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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus

Brazos County JJAEP

Brazos County · Region 06: Huntsville · 10 students

Not Rated

At a glance

TEA did not issue an overall rating for Brazos County JJAEP for 2025-26. Everything TEA did publish for this school is below.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

Current strength

Chronically absent lower than the similar-context average

17.6% −5.2 pts vs 22.8%

  • 17.6% is 5.2 percentage points lower than the 22.8% average among 2,240 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measure

Current strength

Attendance above the similar-context average

94.6% +1.6 pts vs 93%

  • 94.6% is 1.6 percentage points above the 93% average among 2,247 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

TEA did not issue an overall rating for Brazos County JJAEP for 2025-26. Everything TEA did publish for this school is below.

TEA did not issue an overall rating for this school. Scores below are the figures TEA published; the letter grades are the state's where it issued them.

Put the numbers in context

Compare with

Jump to a section
  1. Overview
  2. 5 years of ratings
  3. Where the score comes from
  4. Student outcomes
  5. Who this school serves
  6. Student counts behind the percentages
  7. Discipline and removal from class
  8. Where this comes from

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 average 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.

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
2025-26Not Rated—77.7 2,372 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25Not Rated—77.2 2,353 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24Not Rated—74.0 2,334 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23Not Rated—73.6 2,324 reporting79.1 7,377 reporting
2021-22Not Rated—81.8 2,297 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 Achievement—Not reported · similar economic context 70.6 · 2,193 reporting
  • School Progress—Not reported · similar economic context 78.8 · 2,188 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps—Not reported · similar economic context 75 · 2,172 reporting
  • Academic Growth—Not reported · similar economic context 73 · 2,152 reporting
  • Relative Performance—Not reported · similar economic context 76.9 · 2,187 reporting
  • Brazos County JJAEP
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,372 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement—Not rated—
School Progress—Not rated—
Closing the Gaps—Not rated—
Academic Growth—Not rated—
Relative Performance—Not rated—

The scores above are the ones TEA published. TEA did not issue letter grades for this school, so none are shown: the A–F thresholds marked on the chart are the state's, but applying them here would produce a grade the state chose to withhold.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 66.7% · 2,193 reporting
  • Meets grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 40.7% · 2,193 reporting
  • Masters grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 16.1% · 2,193 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 68.9% · 2,192 reporting
  • Meets grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 44.4% · 2,192 reporting
  • Masters grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 17.6% · 2,192 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 65.9% · 2,184 reporting
  • Meets grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 38.7% · 2,184 reporting
  • Masters grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 14.8% · 2,184 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 63.6% · 2,056 reporting
  • Meets grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 34.3% · 2,056 reporting
  • Masters grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 14.1% · 2,056 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,372 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
10
Economically disadvantaged
90.0%+0.1 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
20.0%−19.2 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
20.0%+2.2 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
94.6%+1.6 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
17.6%−5.2 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Brazos County JJAEP

African American: 50%Hispanic: 30%White: 10%Two or More Races: 10%
  • African American 50%
  • Hispanic 30%
  • White 10%
  • Two or More Races 10%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,372 reporting for every category shown · 2,372 in full cohort

African American: 14.7%Hispanic: 75.5%White: 6.4%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 1.3%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 1.7%
  • African American 14.7%
  • Hispanic 75.5%
  • White 6.4%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 1.3%
  • Pacific Islander 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 1.7%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
10
Economically disadvantaged students
9
Emergent bilingual students
2
Special education students
2

TEA context labels

  • Juvenile Justice Alternative Education Program (JJAEP)

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
22
Students in TEA mobility denominator
22
TEA-published mobility rate
100%

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.

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.

TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Brazos County JJAEP
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 Not reported Suppressed — Suppressed — — —

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.

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 021902015.