Storey Rakin
A local ordinance approved FDH in Springfield, Virginia 22150
6724 Bowie Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22150. (703) 922-5623.
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
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?
6 inspections on record, the latest on Oct 13, 2026.
10 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 Oct 2026. 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.
Oct 13, 2026: subsidy health and safety inspection1 deficiency
-
The vendor shall maintain a written hard copy record of daily attendance that documents the arrival and departure of each child as it occurs.
“The provider did not have any documentation of daily attendance for the arrival or departure for children in care for the entire year to date.”
Oct 27, 2025: subsidy health and safety inspection2 deficiencies
-
The vendor shall maintain a written hard copy record of daily attendance that documents the arrival and departure of each child in care as it occurs.
“The vendor had no documentation of daily attendance for any children.”
-
Evacuation procedures shall be practiced at least monthly.
“The vendor had no documentation of any evacuation for the previous month.”
Nov 6, 2023: subsidy health and safety inspection7 deficiencies
-
Repeat violation
“Based on record review and interview, the vendor did not maintain a written hard copy record of daily attendance that documents the arrival and departure of each child in care as it occurs. Evidence: On the day of the inspection 11/6/2023, the vendor did not have a written hard copy record of daily attendance that documented the arrival and departure of Child #1 since 10/20/2023.”
-
Repeat violation
The inspectors’ words, 103 words
“Based on record review, the children’s records were not complete. Evidence: 1. Child #1 and #2 were missing proof of identity. 2. Child #2 is missing written authorization for emergency medical care. 3. Child #2 is missing a written statement that the vendor will notify the parent when the child becomes ill and that the parent will arrange to have the child picked up as soon as possible if requested by the vendor. 4. Child #1 is missing emergency contact name, phone number, and address information. 5. Child #1 is missing the home telephone and work number for each parent who has custody.”
-
Repeat violation
“Based on record review and interview, the vendor did not complete the departments annual health and safety update course. Evidence: The record for the vendor did not contain documentation of the annual 3-hour updated subsidy training course.”
-
Repeat violation
“Based on interview and observation, the home did not have an in-service, non pay telephone. Evidence: The vendor stated that the phone port at their home location did not work.”
-
Repeat violation
“Based on observation and interview, potentially hazardous substances such as cleaning agents and pesticides were stored in an area that was not inaccessible to children. Evidence: In the bathroom, there were 8 shaving razors, shaving cream, prescription topical ointment, and non-prescription ointment located in a sink cabinet accessible to children.”
-
Repeat violation
“Based on observation and interview, medications for caregivers and household members were not kept in a locked place using a safe locking method that prevents access by children. Evidence: In the bathroom, there was prescription medication (topical ointment) located in a sink cabinet not locked and accessible to children.”
-
Based on observation and interview, the first aid kit did not contain all the required items.
“Evidence: The first aid kit is missing a thermometer.”
Nov 29, 2022: subsidy health and safety inspection9 deficiencies
-
Based on interview and record review, the vendor did not maintain a written hard copy record of daily attendance that documents the arrival and departure of each child in care as it occurs.
“Evidence: 1. The vendor did not have a written hard copy record of daily attendance that documented the arrival and departure of each child. 2. The vendor confirmed attendance is not documented.”
-
Based on record review, the children’s records were not complete.
The inspectors’ words, 144 words
“Evidence: 1. Child #1, #2, and #3 were missing proof of identity. 2. Child #1 and Child #2 were missing written authorization for emergency medical care. 3. Child #1, #2, and #3 were missing a written statement that the vendor will notify the parent when the child becomes ill and that the parent will arrange to have the child picked up as soon as possible if so requested by the vendor. 4. There was no documentation of a written care plan for child #3 who has a diagnosed food allergy. 5. Child #2 was missing immunization records before or on the child’s first day of attendance. 6 Child #3 was missing names of persons other than the custodial parent who are authorized to pick up the child. 7. Child #3 was missing name, home address, and telephone number for each parent who has custody.”
-
Based on record review and interview, the vendor did not complete the department’s annual health and safety update course.
“Evidence: 1. The record for the vendor did not contain documentation of the annual 3-hour updated subsidy training course. 2. The vendor stated that they were unsure whether or not they had taken the course.”
-
Based on interview and observation, the home did not have an in-service, nonpay telephone.
“Evidence: The vendor stated that the phone port at their new home location did not work.”
-
Based on observation and interview, potentially hazardous substances such as cleaning agents and pesticides were stored in an area that was not inaccessible to children.
“Evidence: In the bathroom, there were cleaning agents, disinfectants, deodorizers, and mouthwash located in a sink cabinet accessible to children.”
-
Based on observation, The vendor did not wash their hands with soap and running water before serving food.
“Evidence: The vendor did not wash their hands with soap and running water before serving food to Child #3.”
-
Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the diaper changing pad has not been cleaned with soap + water, and then sanitized with bleach + water after each use.
“Evidence: When the vendor was asked how she cleans and sanitizes the diaper changing pad, the vendor displayed a green spray bottle labeled bathroom cleaner.”
-
Based on observation, medications for caregivers and household members were not kept in a locked place using a safe locking method that prevents access by children.
“Evidence: In the kitchen, there were approximately 4 prescription medications located in a drawer next to the fridge and stove accessible to children.”
-
Based on observation and interview, the children’s eating table was not cleaned and sanitized before and after each use.
“Evidence: The children’s table was not cleaned with soap + water, and then sanitized with bleach + water after each use. The vendor used a disinfectant wipe, as a sanitizer, instead of the required sanitizing spray or sanitizer that could be dipped.”
Nov 29, 2021: subsidy health and safety inspection1 deficiency
-
Based on record review, the vendor did not include all the children’s information in the record.
“Evident: Child 1 did not have parent contact information and emergency contact information.”
All 6 visits on record
| Date | Visit | What the record says |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 13, 2026 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | 1 violation cited |
| Oct 27, 2025 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | 2 violations cited |
| Oct 30, 2024 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Nov 6, 2023 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | 7 violations cited |
| Nov 29, 2022 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | 9 violations cited |
| Nov 29, 2021 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | 1 violation cited |
Is it licensed?
- Local Ordinance Approved FDH: Local Ordinance Approved FDH, expires Oct 12, 2027.
- A current subsidy provider.
- Capacity: Not given.
Virginia Department of Education, Search for Child Day Care: each facility’s page. Checked Nov 5, 2026. Updated weekly.
Has Virginia acted against it?
- 0 complaint inspections 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?
- Among 1353 child care providers in Fairfax County, the middle value for violations cited in the last three years was 7; this one had 10.
Virginia Department of Education, Search for Child Day Care: each inspection’s page, with its violations. Checked Nov 5, 2026. Updated weekly.
| Place | Violations cited in the last three years |
|---|---|
| Storey Rakin This child care provider | 10 |
| First Baptist Church of Springfield | 2 |
| St. Christopher’s Episcopal Church | 0 |
| Grace Presbyterian Church | 6 |
| SACC at Garfield | 2 |
| SACC AT Springfield Estates | 13 |
| SACC at Forestdale | 11 |
| SACC at Key Center | 2 |
| Deborah Mays | 45 |
| Sasanavadee Adam | 31 |
| SACC at Crestwood | 2 |
| Marta Alejos | 15 |
| Rosa Garay | 5 |
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.