Independent Texas school research. TEA data, clearly explained. Not affiliated with the state agencyTEA.

txschools.netSchool data with context

Open-enrollment charter campus

Basis Richardson

Basis Texas · Richardson · 79 students

Current score
91/1002025-26
Score vs similar economic context
+1.6 ptsvs 89.4 average · 50 rated charter campuses serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
22 of 50tied with 4 others
A91

At a glance

The current score is above the 89.4 average for 50 rated charter campuses serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

STAAR result

All Subjects above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters

Meets
74%vs 69.4% avg · +4.6 pts
Masters
47%vs 39.7% avg · +7.3 pts

Among 50 charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.

See the full measure

STAAR result

Math above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters

Meets
67%vs 64% avg · +3 pts
Masters
39%vs 34.8% avg · +4.2 pts

Among 49 charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.

See the full measure

STAAR result

Reading above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters

Meets
81%vs 77.5% avg · +3.5 pts
Masters
56%vs 46.2% avg · +9.8 pts

Among 50 charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.

See the full measure

Selected positive signals, not a summary of performance. The same rules choose them on every page: only the latest one-year gain, results meaningfully better than the currently selected comparison with broad reporting, and distinctive top-three placements. Demographics, staffing and spending cannot become academic “wins.” The overall rating and the full results below remain the complete picture for this school.

Read the full rating context and placement

Basis Richardson is rated A by TEA, scoring 91 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 89.4 average for 50 rated charter campuses serving a similar economic context. TEA has published 1 year of scores for this charter campus, so there is no trend to read yet.

Ranks 22nd of 50 rated charter campuses serving a similar economic context (tied with 4 others).

Put the numbers in context

Compare with

Jump to a section
  1. Overview
  2. 1 year of ratings
  3. Where the score comes from
  4. Student outcomes
  5. Who this school serves
  6. Student counts behind the percentages
  7. Where this school ranks best
  8. Where this comes from

1 year of ratings

Follow the solid line to see how this school has changed. Turn comparison lines on or off to add context.

Compare against
908070 91 2025-26

Comparison lines follow the current rated cohort backward through time. The table gives the number in that fixed cohort that reported a score each year; it can be smaller than cohort membership.

View the yearly scores and comparisons
Rating history with comparisons
YearRatingScoreSelected comparisonSimilar economic-disadvantage rateStateTexas charter average
2025-26A9189.4 50 reporting81.7 829 reporting

Where the score comes from

Texas builds the overall rating from the better of Student Achievement and School Progress, weighted 70%, plus Closing the Gaps at 30%. School Progress is itself the better of Academic Growth and Relative Performance. The 60, 70, 80 and 90 rules mark the letter-grade thresholds.

  • Student Achievement93 A+2.9 vs similar economic context · 50 reporting
  • School Progress86 B+2.4 vs similar economic context · 49 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps87 B−0.1 vs similar economic context · 48 reporting
  • Academic Growth86 B+3.8 vs similar economic context · 48 reporting
  • Relative Performance74 C+0.7 vs similar economic context · 49 reporting
  • Basis Richardson
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (50 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement93A—
School Progress86B4
Closing the Gaps87B3
Academic Growth86B4
Relative Performance74C6

Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 3 points below A in that domain — the nearest of the measures that count toward the overall rating.

TEA does not add the domains up. The overall score is the better of Student Achievement and School Progress at 70%, plus Closing the Gaps at 30%. For this school that better measure is Student Achievement (93), so School Progress (86) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 93.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level93%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 50 reporting
  • Meets grade level74%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 50 reporting
  • Masters grade level47%+7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 50 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level96%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 50 reporting
  • Meets grade level81%+4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 50 reporting
  • Masters grade level56%+10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 50 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level89%+4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 49 reporting
  • Meets grade level67%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 49 reporting
  • Masters grade level39%+4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 49 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (50 in cohort)

Percentage of tests at or above each level. Masters is a subset of Meets, which is a subset of Approaches. The selected-comparison tick on each bar marks the average for charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate — a comparison TEA does not publish.

Counts in the comparison controls describe full cohort membership, not the denominator of every average. Each average uses only charter campuses for which TEA reported that measure; metric-specific reporting counts are shown on the STAAR, graduation and CCMR rows and may vary.

Who this school serves

Placed after the results deliberately: this is context for reading them, not an explanation of them.

Students
79
Economically disadvantaged
6.3%−1.1 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
13.9%−0.5 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
2.5%−8.5 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
—
Chronically absent
—

Student demographics

Basis Richardson

African American: 30.4%Hispanic: 5.1%White: 16.5%Asian: 44.3%Two or More Races: 3.8%
  • African American 30.4%
  • Hispanic 5.1%
  • White 16.5%
  • Asian 44.3%
  • Two or More Races 3.8%

Selected comparison average For charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 50 reporting for every category shown · 50 in full cohort

African American: 8.7%Hispanic: 19%White: 30.7%American Indian: 0.5%Asian: 35.1%Pacific Islander: 0.2%Two or More Races: 5.7%
  • African American 8.7%
  • Hispanic 19%
  • White 30.7%
  • American Indian 0.5%
  • Asian 35.1%
  • Pacific Islander 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 5.7%

Student counts behind the percentages

Context only. These counts are not rankings, comparisons, or judgments about school quality.

Students in this TEA accountability summary
79
Economically disadvantaged students
5
Emergent bilingual students
11
Special education students
2

TEA context labels

  • New campus compared with last year’s fall enrollment

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
Not reported
Students in TEA mobility denominator
Not reported
TEA-published mobility rate
Not reported

The mobility count and rate use TEA’s separate 2024–25 campus denominator shown above, not current enrollment. This site does not recalculate a missing rate.

The first figure is TEA’s student count for this accountability summary. It is a separate publication from the fall PEIMS enrollment shown above and can differ; this site does not substitute one for the other. Counts come from TEA’s 2025-26 accountability summary, fetched 29 August 2026. A reported zero is shown as 0. Small-number and complementary masks, unavailable values, and blank not-reported fields stay separate and are never estimated. TEA masking definitions.

Where this school ranks best

Out of 45 rankings computed across every published metric and every available comparison group, these are all the measures that meet this site’s distinctive-placement threshold. The list does not change when you change Compare against. Each measure appears once, using its strongest placement. Press Copy for a citable sentence.

#2–3 rankings

Second- and third-place results

5 measures

  • 2of 86

    All Subjects — Masters

    Similar size · of the 86 that report this measure

  • 2of 86

    Reading — Approaches

    Similar size · of the 86 that report this measure

  • 2of 86

    Reading — Masters

    Similar size · of the 86 that report this measure

  • 3of 86

    All Subjects — Meets

    Similar size · of the 86 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 3of 86

    Reading — Meets

    Similar size · of the 86 that report this measure

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

4 measures

  • 4of 86

    All Subjects — Approaches

    Similar size · of the 86 that report this measure

  • 4of 84

    Math — Masters

    Similar size · of the 84 that report this measure

  • 5of 84

    Math — Meets

    Similar size · of the 84 that report this measure

  • 10of 84

    Math — Approaches

    Similar size · of the 84 that report this measure

These are selected high placements, not a summary. Every figure above this section is the full picture, including where this school ranks poorly. Each measure appears once here, using its strongest qualifying placement across all available comparison groups. Very large ties are left out because they do not distinguish this school; any tie that does appear is labeled. Every ranking this site publishes, including the ones no school would put in a press release.

Where this comes from

The Texas Education Agency publishes the underlying accountability reports and data downloads. Ratings, outcomes, demographics, staffing and finance on this page come from TEA data available through txschools.gov, fetched 15 August 2026. TEA’s Reports and Data Portal links the official bulk files. Enrollment history comes from TEA's PEIMS Student Program and Special Populations reports, fetched 24 August 2026. The student-count context comes from TEA’s bulk accountability summary, fetched 29 August 2026; TEA’s masking definitions explain withheld values. The dated notice, staffing, discipline, transfer, community and postsecondary sections cite their separate TEA, Census or THECB publication in place. Every archived source carries checksums so each number stays traceable to the bytes the public agency served.

Download the full dataset · this campus's district

Single-file records are pre-built for district-level records only, so there is no per-campus CSV to link here. Producing both formats for every entity would consume most of the 20,000-asset deployment limit before pages and shared data are counted. This campus is a row in the bulk files on the download page, keyed by its TEA id 015834008.