Country Day Care
A child day center in Richmond, Virginia 23230
2312 Dickens Road, Richmond, Virginia 23230. (804) 282-8502.
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
- 18 deficiencies in the last three years
- Apr 202026 the latest visit on record
- 125 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?
23 inspections on record, the latest on Apr 20, 2026.
18 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
18 deficiencies in 5 months of the last 36. Last cited Mar 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.
Mar 23, 2026: subsidy health and safety inspection5 deficiencies
-
Annual approval from the health department shall be provided, or approvals of a plan of correction, for meeting requirements for: 1. Water supply; 2. Sewage disposal system; and 3. Food service, if applicable.
“The center’s annual report of environmental sanitation inspection was five months overdue.”
-
Repeat violation
“Over-the-counter skin products shall not be kept or used beyond the expiration date of the product. Child #5 had a diaper ointment that had expired over one month ago.”
-
The center shall notify the parent by the end of the day of any known minor injuries.
“Child #6 and Child #7 had written injury reports which indicated that the parents were notified in person one day after the date the minor injuries occurred.”
-
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, enrolled for over 16 months, has diagnosed food allergies and did not have a written care plan in their file.”
-
Staff who work directly with children shall annually complete the department’s health and safety update course.
“The updated training for Staff #2 was over one month late, and had not been completed.”
Aug 15, 2025: inspection4 deficiencies
-
Documentation of a negative tuberculosis (TB) screening must be submitted at the time of employment, before coming into contact with children, and shall have been completed within the last 30 days of the date of employment.
“Staff #1, employed for four months, had a TB screening that was dated over 6 months prior to the date of employment.”
-
The center is required to keep a current list of all known allergies, sensitivities, and dietary restrictions in each room or area where children are present. The list must be dated and kept confidential.
“An undated list in the toddler room was posted by the refrigerator in plain sight.”
-
Medication shall be kept in a locked place using a safe locking method that prevents access by children.
“In the infant classroom, a prescription diaper cream was kept in an unlocked bin on a shelf that was inaccessible to the children in care.”
-
Nonprescription drugs and over-the-counter skin products shall not be kept or used beyond the expiration date of the product.
“In the infant room, child #1 had a diaper cream that had expired in 2023. In the toddler room, child #2 had a diaper cream that had expired in 2017.”
Jan 22, 2025: inspection3 deficiencies
-
Repeat violation
“Physical examinations completed by a physician shall be obtained prior to the first day of attendance or within 30 days after the first day of attendance. There was no physical examination in the record of child #2 and child #4, who had both been enrolled for over 5 months.”
-
If diaper ointment or cream is used, written parent authorization noting any known adverse reactions shall be obtained.
“Child #5 did not have written parent authorization for their diaper ointment.”
-
The center shall maintain a written record of children’s serious and minor injuries in which entries are made the day of occurrence. The record shall include the following: 1. Date and time of injury; 2. Name of injured child; 3. Type and circumstance of the injury; 4. Staff present and treatment; 5. Date and time when parents were notified; 6. Any future action to prevent recurrence of the injury; 7. Staff and parent signatures or two staff signatures; and 8. Documentation on how parent was notified.
“An injury report for child #9 was missing one required signature, the date the parent was notified, and how the parent was notified.”
Aug 13, 2024: inspection4 deficiencies
-
Based on a review of five child records and interview, the center did not ensure that one child had a physical examination by or under the direction of a physician: 1. Before the child’s attendance; or 2. Within 30 days after the first day of attendance.
“Evidence: 1. The record of child #2 (date of enrollment: 5/28/2024) did not contain a physical. 2. Administration acknowledged that a physical record was not obtained.”
-
Based on observation and interview, the center did not ensure that areas and equipment of the center, inside and outside, were maintained in a clean, safe and operable condition.
“Evidence: 1. Six swings were observed on the preschool playground that had rust on the chain supports that the children hold. 2. Administration acknowledged that the rusted swings required maintenance.”
-
Based on interview, the center did not ensure that diapering surfaces were cleaned and sanitized after each use.
The inspectors’ words, 107 words
“Evidence: 1. In interview, staff #1 (twos room) stated that at times she used a sanitizing wipe to both clean and sanitize the diapering surface after changing a child. “Sanitized” means treated in such a way to remove bacteria and viruses from inanimate surfaces through using a disinfectant solution (i.e., bleach solution or commercial chemical disinfectant) or physical agent (e.g., heat). The surface of the item is sprayed or dipped into the disinfectant solution and allowed to air dry on the surface for a minimum of two minutes or according to the disinfectant solution instructions. 2. Administration acknowledged that the staff had not sanitized the surface properly.”
-
Based on interview, the center did not ensure that tables were sanitized before and after each use for feeding as required.
“Evidence: 1. In interview, staff #3 (three and four year old room) stated that she had been recently using sanitizing wipes to clean the tables and the sanitizing spray bottle had not been filled. Staff #5 (school age room) stated that she had been wiping the tables but had not been utilizing the sanitizing spray. 2. Administration acknowledged that the tables had not been sanitized properly.”
Apr 8, 2024: inspection2 deficiencies
-
Based on observation and interview, the center did not ensure that areas and equipment of the center, inside and outside, were maintained in a clean, safe and operable condition.
“Evidence: 1. Chipped and peeling paint was observed on a half door in the infant room. 2. Administration acknowledged that the area required maintenance.”
-
Based on observation and interview the center did not ensure that hazardous substances such as cleaning materials, insecticides, and pesticides were kept in a locked place using a safe locking method that prevents access by children.
“Evidence: 1. In the two year old classroom, 2 cans of Lysol disinfectant, one spray bottle of Odoban, and one container of Lysol wipes were observed unlocked on top of the refrigerator. 2. Administration acknowledged that the cleaners/sanitizers were not locked.”
Oct 26, 2023: inspection3 deficiencies
-
Based on a review of five staff records and interview, the center not ensure that two staff had a repeat fingerprint background check every five years as required.
“Evidence: 1. The record of staff #1 (date of employment: 2/24/2014) contained a fingerprint background check dated 7/19/2018. The record of staff #4 (date of employment: 7/27/2018) contained a fingerprint background check dated 7/26/2018. 2. Administration acknowledged that the repeat background checks were missing from the records.”
-
REPEAT VIOLATION Based on a review of five child records and interview, the center did not ensure that one child had a physical examination by or under the direction of a physician: 1. Before the child’s attendance; or 2. Within 30 days after the first day of attendance.
“Evidence: 1. The record of child #2 (date of attendance: 1/22/2023) contained a physical dated 8/25/2023. 2. Administration acknowledged that the physical record was not received within the required time frame.”
-
REPEAT VIOLATION Based on a review of five child records and interview, the center did not ensure that a record was kept for one child that contained the required information.
“Evidence: 1. The record of child #1 (date of attendance: 5/11/2023) did not contain documentation of viewing proof of the child’s identity and age. 2. Administration acknowledged that the documentation was missing from the record.”
Sep 7, 2023: inspection6 deficiencies
-
Based on a review of documentation and interview, the center did not ensure that when staff are supervising children; they always ensured their care and protection.
The inspectors’ words, 394 words
“Evidence: 1. On 9/1/2023, the department received a self-report that child #1 (age four) had left the premises of the center and was located near the road in the front of the building. In interview, teacher #1 stated that she was supervising approximately 18 children ranging in age from two years to five years with teacher #2. Teacher #1 stated that she took her group of children inside at approximately 4:20 pm. Once inside, she observed that child #1 was missing but that pickup time was chaotic, and it took her awhile to notify administration. At approximately 4:45 pm, staff #3 saw child #1 across the street from the center with witness #1, an adult female. Staff #3 stated that she attempted to call the director. Around the same time, witness #2, an unidentified adult male, arrived at the center to ask if child #1 belonged in their care. Staff #4 left the center to retrieve the child. At this time, local law enforcement had arrived based on a report from witness #1 who said that child #1 had been located on Dickens Road. In an interview, witness #1 stated that she stopped her car when she saw a car stopped in the middle of the road. The driver of the car was holding the wrist of a child through the window and calling for help. Witness #1 got out of her car and picked up the child. She said that the driver informed her that she almost hit the child with her car and was holding him so no one else struck him with their vehicle. She said they were approximately a half a block away from the center. The speed limit on the road is 35 MPH and traffic runs in both directions. Staff stated that when child #1 returned he was red in the face and thirsty. Child #1 is non-verbal and could not communicate the events that took place. 2. In interview, staff stated that they believed that child #1 had climbed over the center’s chain linked fence because he had attempted to climb over the fence multiple times. Staff stated that each time, a staff member had to guide him off fence. Staff #1 stated that she had seen child #1 get completely over the fence before being stopped. Staff stated that management was made aware of the situation.”
-
Based on a review of documentation and interview, the center did not ensure that children under 10 years of age were always within actual sight and sound supervision of staff.
“Evidence: 1. On 9/1/2023, child #1, age 4, was determined to be out of the sight and sound of staff for approximately 25 minutes. During that time, child #1 left the premises of the center and was located on a busy street by several witnesses. Local law enforcement was called to assess the situation and approve the transfer of care from witness #1 to the center. 2. Administration acknowledged that child #1 was not within actual sight and sound supervision of staff.”
-
Based on interviews, the center did not ensure that when children are in ongoing mixed age groups, the staff-to-children ratio and group size applicable to the youngest child in the group applied to the entire group.
“Evidence: 1. In interviews, two staff stated that the two-year old class often combined with preschool aged children on the playground in the afternoon. Staff acknowledged that when combined on numerous occasions, including the afternoon of the incident 9/1/2023, they exceeded the required two-year old ratio of one staff to eight children (1:8). Staff stated that there were occasions where they had two staff and over 20 children, ranging in age from two years to five years.”
-
Based on review of documentation and interview, the center did not ensure that their activities and services were maintained in compliance with the center’s own policies and procedures that are required by these standards.
The inspectors’ words, 121 words
“Evidence: 1. The center’s playground safety procedure states that ?All staff members are to distribute themselves in an appropriate manner, evenly throughout the playground, so that all children may be seen at all times. If there is more than one classroom outside, remember that you are responsible for the direct supervision of all children and not simply for the class you lead.? Staff #1 acknowledged that she lost sight of child #1 sometime in between lining up and coming inside. Staff #2 stated that she did not see child #1 after staff #1?s class departed to go inside the building. 2. Administration acknowledged that the staff did not follow the safety procedures for active supervision that are required by the standards.”
-
REPEAT VIOLATION Based on records review and interview, the center did not ensure that one child’s record contained the required information.
“Evidence: 1. The record of child #1 (date of enrollment: 3/6/2023) did not contain a second complete emergency contact. Children’s records are required to contain the name, address, and phone number of two designated people to call in an emergency if a parent cannot be reached. 2. Administration acknowledged the emergency contact information was incomplete.”
-
Based on a review of records and interview, the center did not ensure to maintain a written record of daily attendance that documents the arrival and departure of each child in care as it occurred.
“Evidence: 1. Upon review of attendance records from 9/1/2023, staff stated that several children were signed out over an hour after departure. 2. Administration acknowledged that there were times when children were not signed out immediately as they departed for the day.”
May 3, 2023: inspection4 deficiencies
-
Based on a review of five (5) staff records and interview, the center did not ensure to obtain the required out of state background checks for one (1) staff.
The inspectors’ words, 103 words
“Evidence: 1. The record of staff #1 (date of employment: 12/1/2022) contained a sworn statement that indicated that the staff resided outside of the state within the preceding five (5) years. The record did not contain the results of the out of state criminal history name check that is required for non-NFF states prior to the first date of employment. The record did not contain the results of an out of state child abuse and neglect search request by the end of the 30th day of employment as required. 2. Administration acknowledged that the out of state background checks had not been completed.”
-
Based on a review of five (5) staff records and interview, the center did not ensure to obtain documentation of a negative tuberculosis screening for on (1) staff at the time of employment and prior to coming into contact with children.
“Evidence: 1. The record of staff #1 (date of employment: 12/01/2022) contained a TB screening dated 12/02/2022. 2. Administration acknowledged that the negative screening results were received after the start of employment.”
-
Based on a review of five (5) staff records and interview, the center did not ensure to obtain the results a follow up tuberculosis screening for one (1) staff at least every two years from the date of the first initial screening or testing as required.
“Evidence: 1. The record of staff #5 contained a TB screening dated 12/25/20. 2. Administration acknowledged that they had not obtained a follow up screening from staff #5.”
-
Based on observation and interview, the center did not ensure to maintain the required staff to child ratio of one (1) staff to 10 children for children three years of age to school age eligible.
“Evidence: 1. On 5/3/2023, 24 children were observed in the care of two (2) staff for approximately 10 minutes. The children ranged in age from 3 to 10 years. 2. Administration acknowledged that the classroom was four (4) children over ratio for the 10 minutes due to a staff member calling out sick.”
Dec 1, 2022: inspection5 deficiencies
-
Based on a review of five (5) staff records and interview, the center did not ensure that two (2) staff had a central registry finding within 30 days of employment as required.
“Evidence: 1. The record of staff #1 (date of employment: 5/12/2022) contained a central registry finding dated 6/14/2022. The record of staff #3 (date of employment: 10/31/2022) did not contain a central registry finding. 2. Administration acknowledged that the findings had not been received within 30 days of employment.”
-
Based on a review of five (5) child records and interview, the center did not ensure one (1) child had a physical examination by or under the direction of a physician: 1. Before the child’s attendance; or 2. Within 30 days after the first day of attendance.
“Evidence: 1. The record of child #2 (date of attendance:10/3/2022) did not contain documentation of a physical examination. 2. Administration acknowledged that the physical was not obtained.”
-
Based on observation and interview, the center did not ensure that areas and equipment of the center, inside and outside, were maintained in a clean, safe and operable condition.
“Evidence: 1. Rusting was observed on both sides of a bathroom stall located in the children’s hallway bathroom. The rust was located in an area accessible to children. 2. Administration acknowledged that the areas required maintenance.”
-
Based on observation and interview, the center did not ensure that where playground equipment is provided, resilient surfacing complied with minimum safety standards.
“Evidence: 1. A climber with a slide was observed on the toddler playground. The slide required resilient surfacing. No surfacing was observed under the equipment. 2. Administration acknowledged that the equipment required resilient surfacing.”
-
Based on a review of five (5) child records and interview, the center did not ensure that two (2) records contained the required information.
“Evidence: 1. The record of child #1 (date of enrollment: 10/3/2022) did not contain the required emergency contact information. The record of child #4 (date of enrollment: 9/6/2022) was missing the addresses for the two (2) emergency contacts. The records are required to contain the name, address, and phone number of two designated people to call in an emergency if a parent cannot be reached. 2. Administration acknowledged that the records were incomplete.”
Apr 4, 2022: inspection3 deficiencies
-
Based on record review and interview, the center did not ensure to obtain the results of a central registry background check for one staff within 30 days of employment as required.
“Evidence: 1. The record of staff #3 (DOH: 11/18/2021) contained central registry results dated 1/8/2022. 2. Administration acknowledged that the finding was not received within the required time frame.”
-
Based on record review and interview, the center did not ensure to obtain documentation that each child had received the immunizations required by the State Board of Health before the child attended the center as required.
“Evidence: 1. The record of child #1 (DOE: 1/31/2022) contained an immunization record dated 2/1/2022. 2. Administration acknowledged that the immunizations were received late.”
-
Based on record review and interview, the center did not ensure to obtain documentation of a tuberculosis (TB) screening at the time of employment and prior to coming into contact with children for each staff as required.
“Evidence: 1. The record of staff #3 (DOH: 11/18/2022) contained documentation of a TB screening dated 12/2/2021. 2. Administration acknowledged that the TB screening was obtained after the first date of employment.”
All 23 visits on record
| Date | Visit | What the record says |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 20, 2026 | Inspection | No violations cited |
| Mar 23, 2026 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | 5 violations cited |
| Aug 15, 2025 | Inspection | 4 violations cited |
| Aug 15, 2025 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Jan 22, 2025 | Inspection | 3 violations cited |
| Jan 22, 2025 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Aug 22, 2024 | Complaint inspection | No violations cited |
| Aug 13, 2024 | Inspection | 4 violations cited |
| Aug 13, 2024 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Apr 8, 2024 | Inspection | 2 violations cited |
| Apr 8, 2024 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Dec 18, 2023 | Inspection | No violations cited |
| Dec 18, 2023 | Inspection | No violations cited |
| Oct 26, 2023 | Inspection | 3 violations cited |
| Oct 26, 2023 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Sep 7, 2023 | Inspection | 6 violations cited |
| May 3, 2023 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| May 3, 2023 | Inspection | 4 violations cited |
| Mar 9, 2023 | Complaint inspection | No violations cited |
| Dec 1, 2022 | Inspection | 5 violations cited |
| Dec 1, 2022 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Apr 4, 2022 | Subsidy health and safety inspection | No violations cited |
| Apr 4, 2022 | Inspection | 3 violations cited |
Is it licensed?
- Child Day Center: Two Year license, expires May 12, 2028.
- A current subsidy provider.
- Ages: 1 month - 12 years 11 months.
- Capacity: 125 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 232 child care providers in Henrico County, the middle value for violations cited in the last three years was 10; this one had 18.
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 |
|---|---|
| Westhampton Day School - Willow Lawn | 11 |
| Rowan Academy | 12 |
| Imago Dei Neighborhood School | 0 |
| Celebree School of Richmond at Willow Lawn | 23 |
| Hill City Inc. | 1 |
| Country Day Care This child care provider | 18 |
| Tuckaway-Innsbrook Child Development Center | 14 |
| Bon Secours Family Center @ SMH | 4 |
| La Petite Academy - Church Road | 3 |
| KinderCare Learning Center - Parham | 31 |
| Kids In Discovery Preschool | 9 |
| Westminster Canterbury Child Development Center | 26 |
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.