Lake Highlands Presbyterian CDC
Lake Highlands Presbyterian CDC is a licensed child care center in Dallas, TX, licensed for up to 154 children and serving infants through school-age children. It has held its Texas license since 2005. Since October 2021, state inspectors have visited 47 times and investigated 24 reports. Inspectors recorded 48 citations, 22 of them high-risk, most often for supervision (9 of 48). 14 citations came in the last 12 months, including 9 high-risk. 6% were corrected during the inspection itself. Its last 9 inspections found no violations. Measured by risk-weighted citations per inspection, it is tied for #250 of 328 centers in Dallas and better than 25% of licensed centers statewide.
Inspection record
Every state visit
What inspectors cited most
Citations, newest first
A caregiver failed to supervise children when they exited the classroom, leaving several children without an actively supervising caregiver for about two minutes.
A caregiver failed to share necessary information with an incoming caregiver by exiting the classroom without clearly communicating that they were leaving and without confirming that the incoming caregiver had assumed responsibility for the children.
It was determined that a caregiver used prohibited physical punishment by grabbing and pulling a child by one arm.
The operation failed to timely report allegations of possible mistreatment of children to Child Care Regulation after management became aware of the concerns.
During an investigation, it was determined that a caregiver used inappropriate verbal discipline by yelling at children.
A caregiver in room 109 fell asleep while caring for children.
I observed an infant sitting in a bouncer without being properly strapped in Infant A.
This standard was tasked as part of an investigation and found to be deficient. A caregiver demonstrated poor judgement and competency after failing to follow allergy protocols and giving a child with diagnosed food allergen a food item without getting authorization from the child’s parent or reading the label to ensure it did not contain the child’s allergens.
This standard was tasked as part of an investigation and found to be deficient. A child with a diagnosed food allergy was given a food item that contained three of the child’s identified allergens. Resulting in allergic reaction requiring medical treatment.
This standard was tasked as part of an investigation and found to be deficient. The operation has not yet received parent signature on the incident report to indicate the report had been shared with the child's parents.
During an infant class observation, an infant was found not properly strapped into a child bouncer. This was corrected during the inspection after the caregiver strapped the child in.
During a classroom transition, a child was left unattended.
A caregiver inappropriately redirected a child during nap by hitting their leg.
This standard was tasked as part of an investigation and found deficient. Two caregivers transitioning a group of children outside did not ensure all children were accounted for before leaving the classroom. As a result, one child was left unattended in the classroom restroom.
This standard was tasked as part of an investigation and found deficient. A caregiver fed the wrong bottle to an infant.
This standard was tasked as part of an investigation and found deficient. A classroom was left unattended for at least five minutes due to a miscommunication between caregivers.
This standard was tasked as part of an investigation and found deficient. A caregiver departing their classroom did not relay classroom information to the incoming caregiver, resulting in uncertainty about who was responsible for the group. This led to the classroom being left unattended for at least five minutes.
Loose fill under two playground structures does not meet a depth of at least six inches.
This standard was tasked as part of an investigation and found deficient. A caregiver gave one child the wrong infant bottle.
Five of the seven food allergy emergency plans do not have parent signatures.
This standard was tasked as part of an investigation and found deficient. A child was served food identified on their food allergy emergency plan.
This standard was tasked as part of an investigation and found deficient. A child's food allergy was not posted in their classroom by the child's first day in care.
3 classrooms were checked, and found to have cots the did not have a child's name on the cot or label with a number to match a child's name assignment map available.
A caregiver left 2 children unsupervised in the bathroom. After a minute the caregiver looked in the bathroom to monitor the children,
The operation did not have a procedure in place to account for the number of children that transitioned from one area of the operation to another.
Caregivers in the operation left a child unattended in the classroom. The administrative staff found the child in the classroom.
This standard was tasked as part of an investigation and found deficient. Indoor furniture was arranged in a way that did not allow for caregivers to properly supervise.
One caregiver was observed not washing a child's hands after diaper changing.
In two classrooms, infant's hands were not washed after diaper changing.
A child with a food allergy indicated by the physician consumed food they were allergic to. This child experienced allergic reaction symptoms. This information was not reported to CCR.
Diaper changing tables are not sanitized according to the manufacturer instructions. The diaper changing surface is to be sprayed and set for one minute before wiping to be sanitized. Caregivers were not waiting the full minute to wipe down the table.
The designated relocation site was not indicate on the emergency evacuation diagrams.
The emergency evacuation diagram does not indicate the location inside thte center where children and caregivers shelter in place.
One caregiver that has worked at the operation for at least 90 days is not current in CPR training.
One child with diagnosed food allergy had an incomplete food allergy plan. The plan did not specify each food the child is allergic to, it did not list possible symptoms if the child is exposed to the food, steps to take if a child has an allergic reaction, and it was not signed by the parent.
In two classrooms, caregiver's hands were not washed after diaper changing.
This standard was tasked as part of an investigation and found deficient. Inappropriate guidance was used by a caregiver when redirecting a child's behavior. The caregiver picked a child up by their legs and flipped them onto their stomach during naptime.
This standard was evaluated as part of an investigation and was in deficient. Bleach was inside a bubble bottle that was not labeled correctly.
This standard was evaluated as part of an investigation and was in deficient. A child gained access to a hazardous material and spilled it on their clothes.
This standard was evaluated as part of an investigation and was in deficient. The caregivers did not know the group of children they were responsible for.
The operation did not have updated documentation for CPSC recall items. This was corrected during inspection.
An infant feeding instruction reviewed had not been updated within the required timeframe.
An infant was observed not being strapped in while sitting at a kidney feeding table. This was corrected during the inspection the infant was removed from table.
The operation failed to notify childcare regulation within the required timeframe when they were made aware of a situation that placed children at risk.
This standard was evaluated as part of an investigation and was deficient. A caregiver aggressively placed a child on their nap mat. It was also determined that a caregiver applied pressure with her arm on a child chest during diaper changing.
This standard was evaluated as part of an investigation and was deficient. Children were being yelled at and humiliated.
One child was blocking the classrooms entrance during naptime. The child was moved to another part of the classroom.
Ten infant schedules were reviewed and did not have the required signature. Three of ten infant schedules reviewed did not have the required date.
About this center
Common questions
Does Lake Highlands Presbyterian CDC take infants?
Yes. Texas licenses it to care for infants through school-age children.
What are Lake Highlands Presbyterian CDC’s hours?
7 AM to 6 PM, Monday through Friday, according to its state licensing record. Confirm holiday and summer hours with the center.
Does Lake Highlands Presbyterian CDC accept child care subsidies?
Not according to its state licensing record. Ask the center directly, since participation can change.
Has Lake Highlands Presbyterian CDC had any serious violations?
Inspectors recorded 22 high-risk citations since 2021. The most recent was on Aug 26, 2026: “Supervision ensures each child’s safety, well-being, including physical proximity and auditory or visual awareness of each child’s on going activity.” Each one is listed in full above.
How does Lake Highlands Presbyterian CDC compare with other daycares in Dallas?
It is tied for #250 of 328 centers in Dallas by risk-weighted citations per inspection, and is better than 25% of licensed centers statewide (out of 9,147 Texas centers with enough inspection history).
When was Lake Highlands Presbyterian CDC last inspected?
Sep 25, 2026. No violations were found during that visit.
Other centers near 75238
9919 Mccree Rd · 145 spotsFewer citations than mostThe Goddard School of Dallas Lake Highlands
10622 E Northwest Hwy · 200 spotsFewer citations than mostST James Episcopal Montessori School
9845 Mccree Rd · 197 spotsFewer citations than mostPetite Lumiere Preparatory School
10805 Walnut Hill Ln · 96 spotsAbout typical
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 847683 on Search Texas Child Care. Data refreshed Sep 30, 2026.