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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus

Bluebonnet Elem

Caldwell County · Region 13: Austin · 534 students

Current score
83/1002025-26
Change
−7 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
+3.4 ptsvs 79.6 average · 2,022 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
769 of 2,022tied with 73 others
B83

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 87 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 79.6 average for 2,022 rated schools serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

Recent movement

Overall score rose 6 points

77 to 83 2024-25 to 2025-26

  • 83 is 3.4 points above the 79.6 average among 2,022 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measure

Recent domain gain

School Progress rose 7 points

78 to 85 2024-25 to 2025-26

  • 85 is 4.4 points above the 80.6 average among 1,902 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measure

Current strength

Academic Growth above the similar-context average

85 +11.3 pts vs 73.7

  • 85 is 11.3 points above the 73.7 average among 1,841 schools 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

Bluebonnet Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 83 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 79.6 average for 2,022 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is down 7 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 769th of 2,022 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 73 others).

Put the numbers in context

Compare with

Jump to a section
  1. Overview
  2. Official improvement and transfer notices
  3. 5 years of ratings
  4. Where the score comes from
  5. Student outcomes
  6. Who this school serves
  7. Student counts behind the percentages
  8. Enrollment over time
  9. Discipline and removal from class
  10. Spending per student
  11. Teachers and actual class size
  12. Where this school ranks best
  13. Where this comes from

Official improvement and transfer notices

Official state and federal designations can carry support, reporting requirements or a family transfer option that a single A–F rating does not explain.

2026 federal improvement status

Targeted Support and Improvement

Official support label: TSI

Identification reason: Continuously Enrolled

TEA track year 0 · Title I campus

Open the official TEA list and methodology

Schools identified for improvement

This school
Listed
Selected comparison
28.9%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,022 rated schools reporting

Schools on the PEG list

This school
Not listed
Selected comparison
3.4%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,022 rated schools reporting

Selected comparison percentages are the share of reporting schools in that group found on each dated list. They are neutral prevalence context; changing the comparison never changes this school's official status.

These are dated TEA statuses, fetched 24 August 2026; they are not added to or subtracted from this site's rating.

5 years of ratings

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

Compare against
90807060 Similar economic-disadvantage rateTexas averageBluebonnet Elem 9069817783 2021-222022-232023-242024-252025-26

2021-22 is shown under the refreshed methodology TEA adopted in 2023, so it is comparable with later years. Under the original scoring it was rated B with 87 that year.

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 average
2025-26B8379.6 2,022 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25C7779.3 1,998 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24B8177.3 1,984 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23D6977.8 1,952 reporting79.1 7,377 reporting
2021-22A9082.1 1,931 reporting83.7 7,283 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 Achievement69 D−7.9 vs similar economic context · 1,909 reporting
  • School Progress85 B+4.4 vs similar economic context · 1,902 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps78 C+1.2 vs similar economic context · 1,885 reporting
  • Academic Growth85 B+11.3 vs similar economic context · 1,841 reporting
  • Relative Performance69 D−10.0 vs similar economic context · 1,902 reporting
  • Bluebonnet Elem
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,022 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement69D1
School Progress85B5
Closing the Gaps78C2
Academic Growth85B5
Relative Performance69D1

Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 2 points below B 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 School Progress (85), so Student Achievement (69) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 85.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level67%−6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,909 reporting
  • Meets grade level39%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,909 reporting
  • Masters grade level13%−6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,909 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level73%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,906 reporting
  • Meets grade level44%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,906 reporting
  • Masters grade level13%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,906 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level68%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,898 reporting
  • Meets grade level42%+0 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,898 reporting
  • Masters grade level15%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,898 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level45%−28 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,755 reporting
  • Meets grade level13%−32 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,755 reporting
  • Masters grade level3%−17 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,755 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,022 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 schools 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 schools 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
534
Economically disadvantaged
67.6%±0.0 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
26.2%+6.8 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
17.2%−1.6 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
94.0%±0.0 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
18.2%+1.0 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Bluebonnet Elem

African American: 2.6%Hispanic: 79.4%White: 15.4%Asian: 0.4%Two or More Races: 2.2%
  • African American 2.6%
  • Hispanic 79.4%
  • White 15.4%
  • Asian 0.4%
  • Two or More Races 2.2%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,022 reporting for every category shown · 2,022 in full cohort

African American: 12%Hispanic: 54.5%White: 27.3%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 2.2%Pacific Islander: 0.2%Two or More Races: 3.6%
  • African American 12%
  • Hispanic 54.5%
  • White 27.3%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 2.2%
  • Pacific Islander 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 3.6%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
534
Economically disadvantaged students
361
Emergent bilingual students
140
Special education students
92

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
52
Students in TEA mobility denominator
558
TEA-published mobility rate
9.3%

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.

Enrollment over time

TEA-reported student enrollment for each available school year. Enrollment growth or decline is not a measure of school quality.

TEA reported 534 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 80 (13.0%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
534

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
−80

Decrease · −13.0%

Change since 2021–22
−21

Decrease · −3.8%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This school
534
Selected comparison
637.4

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,987 rated schools reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Bluebonnet Elem
School yearStudents enrolledBluebonnet ElemChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 555 First available year 648.7
2022–23 550 Decrease of 5 (0.9%) 656.1
2023–24 579 Increase of 29 (5.3%) 655.9
2024–25 614 Increase of 35 (6.0%) 653.2
2025–26 534 Decrease of 80 (13.0%) 637.4

The selected comparison column is the average enrollment among reporting schools in that group. It changes with the comparison control; this school's own counts do not.

Source: TEA PEIMS Student Program and Special Populations Reports, fetched 24 August 2026. TEA reports these counts from its fall student snapshot; changes compare adjacent reported school years.

These counts show how enrollment changed, not why. Attendance-zone changes, school openings or closures, grade reconfigurations, transfers and population shifts can affect the total.

Discipline and removal from class

TEA’s annual student and action counts, kept separate and divided only by the matching full-year enrollment. These figures describe removals from instruction, not a simple safe-or-unsafe score.

Students in TEA’s all-discipline count
Suppressed

Rate not available

Disciplinary actions
Suppressed

Rate not available

Cumulative year-end enrollment
648

2024–25

TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Bluebonnet Elem
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 581 Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
2021–22 607 12 2.0% 18 2.97 12.8% 30
2022–23 595 Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
2023–24 627 Suppressed — 15 2.39 — 31.9
2024–25 648 Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Bluebonnet Elem in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
In-school suspensions Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
Out-of-school suspensions Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
DAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Mandatory DAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Discretionary DAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
JJAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Mandatory JJAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Discretionary JJAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Expulsions Not reported — Not reported — — —
Mandatory expulsions Not reported — Not reported — — —
Discretionary expulsions Not reported — Not reported — — —

Selected comparisons use rates, not raw counts, so differently sized schools can be read on the same basis. Each average uses only group members for which TEA reported that rate; this school's own counts and rates remain fixed.

Students, actions and incidents are different units. One student can receive multiple actions. The categories overlap, so they must not be added together. Rates use TEA's matching cumulative year-end enrollment, not the October enrollment shown elsewhere on this page.

Source: TEA Discipline Reports, fetched 24 August 2026. Suppressed values stay unavailable rather than being estimated. Use 2020–21 cautiously because remote instruction during the pandemic changed students' exposure to in-person discipline. TEA consolidated its separate action-group reports into this product in 2024–25; this trend uses only the stable “All discipline” heading.

Spending per student

The campus and its parent district stay fixed while the selected same-sector txschools.net comparison changes with the page-wide control. TEA's own peer group and statewide reference remain visible as separately published, fixed TEA references.

$6k$14k$23k20182020202220242025
  • Bluebonnet Elem
  • Parent district: Lockhart ISD
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$8,903
Selected comparison
$13,185

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,997 rated schools reporting

−$4,282 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $8,903 per student for this campus, $19,438 per student for its parent district, Lockhart ISD, $18,972 per student for the Texas average.

Not reported in this TEA campus finance record: TEA peer group.

View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
YearBluebonnet ElemParent district: Lockhart ISDTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$6,767$11,543$13,054$7,982 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,859 rated schools reporting
2019$6,706$10,549$13,108$8,144 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,875 rated schools reporting
2020$7,362$10,524$14,058$8,704 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,895 rated schools reporting
2021$7,637$21,554$14,797$9,191 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,908 rated schools reporting
2022$8,190$12,435$15,708$10,481 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,931 rated schools reporting
2023$9,647$12,906$16,792$11,198 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,954 rated schools reporting
2024$9,113$16,007$18,125$12,312 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,982 rated schools reporting
2025$8,903$19,438$18,972$13,185 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,997 rated schools reporting

The selected-comparison reporting count is year-specific and can vary across the table. Dollar amounts are shown as TEA published them and are not adjusted for inflation.

Teachers and actual class size

Average salary
$62,385−$4,150 vs similar economic context
Teachers
31−11.7 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
17+3.1 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Bluebonnet Elem

Beginning: 3.2%1 to 5 years: 43.8%6 to 10 years: 22%11 to 20 years: 18.5%21 to 30 years: 12.5%
  • Beginning 3.2%
  • 1 to 5 years 43.8%
  • 6 to 10 years 22%
  • 11 to 20 years 18.5%
  • 21 to 30 years 12.5%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,022 reporting for every category shown · 2,022 in full cohort

Beginning: 6.3%1 to 5 years: 26.6%6 to 10 years: 19.1%11 to 20 years: 27.8%21 to 30 years: 15.6%Over 30 years: 3.9%
  • Beginning 6.3%
  • 1 to 5 years 26.6%
  • 6 to 10 years 19.1%
  • 11 to 20 years 27.8%
  • 21 to 30 years 15.6%
  • Over 30 years 3.9%

Average students in a class

TEA average class size by grade or subject for Bluebonnet Elem in 2024–25
Grade or subjectAverage students per classBluebonnet Elem · 2024–25Average students per classselected comparison
Kindergarten17.718
Grade 121.718.3
Grade 223.818.4
Grade 319.318.7
Grade 421.719
Grade 527.120

These are TEA's actual class-size averages for the grade or subject shown, not the student-to-teacher ratio. TEA reported 6 of 12 categories for this campus; the categories are not combined into a made-up campus-wide average. Each selected comparison average uses only schools reporting that same grade or subject.

Source: TEA Texas Academic Performance Reports, fetched 24 August 2026.

Where this school ranks best

Out of 105 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

1 measure

  • 3of 15

    Overall score

    Caldwell County · of the 15 that report this measure · tied with 2

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

18 measures

  • 4of 14

    Closing the Gaps

    Caldwell County · of the 14 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 4of 14

    Academic Growth

    Caldwell County · of the 14 that report this measure

  • 4of 12

    Attendance

    Caldwell County · of the 12 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 4of 12

    Chronically absent (lowest is best)

    Caldwell County · of the 12 that report this measure

  • 5of 14

    School Progress

    Caldwell County · of the 14 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 5of 14

    Reading — Approaches

    Caldwell County · of the 14 that report this measure

  • 6of 14

    Math — Meets

    Caldwell County · of the 14 that report this measure

  • 7of 14

    Reading — Meets

    Caldwell County · of the 14 that report this measure

  • 7of 14

    Math — Masters

    Caldwell County · of the 14 that report this measure

  • 8of 14

    All Subjects — Approaches

    Caldwell County · of the 14 that report this measure

  • 8of 14

    Math — Approaches

    Caldwell County · of the 14 that report this measure

  • 8of 13

    Per-student spending

    Caldwell County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 9of 14

    Relative Performance

    Caldwell County · of the 14 that report this measure

  • 9of 14

    All Subjects — Meets

    Caldwell County · of the 14 that report this measure

  • 9of 14

    All Subjects — Masters

    Caldwell County · of the 14 that report this measure

  • 9of 14

    Reading — Masters

    Caldwell County · of the 14 that report this measure

  • 10of 14

    Student Achievement

    Caldwell County · of the 14 that report this measure

  • 10of 14

    Science — Masters

    Caldwell County · of the 14 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 028902105.