for at once: residents, children, beds or apartments, as the state counts them. It isn’t how many are there now. Source: Each state’s licensing agency.
What did inspectors find?
19 inspections on record, the latest on Oct 26, 2026.
3 violations cited in the last three years.
Virginia Department of Education, Search for Child Day Care: each inspection’s page, with its violations. Checked Nov 5, 2026. Updated weekly.
When those deficiencies happened
3 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited May 2025. The last 3 years, to Nov 5, 2026.
| Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Dec | |||||||||||
| 2024 | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
| 2025 | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
| 2026 | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov |
Hover or focus a month to read it.
Hearth Record drew this from the dates and levels in the source’s own records.
Each deficiency, in its source’s words
Grouped by visit, newest first, with the level its source gave it.
Virginia Department of Education, Search for Child Day Care: each inspection’s page, with its violations. Checked Nov 5, 2026. Updated weekly.
May 21, 2025: inspection1 deficiency
-
The required staff to child ratio for birth up to 16 months is 1:4 (staff:children).
“There were 10 children with 2 staff in a group where Child A in the group was under 16 months of age, requiring the ratio to be 1:4. The classroom was over the ratio from approximately 12:15pm-1:25pm, when a third staff member was added to the classroom.”
Apr 18, 2024: inspection2 deficiencies
-
Based on observation, cribs were not identified for use by a specific child.
“Evidence: 1. All cribs located in the infant room were not identified for use by a specific child at the time of the inspection.”
-
Based on observation, when food is brought from home it is not always labeled with the date.
“Evidence: 1. Two lunch boxes (infant room) containing food from home were observed to have no date on them at the time of the inspection.”
May 24, 2023: inspection4 deficiencies
-
Based on a review of staff records, 1 out of 3 staff did not have a copy of the results of a criminal history record information check, a sex offender registry check, and a search of the child abuse and neglect registry or equivalent registry from any state in which the individual has resided in the preceding five years.
The inspectors’ words, 99 words
“Evidence: 1. Staff #3 (doh: 11/8/2022) did not have the required out of state sex offender registry check for State #1 in which the individual has resided in the preceding five years. 2. Staff #3 (doh: 11/8/2022) did not have the required out of state search of the child abuse and neglect registry check for State #1 in which the individual has resided in the preceding five years. 3. Staff #3 (doh: 11/8/2022) did not have the required out of state criminal history record check for State #1 in which the individual has resided in the preceding five years.”
-
Based on a review of staff records, 2 out of 3 staff members did not submit documentation of a negative tuberculosis screening within the time frame allotted.
“Evidence: 1. Staff #2 (doh: 2/6/2023) had a tuberculosis screening on file dated 11/23/2022. 2. Staff #3 (doh: 11/8/2022) had a tuberculosis screening on file dated 11/11/2022.”
-
Based on a review of staff records, 2 out of 3 staff did not complete orientation training prior to the staff member working alone with children and no later than seven days of the date of assuming job responsibilities.
“Evidence: 1. Staff #2 (doh: 2/6/2023) had documentation on file that the staff member’s orientation was completed by 2/27/2023. 2. Staff #3 (doh: 11/8/2022) had documentation on file that the staff member’s orientation was completed by 4/10/2023.”
-
Based on a review of staff records, 1 out of 3 staff did not have the required records kept for each staff person.
“Evidence: 1. Staff #3 (doh: 11/8/2022) had 2 references on file that were dated 11/22/2022, after the employee was hired.”
Dec 8, 2022: inspection7 deficiencies
-
Based on observation and staff interview, all staff who work directly with children were not capable of communicating with emergency personnel.
“Evidence: 1. Staff C was unable to demonstrate the ability to communicate with emergency personnel, if necessary. 2. Staff B stated that Staff C was going to take English classes.”
-
Based on observation, areas and equipment of the center, inside and outside, were not maintained in a clean, safe and operable condition.
“Evidence: 1. The gate from the front office/entrance area to the hallway had protruding nails and the wood was broken. It was very loose when closed due to these conditions.”
-
Based on observation, children under 10 years of age were not always within actual sight and sound supervision of staff.
“Evidence: 1. At approximately 2:03pm, Child A (5 years old) was sent from the Flowers classroom to the bathroom on the other side of the facility, which is approximately 9 feet from the Flowers classroom. Child A was then observed leaving the restroom and returning back to the Flowers classroom. There was no staff member supervising Child A for approximately 2 minutes, from 2:03pm-2:05pm.”
-
Based on observation and staff interview, the licensee did not maintain compliance with the standards and terms of the current license issued by the department.
The inspectors’ words, 283 words
“Evidence: 1. As the LI was conducting a tour of the facility, the LI noticed a room that appeared to have cribs. The room was not set up properly for infant care, but had bouncy chairs, cribs, and boxes inside of it. When looking out of the window of the classroom, the LI noticed 2 staff members, with 5 children that appeared to be under the age of 2.5 years sitting outside of the door of the classroom. The LI observed that one infant did not have any socks on in the (approximately) 45 degree weather and one toddler was walking with only one shoe on. The LI tried to open the door to exit the classroom but it was locked. The LI exited from the front door of the facility and walked around to the side of the building and approached the 2 staff members. The staff members began to walk away and repeatedly said “No English” as they tried to gather the 5 children. The LI explained that it was very cold and that the children and staff needed to come back inside since all of the children did not have proper attire. 2. Once back inside the facility, it was determined that the facility was operating outside of their current license terms. There were 5 children in care under the age of 2.5 years. The facility’s current license only allows them to care for children from 2.5 years-12 years of age. 3. When it was discovered by the LI that the facility was operating outside of their current license terms, staff A stated “I admit, I made a mistake. I accepted the younger children and I shouldn’t have done that.””
-
8VAC20-780-500-B
“Based on observation, a nonabsorbent surface for diapering or changing was not used. Evidence: 1. There were small tears observed on the diaper changing pad surface.”
-
Based on a review of nonmedical emergency supplies, all required nonmedical emergency supplies were not available.
“Evidence: 1. There was no battery operated radio available on-site during the time of the inspection.”
-
Based on a review of children’s records and staff interview, the center did not maintain and keep at the center a separate record for each child enrolled with the required information.
“Evidence: 1. Child A (23 mos.), Child B (14 mos.), Child C (2 yrs), Child D (2 yrs), and Child E (11 mos.) were observed receiving care at the facility at the time of the inspection and did not have a child record on file. 2. Staff B stated that there were no child records on file at the facility for Child A, B, C, D, and E.”
All 19 visits on record
| Date | Visit | What the record says |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 26, 2026 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| May 1, 2026 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Oct 21, 2025 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Oct 21, 2025 | Inspection | No violations cited |
| May 21, 2025 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| May 21, 2025 | Inspection | 1 violation cited |
| Oct 22, 2024 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Oct 22, 2024 | Inspection | No violations cited |
| Apr 18, 2024 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Apr 18, 2024 | Inspection | 2 violations cited |
| Oct 17, 2023 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Oct 17, 2023 | Inspection | No violations cited |
| May 24, 2023 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| May 24, 2023 | Inspection | 4 violations cited |
| Dec 8, 2022 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Dec 8, 2022 | Inspection | 7 violations cited |
| Aug 4, 2022 | Complaint inspection | No violations cited |
| May 12, 2022 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| May 12, 2022 | Inspection | No violations cited |
Is it licensed?
- Child Day Center: Two Year license, expires Nov 4, 2027.
- A current subsidy provider.
- Ages: 6 months - 12 years 11 months.
- Capacity: 114 children.
Virginia Department of Education, Search for Child Day Care: each facility’s page. Checked Nov 5, 2026. Updated weekly.
Has Virginia acted against it?
- 1 complaint inspection on record.
- No complaint allegations published with findings.
Virginia Department of Education, Search for Child Day Care: each inspection’s page, with its violations and Search for Child Day Care: each complaint’s page, with its allegations and findings. Checked Nov 5, 2026. Updated weekly.
Who does the caring?
- Virginia doesn’t publish staffing levels for individual providers. State rules set staff-to-child ratios by age.
Who owns it?
- Virginia’s search doesn’t list owners.
How is it rated?
- Virginia’s search doesn’t show a quality rating.
How does it compare nearby?
- Comparisons appear once all of Fairfax County’s providers are read.
Virginia Department of Education, Search for Child Day Care: each inspection’s page, with its violations. Checked Nov 5, 2026. Updated weekly.
What the record doesn’t say
- Virginia doesn’t grade how serious a violation is, so no severity is shown.
- Virginia publishes a complaint’s allegations and findings only when its inspection found a violation and the records are linked.
- Virginia doesn’t publish staffing levels or owners for individual providers.
- A plan of correction sent late, or not at all, isn’t online: Virginia says to ask the inspector.
- Virginia’s pages show about the last five years of inspections; for older ones, Virginia says to contact the licensing inspector.
- Virginia says this information may not be accurate, up to date or complete, and shouldn’t be the only source in choosing care.
Sources
-
Virginia Department of Education, Search for Child Day Care: each facility’s page.
Checked Nov 5, 2026. Updated weekly. No open licence; Virginia allows non-commercial use, so Care Ledger shows it free.
-
Virginia Department of Education, Search for Child Day Care: each inspection’s page, with its violations.
Checked Nov 5, 2026. Updated weekly. No open licence; Virginia allows non-commercial use, so Care Ledger shows it free.
-
Virginia Department of Education, Search for Child Day Care: each complaint’s page, with its allegations and findings.
Checked Nov 5, 2026. Updated weekly. No open licence; Virginia allows non-commercial use, so Care Ledger shows it free.
If you believe something here is wrong, a correction starts with the agency whose record this copies: Virginia Department of Education. Virginia’s own record is on legacy.dss.virginia.gov. If Hearth Record copied something wrongly, it will fix it and log the correction publicly, with its date: how corrections work.
This copy of the record was made on Nov 5, 2026.
From the provider
The public record above comes first. Anything the provider adds will appear here, below it, and say who wrote it.
Replies
None. Replies aren’t open yet. When they open, the provider will be able to answer any finding for free, and the reply will show beside that finding, unedited and dated.
Paid listing
None. Paid listings aren’t open yet. When they open, anything paid for will say “Paid by the provider”, and paying will never change a finding, a rating or the order of results.