Rashida Barnes
A family day home in Richmond, Virginia 23223
2809 Seibel Road, Richmond, Virginia 23223. (804) 821-5577.
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
- 27 deficiencies in the last three years
- Jul 132026 the latest visit on record
- 12 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 Jul 13, 2026.
27 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
27 deficiencies in 6 months of the last 36. Last cited Apr 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.
Apr 30, 2026: subsidy health and safety inspection1 deficiency
-
The provider shall obtain documentation of a physical examination prior to a child’s attendance or within 30 days after the first day of attendance.
“Child #3 had documentation of a physical dated more than 4 months after their start date.”
Jul 9, 2025: inspection4 deficiencies
-
The provider shall ensure that a caregiver does not exceed 16 points for appropriate ratio at all times.
“On 7/9/2025, the substitute provider was individually caring for eight children (5 months- 4 years old) at a point total of 22 for approximately one hour and 40 minutes.”
-
The following telephone numbers shall be posted in a visible area close to the telephone: 911 or local dial number for police, fire, and emergency medical responders; responsible person for emergency backup care, and the regional poison control center.
“Provider did not have any emergency numbers posted within the home in case of emergencies.”
-
The provider shall review the emergency plan at least annually and update the plan as needed. The provider shall document in writing each review and update to the emergency plan.
“The provider did not complete an annual review of the emergency preparedness plan. The last signature was dated 04/2024.”
-
Before attendance, documentation of immunizations is to be obtained for each child.
“Documentation of immunizations for Child #4, who was in care during the inspection, was submitted three days after the child began attending.”
Apr 9, 2025: inspection1 deficiency
-
Caregivers shall obtain a minimum of 16 clock hours of training annually.
“Caregiver #2 did not obtained any training hours in 2024.”
Sep 9, 2024: inspection6 deficiencies
-
Based on tour of the home and observation, cleaning chemicals were left in an unlocked area accessible to children.
“Evidence: 1. Dawn soap, Shout, Clorox disinfectant spray, and Febreeze air freshener were found under the kitchen sink. A child lock was placed on the cabinet but had been left unlocked. Inspector observed a child crawl under sink cabinet during inspection.”
-
Based on a tour of the home and observation, the provider failed to ensure that sharp objects were inaccessible to children.
“Evidence: 1. Kitchen knives were observed under the kitchen sink in an unlocked cabinet. 2. Provider acknowledged cabinet was unlocked and accessible.”
-
8VAC20-800-320-B
“Based on observation, the provider failed to ensure that all electrical outlets shall be covered with a protective cover. Evidence: Inspector observed an outlet cover missing in the living room, and a missing outlet cover in the kitchen area.”
-
Based on child record review, the provider failed to ensure all required information was in children records.
“Evidence Child #2, Child #3, Child #4, and Child #5 were missing medical insurance policy numbers in their files.”
-
Based on review and interview, the provider failed to ensure all required items were in the first aid kit.
“Evidence: 1. Thermometer was missing from first aid kit. 2. Provider stated they could not find a thermometer in the home.”
-
During home observation, bottles were in the fridge with no labels or dates.
“Evidence: 1. Inspector found three bottles in the fridge unlabeled and no dates on the bottle. 2. Provider stated they were aware they needed to label bottles and stated they would meet with staff about it.”
Sep 9, 2024: complaint inspection1 deficiency
-
Based on observations and record review, providers failed to maintain appropriate supervision with all children at all times.
“Evidence: During staff interviews, provider stated they did not see the incident occur but did create an incident report stating the child had a mark/bruise on their head that occurred during the time the child was in the provider’s care. Provider was unable to intervene when incident occurred.”
May 28, 2024: inspection6 deficiencies
-
Based on observations, a review of documentation and interviews, the provider did not ensure compliance with these standards and the terms of the current license issued by the department.
“Evidence: 1) The record of Child #4 indicates the child is five-months-old and began attending the family day home on 04/17/24, when the child was four-months-old. Child #4 was observed in care during the inspection on 05/28/24. 2) A review of the terms of the license indicates the family day home may serve children between the ages of 0years, 6 months through 12 years, 11 months. 3) During interview, Caregiver #1 acknowledged Child #4’s age does not meet the terms of the current license.”
-
Based on the water temperature taken and interviews, the hot water taps available to children were not maintained within the range of 105 degrees F and 120 degrees F.
“Evidence: 1) On 05/28/24, the inspector tested the hot water tap in the main bathroom sink used by children. The water registered 126 degrees F. 2) The inspector tested the hot water tap in the kitchen sink that is also used by children. The water registered 127 degrees F. 2) During interview, Caregiver #1 acknowledged the hot water temperature was not maintained within the required range.”
-
Based on observations and interviews, the provider did not ensure cribs when being used by infants shall have a tight-fitting bottom cover.
“Evidence: On 05/28/24, the inspector observed two occupied cribs that did not have a tight-fitting bottom cover. During interview, Caregiver #1 acknowledged she did not have bottom covers for the cribs.”
-
Based on observations and interviews, the provider did not ensure that a caregiver does not exceed 16 points.
“Evidence: On 05/28/24, from 10:10am to approximately 10:35am, the inspector observed 12 children, totaling 35 points, in the care of two caregivers. A third caregiver arrived at the family day home at approximately 10:35am. During interview, Caregiver #1 acknowledged each caregiver exceeded 16 points until the third caregiver arrived.”
-
Based on observations and interviews, the provider did not ensure that when food is brought from home, the food container shall be clearly labeled in a way that identifies the owner.
“Evidence: On 05/28/24, the inspector observed three lunch boxes that belonged to children in care. The lunch boxes were not labeled in a way that identified the owner. During interviews, Caregiver #1 acknowledged the lunch boxes were not labeled.”
-
Based on observations and interviews, the provider did not ensure that bottles shall be refrigerated and labeled with the child’s full name and the date, if more than one infant is in care.
“Evidence: On 05/28/24, the inspector observed infant bottles that were not labeled with children’s full name and the date. During interview, Caregiver #1 acknowledged the bottles were not labeled and confirmed there were four infants in care during the inspection.”
Jan 31, 2024: subsidy health and safety inspection2 deficiencies
-
Based on a review of six children’s records and interview, the vendor did not obtain a written care plan for one 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.
“Evidence: The record of Child #2, enrolled on 06/01/23, indicated the child has a diagnosed food allergy, but the record did not contain a written care plan. During interview, Caregiver #1 reported a written allergy care plan was not on file for Child #2.”
-
Based on a review of two caregivers’ records and interview, the vendor did not ensure one caregiver completed the department’s health and safety update course.
“Evidence: The record of Caregiver #1 did not contain the department’s health and safety update course. During interview, Caregiver #1 confirmed she has not completed the course to date. The department’s health and safety update course should be completed annually. The family day home was approved as a vendor on 01/25/23, therefore, the annual training should have been completed no later than 01/25/24.”
Jan 31, 2024: inspection6 deficiencies
-
Based on a review of two caregivers? records and interviews, the provider did not ensure that in addition to satisfactory completion of first aid training and CPR training, one caregiver obtained a minimum of sixteen clock hours of training annually in areas relevant to their job responsibilities.
“Evidence: The record of Caregiver #1 did not contain documentation that Caregiver #1 obtained a minimum of sixteen clock hours of annual training between 1/24/23-1/23/24. During interview, Caregiver #1 acknowledged she did not obtain the required hours of annual training.”
-
Based on observations, the provider did not ensure when a cot was being used for sleeping or napping by children, it consisted of a top cover and a bottom cover or a one-piece covering that is open on three edges.
“Evidence: During the inspection, a child was observed sleeping on a cot. The cot did not have linens consisting of a top cover and a bottom cover or a one-piece covering that is open on three edges. During interview, Caregiver #1 acknowledged the cot did not have a cover when the child fell asleep.”
-
Based on a review of six children’s records and interviews, the provider did not ensure one child’s record contained the required information.
The inspectors’ words, 105 words
“Evidence: The record of Child #5, enrolled on 11/20/23, was missing the address of the two designated persons to contact in case of an emergency if the parent cannot be reached; the parent’s signed acknowledgement of the receipt of the information required by 8VAC20-800-70; proof of the child’s age and identity; and written authorization for emergency medical care should an emergency occur and the parent cannot be located immediately unless the parent presents a written objection to provision of medical treatment on religious or other grounds. During interview, Caregiver #1 acknowledged the information was missing from the child’s record at the time of the inspection.”
-
Based on a review of documentation and interviews, the provider did not ensure shelter-in-place procedures were practiced a minimum of twice per year.
“Evidence: The emergency response drills for 2023 were reviewed. The most recent shelter-in-place drill was documented on 01/17/23. During interview, Caregiver #1 stated the shelter-in-place procedures were not practiced a second time in 2023.”
-
Based on a review of documentation and interviews, the provider did not maintain the required documentation of emergency evacuation drills.
“Evidence: The emergency evacuation drills documented from November 2023 through January 2024 did not include documentation of the method used for notification of the drill; the number of children participating; any special conditions simulated; or weather conditions. During interview, Caregiver #1 acknowledged the required documentation was not maintained.”
-
Based on a review of six children’s records and interviews, the provider did not obtain documentation that two children had been adequately immunized according to the requirements of ? 32.1-46 A of the Code of Virginia and applicable State Board of Health regulations before the children attended the family day home.
“Evidence: 1) The immunizations in the record of Child #2, date of attendance 06/01/23, were dated 06/05/23. 2) The immunizations in the record of Child #5, date of attendance 11/20/23, were dated 11/21/23. 3) During interview, Caregiver #1 acknowledged the immunizations were obtained after the children attended the family day home. There was no other documentation to show the immunizations were obtained prior to the children’s attendance.”
Jun 27, 2023: subsidy health and safety inspection2 deficiencies
-
Based on a review of three caregivers’ records and interview, the vendor did not ensure one caregiver had current certification in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) appropriate to the ages of children in care.
“Evidence: 1) The CPR certification in the record of Caregiver #1 expired on 05/01/23. 2) During interview, Caregiver #1 acknowledged the CPR certification was expired.”
-
Based on a review of three caregivers’ records and interview, the vendor did not ensure one caregiver had current certification in first aid appropriate to the ages of children in care.
“Evidence: 1) The first aid certification in the record of Caregiver #1 expired on 05/01/23. 2) During interview, Caregiver #1 acknowledged the first aid certification was expired.”
Jun 27, 2023: inspection5 deficiencies
-
Based on a review of three caregivers’ records and interview, the provider did not ensure one staff had a central registry finding within 30 days of employment.
“Evidence: 1) The record of Caregiver #3, employed on 03/02/23, did not contain a central registry finding. 2) During interview, Caregiver #1 confirmed the central registry finding for Caregiver #3 could not be located.”
-
Based on a review of four children’s records and interview, the provider did not ensure the physical examination for one child was conducted within the required timeframe.
“Evidence: 1) The physical examination in the record of Child #1 (23-months-old) was conducted on 03/21/22. The child’s first day of attendance was 04/17/23. The physical examination prior to attendance shall have been conducted within six months prior to attendance for children age 19 months through 24 months. 2) During interview, Caregiver #1 acknowledged there was no other physical examination on file for Child #1.”
-
Based on a review of three caregivers’ records and interview, the provider did not ensure to have current certification in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) appropriate to the ages of children in care.
“Evidence: 1) The CPR certification in the record of Caregiver #1 expired on 05/01/23. 2) During interview, Caregiver #1 acknowledged the CPR certification was expired.”
-
Based on a review of three caregivers’ records and interview, the provider did not ensure to have current certification in first aid appropriate to the ages of children in care.
“Evidence: 1) The first aid certification in the record of Caregiver #1 expired on 05/01/23. 2) During interview, Caregiver #1 acknowledged the first aid certification was expired.”
-
Based on the water temperature taken and interview, the hot water taps available to children were not maintained within the range of 105 degrees F and 120 degrees F.
“Evidence: 1) On 06/27/23, the inspector tested the hot water tap in the main bathroom sink used by children. The water registered 123.9 degrees F. 2) The inspector tested the hot water tap in the kitchen sink that is also used by children. The water registered 128.3 degrees F. 2) During interview, Caregiver #1 acknowledged the hot water temperature was not maintained within the required range.”
Mar 21, 2023: inspection7 deficiencies
-
Based on a review of caregivers’ records and interview, the provider did not ensure each caregiver record contained the required information.
The inspectors’ words, 123 words
“Evidence: 1) The record for Caregiver #2, employed 03/06/23, did not contain the following - verification of age, job title, name address and telephone number of a person to be notified in an emergency; documentation that two or more references as to character and reputation as well as competency were checked before employment. 2) The record for Caregiver #3, employed 03/02/23, did not contain the following - verification of age, job title, name address and telephone number of a person to be notified in an emergency; documentation that two or more references as to character and reputation as well as competency were checked before employment. 3) During interview, Caregiver #1 acknowledged the required information was not obtained for Caregiver #2 and Caregiver #3.”
-
Based on a review of caregivers’ records, the provider did not obtain from two caregivers at the time of employment and prior to coming into contact with children, a current report of tuberculosis (TB) screening form published by the Virginia Department of Health or a form consistent with it documenting the absence of tuberculosis in a communicable form.
“Evidence: 1) The TB screening in the record of Caregiver #2, employed 03/06/23, was dated 03/09/23. 2) The TB screening in the record of Caregiver #3, employed 03/02/23, was dated 03/16/23.”
-
Based on a review of documentation and interview, the provider did not maintain documentation that two caregivers completed orientation training.
“Evidence: 1) The record of Caregiver #2, employed 03/06/23, and Caregiver #3, employed 03/02/23, did not contain documentation that the provider conducted orientation by the end of the caregivers’ first week of assuming job responsibilities. 2) During interview, Caregiver #1 reported orientation was provided on 03/06/23, but signed documentation was not kept as required. The documentation of the orientation should be signed and dated by the provider and assistant.”
-
Based on observation on 03/21/23, the provider did not ensure that the total number of children receiving care at any one time did not exceed the maximum licensed capacity of the home.
“Evidence: 1) On the date of the inspection, the inspector observed eight children in care, one of which was the provider’s own child. 2) The family day home’s maximum licensed capacity is five children. Excluding the provider’s child, the family day home exceeded the licensed capacity of the home by two children.”
-
Based on observation, the provider did not ensure that a caregiver does not exceed 16 points.
“Evidence: 1) When the inspector arrived at 8:20am on 03/21/23, there were seven children in care, totaling 22 points, with one caregiver. 2) During interview, Caregiver #1 reported an assistant was scheduled to arrive at 8:30am, but was running late that morning. 3) A second caregiver arrived at the family day home at 8:50am. It is estimated Caregiver #1 was over 6 points for approximately 30 minutes.”
-
Based on a review of five children’s records, the provider did not ensure four children’s records contained the required information.
The inspectors’ words, 166 words
“Evidence: 1) The record for Child #1 did not contain written authorization of emergency medical care should an emergency occur and the parent cannot be located immediately unless the parent presents a written objection to provision of medical treatment on religious or other grounds; the first emergency contact in the record for was missing the emergency contact’s address; the record did not contain the name, address, and telephone number of a second emergency contact. 2) The record for Child #2 did not contain the name, address, and telephone number of a second emergency contact. 3) The first emergency contact in the record for Child #3 was missing the emergency contact’s address. 4) The second emergency contact in the record for Child #4 was missing the emergency contact’s telephone number. The first emergency contact listed was the child’s parent. A child’s record should contain the name, address and telephone number of two designated persons to contact in case of an emergency if the parent cannot be reached.”
-
Based on a review of emergency supplies and interview, the provider did not ensure the first aid kit contained the required supplies.
“Evidence: 1) The family day home’s first aid kit did not contain at a minimum two triangular bandages. 2) During interview, Caregiver #1 reported there were no triangular bandages in the first aid kit or anywhere in the home.”
All 19 visits on record
| Date | Visit | What the record says |
|---|---|---|
| Jul 13, 2026 | Inspection | No violations cited |
| Apr 30, 2026 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | 1 violation cited |
| Jul 9, 2025 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Jul 9, 2025 | Inspection | 4 violations cited |
| Apr 9, 2025 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Apr 9, 2025 | Inspection | 1 violation cited |
| Sep 9, 2024 | Complaint inspection | 1 violation cited |
| Sep 9, 2024 | Inspection | 6 violations cited |
| Sep 9, 2024 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| May 28, 2024 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| May 28, 2024 | Inspection | 6 violations cited |
| May 14, 2024 | Complaint inspection | No violations cited |
| May 2, 2024 | Complaint inspection | No violations cited |
| Jan 31, 2024 | Inspection | 6 violations cited |
| Jan 31, 2024 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | 2 violations cited |
| Jun 27, 2023 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | 2 violations cited |
| Jun 27, 2023 | Inspection | 5 violations cited |
| Mar 21, 2023 | Inspection | 7 violations cited |
| Dec 28, 2022 | Inspection | No violations cited |
Is it licensed?
- Family Day Home: Two Year license, expires Jul 22, 2028.
- A current subsidy provider.
- Ages: Birth - 12 years 11 months.
Virginia Department of Education, Search for Child Day Care: each facility’s page. Checked Nov 5, 2026. Updated weekly.
Has Virginia acted against it?
- 3 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 232 child care providers in Henrico County, the middle value for violations cited in the last three years was 10; this one had 27.
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 |
|---|---|
| Rashida Barnes This child care provider | 27 |
| Landmark Baptist Church | 4 |
| Ollie Harvey | 25 |
| Ms. Theodora Jones | 0 |
| New Bridge Baptist Church | 11 |
| Kids -N- Us Inc. | 11 |
| Ms. Sandra Nicholas | 27 |
| Love and Learn Child Care, LLC | 34 |
| Young Men’s Christian Association of Greater Richmond - Adams | 14 |
| Ms. Latrice Tyler | 2 |
| Worship and Praise United Methodist Church | 48 |
| Ms. Kanikka Blakely | 7 |
| Love and Learn Child Care, LLC | 21 |
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.