The Nest Academy of Cameron
A child day center in Alexandria, Virginia 22314
1321 Cameron St, Alexandria, Virginia 22314. (703) 518-5150.
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
- 2 deficiencies in the last three years
- Aug 122026 the latest visit on record
- 144 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?
22 inspections on record, the latest on Aug 12, 2026.
2 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
2 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited Sep 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.
Sep 10, 2025: inspection1 deficiency
-
8VAC20-780-60-A-8
“A written care plan is required for each child with a diagnosed food allergy, to include instructions from a physician regarding the food to which the child is allergic and the steps to be taken in the event of a suspected or confirmed allergic reaction. Child #5, who has been enrolled for five weeks, has a diagnosed food allergy and did not have a written care plan in their file.”
Dec 7, 2023: inspection1 deficiency
-
Based on observation, hazardous substances such as cleaning materials, insecticides, and pesticides were not kept in a locked place using a safe locking method that prevents access by children.
“Evidence: 1. In the combined caterpillars and butterflies classroom, two bleach spray bottles labeled strong and mild, as well as Windex, were kept in an unlocked cabinet. 2. In the combined caterpillars and butterflies classroom, a bottle of cleaning solution was kept in an unlocked cabinet under the bathroom sink.”
Jun 23, 2023: inspection2 deficiencies
-
8VAC20-780-160-B
“Based on records reviewed, the licensee failed to ensure that 1 of 2 staff records included an acceptable form of documentation of a TB screening. Evidence: Staff #3-The TB test submitted does not include a patient name on the document.”
-
Based on records reviewed, the licensee has failed to ensure that individuals working as a program director meet the minimum qualifications.
“Evidence: 1. Staff #2 has been working in the program director role intermittently for a period of years and the documentation submitted does not qualify them for the position of program director. 0 of 4 qualification options were met. 2. Staff #3 has been working in the program director role since 3/31/23-to-date, and the documentation submitted does not qualify them for the position of program director. 0 of 4 qualification options were met.”
Mar 30, 2023: inspection13 deficiencies
-
Based on records reviewed, it was determined that an out-of-state background search did not include required information.
“Evidence: 1. The sex offender search for Staff #2 did not include the staff person’s name and date of search.”
-
Based on records reviewed, it was determined that 1 of 4 staff records did not include a completed central registry search (CRS) within 90-days of employment.
“Evidence: 1. Staff #4 was hired 7/21/22. The CRS was dated as completed 2/23/22.”
-
Based on records reviewed, it was determined that 1 of 4 staff records did not include true information on the sworn disclosure statement.
“Evidence: 1. Staff #4 ? The sworn disclosure statement dated 1/6/23 stated ?no? to having lived out of the State of Virginia in the previous 5 years. 2. The job application submitted by Staff #4 indicated otherwise.”
-
Based on records reviewed, it was determined that 1 of 4 staff records did not include true information on the sworn disclosure statement.
“Evidence: 1. Staff #4 ? The sworn disclosure statement dated 1/6/23 stated ?no? to having lived out of the State of Virginia in the previous 5 years. 2. The job application submitted by Staff #4 indicated otherwise.”
-
Based on records reviewed, it was determined that 2 of 4 staff records did not include a TB screening at the time of employment and prior to coming into contact with children that was completed within 30-calendar days prior to the date of employment.
“Evidence: 1. Staff #4 ? Date of employment 7/21/22. Date of TB screening 2/4/22. 2. Staff #5 ? Date of employment 9/20/22. Date of TB screening 8/2/21.”
-
Based on records reviewed and interviews conducted, it was determined that Staff #5 who has been working as the program director does not meet any of the 4 program director qualification options.
The inspectors’ words, 298 words
“Evidence: 1. During the inspection, there were multiple phone conversations between the inspector and owners who were unsure which option they used to qualify Staff #5 and asked the inspector which option would qualify Staff #5. The inspector advised the owners that the qualification determination should already have been made and advise the inspector which option they were using. The owners advised the inspector that Staff #5 was qualified using option #4. 2. Considering option #4, there was no documentation of a minimum of 2 years programmatic experience with 1 year in a staff supervisory capacity and at least one of the following education backgrounds-(1) 1-year early childhood certificate from a college/university that consists of at least 30 semester hours; (2) a child development credential that requires a high school diploma, 480 hours working with children in a group including a supervised practicum, including determination of competency in specific child-related areas, and at least 120 hours of child-related training taught by an organization with expertise in early childhood teacher preparation which includes documentation of the trainer’s qualifications; (3) or a Montessori certification. 3. On 4/4/23, the inspector received an email from the owners stating that Staff #5 was qualified using option #1. 4. Considering option #1, the graduate degree is not in a child-related field, and the transcripts did not reflect child-related or teaching coursework. The inspector reviewed course descriptions from the issuing education institution and were determined to be not child or teaching related. 5. The inspector proceeded to consider option #2. The bachelor’s degree is not in a child-related field, and the transcripts did not reflect child-related or teaching coursework. 6. The inspector proceeded to consider option #3. The college transcripts did not include a minimum of 12 semester hours of courses in a child-related field.”
-
Based on records reviewed, it was determined that there was no documentation of additional education and training for a program director without management experience.
“Evidence: 1. There was no documentation of previous management experience for Staff #5. 2. There was no documentation that Staff #5 had completed at least one college course in a business-related field, nor was there documentation that the program director had received 10-hours of management training, or that Staff #5 had completed one child care management course that covers planning, budgeting, staffing, and monitoring.”
-
Based on records reviewed, it was determined that there was no documentation of additional education and training for a program director without management experience.
“Evidence: 1. There was no documentation of previous management experience for Staff #5. 2. There was no documentation that Staff #5 had completed at least one college course in a business-related field, nor was there documentation that the program director had received 10-hours of management training, or that Staff #5 had completed one child care management course that covers planning, budgeting, staffing, and monitoring.”
-
Based on records reviewed, it was determined that there was no documentation that 1 of 2 staff working as a program leader (lead teacher) had received required training within 6 months prior to being promoted or beginning work, or one month after being promoted or beginning work.
“Evidence: 1. 1. Staff #6 began working as a lead teacher on 11/28/22. 2. There was no documentation that Staff #6 had received 24 hours of training related to the care of children. 3. On 4/4/23, the inspector received an email from the owners that included documentation that Staff #6 received 16 hours of training related to the care of children.”
-
Based on observations made it was determined that there was not at least 12? of space between occupied cots.
“Evidence: 1. In 1 of 2 classrooms where children were napping on cots, there were 3 occupied cots pushed together. 2. There was no space for staff to walk between the cots.”
-
Based on records reviewed and interviews conducted, it was determined that 3 of 4 staff records did not include required documentation.
The inspectors’ words, 196 words
“Evidence: 1. Staff #4 ? (1) The record did not include the accurate date of hire. The date recorded was 1/22/22. The date verbally provided to the inspector was 7/21/22. (2) The record did not include the current job title. The job title was recorded as Lead Teacher. On 4/4/23, the inspector received an email from the owners stating the job title is Assistant Director. (3) The education diploma on-file was not verifiable, as it was not written in English and a translated copy was not on-file or made available to the inspector. 2. Staff #5 ? (1) The record did not include the current job title. The job title was recorded as Lead Teacher. The job title verbally provided to the inspector was Acting Director. On 4/4/23, the inspector received an email from the owners stating the job title is Program Director. (2) The education diplomas were not in a child-related field and the subsequent transcripts on-file did not include required coursework. 3. Staff #6 ? The record did not include the current job title. The job title was recorded as Assistant Teacher (Aide). The job title verbally provided to the inspector was Lead Teacher.”
-
Based on records reviewed and interviews conducted, it was determined that 3 of 4 staff records did not include required documentation.
The inspectors’ words, 196 words
“Evidence: 1. Staff #4 ? (1) The record did not include the accurate date of hire. The date recorded was 1/22/22. The date verbally provided to the inspector was 7/21/22. (2) The record did not include the current job title. The job title was recorded as Lead Teacher. On 4/4/23, the inspector received an email from the owners stating the job title is Assistant Director. (3) The education diploma on-file was not verifiable, as it was not written in English and a translated copy was not on-file or made available to the inspector. 2. Staff #5 ? (1) The record did not include the current job title. The job title was recorded as Lead Teacher. The job title verbally provided to the inspector was Acting Director. On 4/4/23, the inspector received an email from the owners stating the job title is Program Director. (2) The education diplomas were not in a child-related field and the subsequent transcripts on-file did not include required coursework. 3. Staff #6 ? The record did not include the current job title. The job title was recorded as Assistant Teacher (Aide). The job title verbally provided to the inspector was Lead Teacher.”
-
Based on observations made and interview conducted it was determined that the findings of the most recent inspection report were not posted in the facility.
“Evidence: 1. The violation notice from the 9/8/22 inspection was not posted on the premises. 2. The program director did not know where the violation notice might be.”
Sep 8, 2022: subsidy health and safety inspection1 deficiency
-
8VAC20-790-600-F
“Based on records reviewed, it was determined that 1 of 3 staff records reviewed did not include documentation of the Virginia Health + Safety Training dated as completed within the previous 12 months. Evidence: The training certificate for Staff #1 was dated as completed in 2019.”
Sep 8, 2022: inspection3 deficiencies
-
Based on records reviewed, it was determined that a prescription medication was given to a child by staff that are not currently trained in medication administration.
The inspectors’ words, 93 words
“Evidence: 1. Staff #1 reported that she had given medication to Child #1, and according to the medication administration record this was done on 9/7/22. 2. Staff #1?s medication administration training expired 4/14/22. 3. According to the medication administration record Staff #4 gave Child #1 medicine on 9/8/22 + 9/9/22. 4. When the inspector requested Staff #4?s medication training certificate it was stated that her record was not on-site, but it could be sent. The inspector was not able to verify Staff #4?s training, as the certificate was never provided to the inspector.”
-
Based on observations made, it was determined that occupied cribs in the infant room did not have a minimum of 30? clearance on the service side.
The inspectors’ words, 115 words
“Evidence: 1. Upon the initial observation of the infant room a child was observed in a crib that had less than 30? clearance on the service side. Consultation with staff and owner were held at this time and all acknowledged an understanding of the requirement. 2. During a follow-up observation of the infant room (about an hour later) 2 children were observed napping in 2 separate cribs that had less than 30? clearance on the service sides. Staff present did not demonstrate an understanding of the requirement and moved the cribs closer together in response to the inspectors query. The inspector provided further consultation to the staff and moved the cribs to the appropriate spacing.”
-
8VAC20-780-550-P
“Based on records reviewed, it was determined that 1 of 6 written injury reports did not document required information. Evidence: An injury report written for Child #3 did not include the time the parent was notified of the injury. The space was left blank.”
Mar 10, 2022: inspection4 deficiencies
-
Based on record review, the provider did not obtain criminal history record results from a state in which the applicant has resided in the preceding five years before a final determination was made of the individual’s eligibility to have responsibility for the safety and well-being of children.
“Evidence: Staff #1 was hired on 9/10/2021. Results of criminal history results from a state where the employee has resided within the previous five years were not obtained prior to employment. Staff#1 was present during the inspection.”
-
Based on record review, a staff’s tuberculosis (TB) test/screening results were not completed within the last 30 calendar days of the date of employment.
“Evidence: Staff #2’s (DOH: 2/28/2022) record contains a TB test/screening that was completed on 6/3/2021.”
-
Based on observation, staff-to-children ratios were not maintained in the Infant 1’s classroom.
“Evidence: The Infant 1’s classroom had 5 children with one staff member during the inspection. Upon checking ages of children in the classroom, it was determined that the youngest child is 3 months and the oldest child is 9 months, which requires the group to follow a ratio of 4 children to 1 staff member. An additional staff member was assigned to the classroom shortly after the inspector entered the classroom.”
-
Based on observation, the protective belt was not securely fastened while an infant was sitting in an infant seat.
“Evidence: An infant was observed sitting in a Bumbo seat while eating a cracker, the Bumbo seat had a protective belt, but the child was not buckled into their seat by the caregiver.”
Feb 4, 2022: inspection3 deficiencies
-
Based on record review, the center did not obtain out of state criminal history results and out of state child abuse and neglect registry results for a staff member that has resided outside the state of Virginia in the preceding five years.
“Evidence: Staff #2’s (DOH: 10/01/2021) record did not include criminal history results and abuse and neglect results from a state the employee had resided in within the past five years.”
-
Based on documentation review and interview, the center did not develop and implement a written policy and procedure that describes how the center will ensure that each group of children receives care by consistent staff or team of staff members.
“Evidence: There was no documentation at the center to verify that they have a written policy and procedures that describe how the center will ensure that each group of children receives care by consistent staff or team of staff members.”
-
Based on review of documentation and interview, the center did not develop written procedures for prevention of shaken baby syndrome or abusive head trauma, including coping with crying babies, safe sleeping practices, and sudden infant death syndrome awareness.
“Evidence: There was no documentation at center to verify that the center has a written procedures for prevention of shaken baby syndrome or abusive head trauma, including coping with crying babies, safe sleeping practices, and sudden infant death syndrome awareness.”
All 22 visits on record
| Date | Visit | What the record says |
|---|---|---|
| Aug 12, 2026 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Feb 25, 2026 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Sep 10, 2025 | Inspection | 1 violation cited |
| Sep 10, 2025 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Apr 28, 2025 | Complaint inspection | No violations cited |
| Jan 8, 2025 | Complaint inspection | No violations cited |
| Jan 8, 2025 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Jan 8, 2025 | Inspection | No violations cited |
| Aug 27, 2024 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Aug 27, 2024 | Inspection | No violations cited |
| Feb 15, 2024 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Feb 15, 2024 | Inspection | No violations cited |
| Dec 7, 2023 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Dec 7, 2023 | Inspection | 1 violation cited |
| Jun 23, 2023 | Inspection | 2 violations cited |
| Mar 30, 2023 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Mar 30, 2023 | Inspection | 13 violations cited |
| Sep 8, 2022 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | 1 violation cited |
| Sep 8, 2022 | Inspection | 3 violations cited |
| Mar 10, 2022 | Inspection | 4 violations cited |
| Feb 4, 2022 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Feb 4, 2022 | Inspection | 3 violations cited |
Is it licensed?
- Child Day Center: Two Year license, expires Mar 14, 2028.
- A current subsidy provider.
- Ages: Birth - 12 years 11 months.
- Capacity: 144 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?
- 2 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 171 child care providers in the City of Alexandria, the middle value for violations cited in the last three years was 7; this one had 2.
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 |
|---|---|
| The Nest Academy of Cameron This child care provider | 2 |
| Hopkins House - Helen Day Preschool Academy | 61 |
| Children’s Int’l School -Alexandria | 11 |
| Washington Street United Methodist Church | 0 |
| The Campagna Center - Lyles Crouch | 4 |
| Potomac Crescent Waldorf School | 11 |
| Innovation Station Child Development Center | 47 |
| American Day School #1 | 14 |
| Tiny Tots Playroom | 2 |
| American Day School 2 | 9 |
| Great Beginnings Early Learning Center | 30 |
| Blue Bird of Alexandria | 1 |
| The Del Ray Montessori School | 3 |
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.