Pinnacle Montessori Academy of Alamo Ranch
Pinnacle Montessori Academy of Alamo Ranch is a licensed child care center in San Antonio, TX, licensed for up to 210 children and serving infants through school-age children. It has held its Texas license since 2015. Since October 2021, state inspectors have visited 64 times and investigated 27 reports. Inspectors recorded 72 citations, 33 of them high-risk, most often for supervision (15 of 72). 11 citations came in the last 12 months, including 3 high-risk. 10% were corrected during the inspection itself. Its last 5 inspections found no violations. Measured by risk-weighted citations per inspection, it is tied for #360 of 476 centers in San Antonio and better than 21% of licensed centers statewide.
Inspection record
Every state visit
What inspectors cited most
Citations, newest first
During the course of the investigation, it was noted that a toddler caregiver was utilizing a cell phone while a child exited the classroom.
During the course of the investigation, it was noted a toddler was unsupervised for approximately 2.5 minutes.
It was determined during the investigation, while viewing video footage that a child was not offered water upon return to the classroom from being outside.
During the investigation, it was determined while viewing video footage that a child did not wash their hands upon entering the classroom from outside.
During the investigation, it was determined that a parent was not notified immediately when a child was left unattended outside. The parent was notified within 2.5 hours of the incident.
During the investigation, it was determined that a 2-year-old child was left unattended on the playground for approximately 30 minutes.
At time of inspeciton, crib sheets were observed to not be tight-fitted.
At time of inspection, six out of seven monthly feeding instructions were not updated for the month of May.
At the time of the inspection, two out of the ten staff members did not have current CPR/First Aid certifications for review.
The diaper changing mat in the infant room had two tears on the vinyl. Note, a picture of the diaper changing mat was taken.
Several classrooms were observed of having the children's cots stored in the restroom. One restroom had toilet paper on the floor next to the cots. Several cots stacked up also had the children's blankets. Note, pictures were taken of all classrooms and restrooms.
At the time of inspection the caregiver in the toddler room stated there were 18 children in her care when there were 16. NOTE: This was corrected when the caregiver recounted the children.
Recite: Bolts were observed to be protruding from the PVC pipe that is utilized as a barrier. Chicken wire was observed on the ground on the playground.
The director did not have training certificates totaling 30 hours available for review.
Five of the nine caregivers did not have training certificates totaling 24 hours available for review.
A nine month old infant, who does not walk, was observed to be utilizing a cot for napping.
A caregiver was observed utilizing their cell phone for personal use while supervising a napping group of children.
Bolts were observed to be protruding from the PVC pipe that utilized as a barrier. Chicken wire was observed to be on the ground on the playground.
A standing fan was observed to be on the floor in the primary room.
The loose fill on the playgrounds was not installed the thee reuqired 6 inch depth.
It was determined in an investigation that a caregiver was using prohibited punishment by yelling at children as a form of discipline.
An investigation revealed that caregivers were utilizing personnel devices, such as cell phones, for non-job-related activities, including viewing camera footage and sending text messages.
Operation did not have a Sleep Exception Form completed for the two month old infant observed asleep in a restrictive device.
The electronic child safety alarm was observed not functioning in one of the operation's vans used to transport the children in care.
Loose fill observed by the slides on the playground did not meet the required 6 inches of dept.
The operation did not obtain a fire inspection within the last 12 months.
The automatic door closer that is meant to close classrooms doors was not working properly in room 112.
During the course of this investigation, it was determined that supervision was not appropriate when a 14 month old child was able to leave a classroom unattended. Caregivers were unaware the child left until the child was brought back 5-7 minutes after the child exited the classroom.
While viewing video for an investigation, a child was observed to not have their hands washed after a diaper change.
While viewing video for an investigation, a caregiver was observed not washing her hands after changing a child's diaper.
A bottle of Lysol was observed on a shelf in the bathroom that was within children's reach. This was CORRECTED AT INSPECTION when the Lysol was moved to a high shelf.
A cot was observed to be leaned up against the backdoor of the classroom, blocking its use as a fire exit. Note this was CORRECTED AT INSPECTION when the cot was moved.
A parent was not notified of a situation that placed their child at risk until the day after the incident.
A child was left unsupervised.
The electronic child safety alarm was observed not functioning in one of the operation's vans used to transport the children in care.
A four year old child was left unsperviseed in the classroom for six minutes.
The operation did not have a current fire inspection.
Based upon information gathered and interviews conducted this incident was reported to Licensing more than two days after the incident occurring.
Based upon information gathered, surveillance and interviews conducted supervision was determined to have occurred when a child left the classroom to go into the gym unsupervised.
Based upon information gathered and interviews conducted the incident report wasn't signed or a copy provided to the parent until after 48 hours of the incident occurring. NOTE: This was corrected at inspection.
Two of the four children incident reports were not shared with the parents. NOTE: One of the two was corrected at inspection.
Two of the four incident reports were unavailable for review. NOTE: One of the two incident reports was corrected at inspection.
Based upon information gathered, surveillance and interviews conducted inadequate supervision was determined to have occurred when children were left on the playground unsupervised as the caregiver went back into the classroom. In addition to several children running outside the classroom door into the playground unsupervised to get water bottles.
There was a slide on the Pre-K playground that had half of the screws missing making the slide not secured in place. Note: This was corrected at in inspection when the operation's maintenance personnel applied the screws to secure the slide in place.
In the course of this investigation, information gathered determined a lack of judgment by staff to immediately notify the parent of a child in distress. Parent was contacted approximately two hours after staff observed the child limping.
A child was not adequately supervised on the playground. They were able to leave their playground and reach a different one on the other side of the daycare and caregivers were not aware until the child was brought back by the director.
Based on information gathered, two caregivers did not use good judgement when it was decided to take an infant who was experiencing symptoms of allergic reaction to the child's relative who is an employee at the center versus following operational procedures and specific emergency instructions on the child's food allergy emergency plan such as immediately calling 911, administering epi-pen, keeping child warm, and avoiding unnecessary movement. Caregivers did not use good judgement when a known food allergen was served in an infant classroom where an infant with that specific diagnosed food allergy was present. Although food wasn't directly served to the infant, the infant was sitting at a table with other children eating the food allergen. Shortly after, the child started experiencing symptoms an allergic reaction.
Based on information gathered, a caregiver whose background check is provisionally eligible with conditions was left alone with children in a classroom. This was corrected when a caregiver with an eligible background check returned to the classroom.
It was determined that the operation failed to adequately supervise a child in care when they left the child on the playground for approximately 2 minutes by themself when the group returned to their classroom.
A child's hands were not washed after diaper changing. Note: This was corrected at inspection as the caregiver washed the child's hands.
A Lysol and a pink disinfect bottle were observed accessible to the children in care as it was located on a top of a child's height bookshelf within their reach. Note: This was corrected at inspection as the caregiver moved the disinfectant bottles to a high shelf.
The operation staff did not report a situation where a child was placed at risk. The operation staff did not report an incident where a three year old placed a small piece of a disinfectant dissolvable tablet in their mouth while in care that required a call to poison control.
The operation staff did not generate an incident report at the time a three year old child placed a piece of dissolvable disinfectant tablet in their mouth while in care.
Caregiver did not exercise good judgment when failing to ensure the disinfectant tablet completely dissolved in the water before allowing children to use it, resulting in a three year old placing a small piece of the tablet in their mouth for a couple of seconds.
The operation failed to create an incident report on the specific date and time the incident occurred with two children on the playground.
Based on the information obtained for this investigation, the director failed to communicate truthfully with the parents and attempted to withheld information on two children who had physical contact with each other while on the playground. Director did not follow up with staff to collect more information on the incident. Director failed to notify licensing on the incident and neglected to create an incident report.
The lack of supervision enabled two children to display inappropriate sexual behavior on each other while on the playground.
The parents of two children involved with an incident on the playground regarding child-on-child contact were not properly informed.
The operation failed to notify licensing on an incident that happen on the playground with two children.
Information gathered for this investigation based on footage determined one staff was sweeping the play structure platform while the other staff was walking around the playground holding a cell phone and glancing at it when the toddler was observed walking away from the play area.
Information gathered for this investigation determined an incident report was not shared with the parent when a child was found unsupervised in the pre-school playground.
A toddler walked behind the building from the toddler playground to the preschool playground unsupervised. The toddler was on the preschool playground for approximately less then five minutes unsupervised.
The operation failed to notified licensing on a toddler who wandered off to the preschool playground and was on the play structure that is not age appropriate.
Information gathered for this investigation determined a licensing incident report was not created for the child who was found unsupervised on the preschool playground.
A caregiver was observed out of ratio when observed caring for 18 children. The three year old ratio is 1 to 15. Note: This was corrected it at inspection as another caregiver stepped in the classroom.
The wooden fence observed dividing the playground space is not in good repair with many wooden boards missing and gates not properly attached to the wooden beams.
The plastic steps on the playscape were observed broken as gaps were seen where children stepped on to them.
Hazards were not removed or repaired promptly after noticing the hazards during their required active play inspections.
Nails were observed protruding from the broken wooden fences that divides the playground spaces.
A review of the Employees Who Left Employment in 2021 data from February 23, 2022, revealed that the center had not reported the number of employees who left employment in 2021 by February 22,2022, as required.
The operation did not report two positive COVID cases to Child Care Regulation within 48 hours
Wax burners were observed in two classrooms. Only one class had it plugged in with hot liquid that was accessible to children. This was corrected at inspection when the caregivers agreed to remove the wax burners from the classroom.
About this center
Common questions
Does Pinnacle Montessori Academy of Alamo Ranch take infants?
Yes. Texas licenses it to care for infants through school-age children.
What are Pinnacle Montessori Academy of Alamo Ranch’s hours?
6:30 AM to 6:30 PM, Monday through Friday, according to its state licensing record. Confirm holiday and summer hours with the center.
Does Pinnacle Montessori Academy of Alamo Ranch accept child care subsidies?
Yes, according to its state licensing record.
How much does Pinnacle Montessori Academy of Alamo Ranch cost?
Texas does not publish individual centers’ prices, so ask Pinnacle Montessori Academy of Alamo Ranch for its current tuition. For comparison, the median full-day price at licensed centers in the Alamo area, which includes San Antonio, is $42.00 a day for infants, $40.40 a day for toddlers and $39.20 a day for 3-year-olds (2025 Texas Child Care Market Rate Survey).
Has Pinnacle Montessori Academy of Alamo Ranch had any serious violations?
Inspectors recorded 33 high-risk citations since 2021. The most recent was on Aug 19, 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 Pinnacle Montessori Academy of Alamo Ranch compare with other daycares in San Antonio?
It is tied for #360 of 476 centers in San Antonio by risk-weighted citations per inspection, and is better than 21% of licensed centers statewide (out of 9,147 Texas centers with enough inspection history).
When was Pinnacle Montessori Academy of Alamo Ranch last inspected?
Sep 21, 2026. No violations were found during that visit.
Licensed centers nearby
11161 Westwood Loop, San Antonio · 0.6 mi away · 226 spotsMore citations than mostChildrens Lighthouse Learning Center at Alamo Ranch
5610 Lone Star Pkwy, San Antonio · 0.9 mi away · 249 spotsAbout typicalAlphabetz Montessori Culebra LLC
12026 Culebra Rd, San Antonio · 1.0 mi away · 274 spotsMore citations than mostIvy Kids of Alamo Ranch
5325 Lone Star Pkwy, San Antonio · 1.1 mi away · 280 spotsAbout typicalSA Liberty Field Prep School, LLC
10606 Liberty Fld, San Antonio · 1.3 mi away · 354 spotsAbout typicalThe Learning Experience
12112 Alamo Ranch Parkway, San Antonio · 1.4 mi away · 161 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 1544442 on Search Texas Child Care. Data refreshed Sep 30, 2026.