Amazing Kidz Childcare Center LLC
Amazing Kidz Childcare Center LLC is a licensed child care center in Arlington, TX, licensed for up to 103 children and serving infants through school-age children. It has held its Texas license since 2022. Since October 2021, state inspectors have visited 39 times and investigated 12 reports. Inspectors recorded 64 citations, 22 of them high-risk, most often for building & playground safety (10 of 64). 25 citations came in the last 12 months, including 11 high-risk. 3% were corrected during the inspection itself. Measured by risk-weighted citations per inspection, it is tied for #99 of 108 centers in Arlington and better than 10% of licensed centers statewide.
Inspection record
Every state visit
What inspectors cited most
Citations, newest first
3 caregivers did not have 24 training hours at the time of inspection.
The 2 directors did not have 30 hours of training for thier training year to anniversary date at the time of inspection.
During the follow-up visit, the vehicle did not have a safety alarm on the vehicle.
During the follow-up visit, the playground fence was leaning and had a black covering that was falling behind the covering are broken panels, and the fence is no longer connected to the ground. As you walk down the playground, the area slopes in and it is easy to slide down toward the leaning fence.
During the visit, two out of ten children did not have up-to-date immunization records available for review.
During the monitoring visit, the emergency authorization section was not complete for one child in the transportation binder.
During the monitoring visit, there were fifteen children in the class. There was a mixed group of children ages 13 months to five years of age. The specific age was two years old. The youngest in the class was 13 months old with two caregivers present. During the visit, once another caregiver arrived, the children were separated into three classrooms.
During the monitoring visit, I could not view current driving licenses for two drivers at the operation. Out of the two, one driving license was not available for review.
During the visit 7 out of 10 caregivers did not have current CPR training certificates available for review.
During the visit 7 out of 10 caregivers did not have current First Aid training certificates available for review.
During the monitoring visit, the operation did not have a carbon monoxide detector available for review.
During the visit, I could not view three caregivers' 2985 affidavit forms. Two of the forms were in the folder but not notarized, and one of the forms was not available for review.
During the monitoring visit, I could not view current transportation training certificates for four drivers.
During the visit, the victim's records were not available for the DFPS investigator or inspector.
During the follow-up visit, the fence on the playground at an exit gate has a wide opening on the playground.
Based on information obtained during a DFPS investigation, a violation was found. The caregiver was unaware of the children who she was responsible for during transportation to the center from the school.
Based on information obtained during a DFPS investigation, a violation was found. The training certificate did not have trainer's qualification.
Based on information obtained during a DFPS investigation, a violation was found. The caregiver was unaware that the victim was on the transportation vehicle and unaware of the victim's activity in the van. Moreover, once the caregiver arrived at the operation and left the van with the victim still in, the caregiver did not have any physical proximity or auditory or visual awareness of the victim for the victim's safety and well-being after leaving the van. As a result, the victim was left in the van for 3 hours with soiled clothes.
Based on information obtained during a DFPS investigation, a violation was found. It was determined that a 5-year-old child was left on the vehicle unattended at the operation for three hours.
Based on information obtained during a DFPS investigation, a violation was found. The caregiver did not received 2 hours of transportation training before she started transporting children.
Based on information obtained during a DFPS investigation, a violation was found. It was determined that the caregiver did not account for who got on or off the van. The caregiver did not know who was in the van while she was transporting. As a result, a child was left on the van for 3 hours.
During the follow-up visit, the operation vehicles were not present. All vehicles were in the car shop for maintenance.
Based on information obtained during a DFPS investigation, a violation was found. The caregiver demonstrated a lack of good judgment and competency when failing to complete multiple caregiver responsibilities regarding transportation including not verifying the child's attendance with school personnel or parents before leaving the school, not utilizing the operation' face to name sheet to verify who got on and off the vehicle, and not utilizing the child safety alarm on the vehicle.
During the follow-up visit, there was a 3-month-old infant sleeping in the restrictive device. The infant classroom had seven infants with two caregivers. The caregiver removed the 3-month-old infant from the restrictive device upon request from the inspector and placed it in the crib. The specific age is 9 months old in the classroom.
During the investigation visit, the operation was out of ratio. There was one caregiver supervising nineteen children on the playground. The ages were 21 months to 4 years of age. The specific age is 3 years of age. The operation was over ratio by four children with one caregiver. The children were outside from 3:15 to 4:13 pm until another caregiver arrived and the class was split up.
During the visit, there was a two-month-old sleeping on its stomach in a crib without the sleep exception form signed by a health care professional. Caregiver removed infant from crib.
During the follow-up visit, there was an 8-month-old and an 11-month-old infant not strapped in a table while eating their morning breakfast at the table. The caregiver buckled the children upon request from the inspector.
During the follow-up visit, there was an individual in the office that did not have a background check. The caregiver in the infant classroom did not have a background check and had to stay because the operation would be out of ratio if they had left the operation.
During the monitoring visit, the grass was high on the outdoor playground.
During the monitoring visit, the operation did not have a current fire inspection available for review.
Based on information obtained during a DFPS investigation, a violation was found. The operation did not have records available for two caregivers during the DFPS face-to-face visit. One caregiver's last day of employment was two months before the day of the visit per the director, but no documents were provided, and the second caregiver was present, and no file was available during the DFPS face-to-face visit. The DFPS was not able to review any records during the visit and also requested records by email, and no records were sent.
During the monitor visit, the shot records were not available for four students during the monitoring visit.
The operation did not have any documentation of fire drills available for review during the monitoring visit.
During the monitor visit, five children did not have the food allergy emergency plan available for review during the monitoring visit.
During the monitor visit, the director and two bus drivers did not have the annual transportation training hours available for review during the monitoring visit.
During the monitor visit, the operation did not have documentation for carbon monoxide detection available for review.
During the monitor visit, the operation did not have the physical duration time in the parent handbook.
Upon arrival, there was a 15-month-old child in the high chair at 8:30 am. The child was sitting in a high chair and did not have any food, bottle, toys or cup on the tray. The child was removed from the high chair at 8:50 am. She was initially in the toddler classroom, then she was moved to the infant classroom, where another caregiver was placed in the classroom.
The slide does not have six inches of mulch under the landing slide area on the playground equipment.
The infant room had seven children with one caregiver upon arrival. The specific age is 11 months. A second caregiver entered the class to make compliant but had to leave to assist with the large group class in the eating area. The eating area had twenty-four children with one caregiver. The specific age is 2 years old. The director arrived and the large class in the eating area was split up into two groups. The toddler room had eleven children, and the specific age is two years old. The preschool class stayed in the eating area with twelve children, and the specific age is 3-4 years old. The infant room had two teachers, and the specific age is 11 months.
During the monitor visit, the children were running around. The children were running in and out of the other classrooms. The caregiver attempted to have the children sit on the carpet. There were some children sitting at the table with no activities. The children on the carpet did not have any activities. Eventually, after a suggestion from the inspector, the caregiver provided blocks for the children at the table and was able to have children sit at three tables and play with blocks.
There were sixteen children in the eating area of the operation, with one caregiver. The specific age is two years old. The infant room had seven children with one caregiver. The specific age is fourteen months. The children in the eating area were split up into two groups, with two caregivers and another caregiver arrived in the infant room.
I observed the children in the open eating area not washing their hands before eating, and when the children were dropped off in the morning, they did not wash their hands. The children in the toddler, infant, and one-year-old classrooms did not wash their hands before breakfast.
I observed the caregivers and the assistant director serve food to children without washing their hands during their visit today. Children were severed in the open eating area in the in the toddler, one, and infant classrooms.
The wall in the open space for children has a hole, and the restroom in classroom 6 has a hole in the wall.
Three out of ten children did not have an up-to-date shot record.
There was a bottle of bleach and a bottle of clear water not labeled in the infant room. (Note: The bottles were labeled during the inspection.)
Infants ages 6 months and 8 months were combined in the common room with children that were 18 months older than the children. The oldest child in the group was 11 years old. (Note: The two infants were moved to the infant classroom during the inspection.)
The operation did not use a licensed exterminator to treat the child-care center for insects. An over-the-counter pesticide was used and applied by one of the caregivers. The caregiver is not certified as a noncommercial applicator.
A 17 year old caregiver was present at the operation and had direct access to children prior to the operation receiving a background check result of eligible, eligible with conditions, or provisionally eligible. (Note: The caregiver left during the inspection).
A 17 year old was observed in charge of a group of children and was supervised by a qualified caregiver.
It was determined that infants are being allowed to sleep in restrictive devices (swings).
Children were present in the center when pesticides were sprayed to treat the building for insects placing children at risk.
It was determined that infants and toddlers are being seated in restrictive devices (highchairs) for more than 15 minutes during opening hours.
A 19 month old child was placed in a highchair and put in a separate room due to the child's behavior. The child remained in the highchair for an extended period of time.
The operation purchased a play structure that is missing a leg. A PCV pipe was placed to replace the missing leg. The operation is not using the structure at this time and understand it can not use it under a manufacture replacement is installed. Manufacture instructions were not available at the time of inspection.
An infant that was one month old was combined with infants that were 21 months old.
An infant that was 4 months old was asleep in the swing during the inspection. Form 2970 was given to the operation at the inspection.
Out of ten children files reviewed, one child did not have a health statement available at the time of the inspection.
The last dated playground maintenance check was conducted on April 25, 2022.
The infants sheets were not snug during the inspection. The caregivers did place sheet clips to tighten the sheets during the inspection.
An infant was sleeping in a crib with a lanyard attached to her pacifier.
Three infant feeding sheets were expired. Infant sheets were last updated on 12/15/2021, 12/6/2021, 12/13/2021.
The operation allowed a caregiver to provide direct care to children in care prior to receiving a background check determination of, Eligible , Provisional Eligibility with Conditions , or, Eligible with Conditions . The caregiver's current status is pending.
About this center
Common questions
Does Amazing Kidz Childcare Center LLC take infants?
Yes. Texas licenses it to care for infants through school-age children.
What are Amazing Kidz Childcare Center LLC’s hours?
12 AM to 11:59 PM, Monday through Sunday, according to its state licensing record. Confirm holiday and summer hours with the center.
Does Amazing Kidz Childcare Center LLC accept child care subsidies?
Yes, according to its state licensing record.
Has Amazing Kidz Childcare Center LLC had any serious violations?
Inspectors recorded 22 high-risk citations since 2021. The most recent was on Apr 13, 2026: “Electronic Child Safety Alarm - used at all times when transporting a child in care.” Each one is listed in full above.
How does Amazing Kidz Childcare Center LLC compare with other daycares in Arlington?
It is tied for #99 of 108 centers in Arlington by risk-weighted citations per inspection, and is better than 10% of licensed centers statewide (out of 9,147 Texas centers with enough inspection history).
When was Amazing Kidz Childcare Center LLC last inspected?
Aug 18, 2026. No violations were found during that visit.
Licensed centers nearby
1600 Patio Ter, Arlington · 0.4 mi away · 102 spotsAbout typicalChildrens Place
2312 Remynse Dr, Arlington · 1.3 mi away · 120 spotsAbout typicalNaNa Childcare and Learning Center
1951 E Arkansas Ln, Arlington · 1.5 mi away · 129 spotsMore citations than mostZone 4 Kids Child Care & Learning Center
1801 E Park Row Dr, Arlington · 1.5 mi away · 135 spotsMore citations than mostArlington II Headstart & Child Development Center
525 Browning Dr, Arlington · 1.7 mi away · 120 spotsFewer citations than mostTarrant County Kids @ Berry Elementary
1800 Joyce St, Arlington · 1.8 mi away · 100 spotsToo few inspections to compare
Citations are quoted from Texas HHS inspection records. Many are corrected the same day, and a citation is a finding about one rule, not a judgment about a center overall.
To see the official record, search operation 1720256 on Search Texas Child Care. Data refreshed Sep 30, 2026.