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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus

Cedar Grove Elem

Polk County · Region 06: Huntsville · 516 students

Official school websiteSchool information and family resources

Current score
78/1002025-26
Change
−12 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
−2.7 ptsvs 80.7 average · 1,937 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
1,206 of 1,937tied with 77 others
C78

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 below the 80.7 average for 1,937 rated schools serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

STAAR result

Math above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters

Meets
46%vs 43.5% avg · +2.5 pts
Masters
18%vs 16.9% avg · +1.1 pts

Among 1,839 schools 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
59%vs 54.2% avg · +4.8 pts
Masters
29%vs 21.8% avg · +7.2 pts

Among 1,847 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.

See the full measure

Current strength

Chronically absent lower than the similar-context average

7.8% −8.3 pts vs 16.1%

  • 7.8% is 8.3 percentage points lower than the 16.1% average among 1,879 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

Cedar Grove Elem is rated C by TEA, scoring 78 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 80.7 average for 1,937 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is down 12 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 1,206th of 1,937 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 77 others).

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. Enrollment over time
  8. Discipline and removal from class
  9. Spending per student
  10. Teachers and actual class size
  11. Where this school ranks best
  12. 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
908070 Similar economic-disadvantage rateTexas averageCedar Grove Elem 9080818878 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
2025-26C7880.7 1,937 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25B8880.5 1,914 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24B8178.5 1,893 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23B8079.0 1,862 reporting79.1 7,377 reporting
2021-22A9082.5 1,837 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 Achievement77 C−2.1 vs similar economic context · 1,850 reporting
  • School Progress80 B−1.4 vs similar economic context · 1,843 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps72 C−5.9 vs similar economic context · 1,826 reporting
  • Academic Growth66 D−8.4 vs similar economic context · 1,788 reporting
  • Relative Performance80 B+0.4 vs similar economic context · 1,843 reporting
  • Cedar Grove Elem
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,937 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement77C3
School Progress80B10
Closing the Gaps72C8
Academic Growth66D4
Relative Performance80B10

Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 8 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 (80), so Student Achievement (77) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 80.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level76%+1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,850 reporting
  • Meets grade level49%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,850 reporting
  • Masters grade level22%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,850 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level83%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,847 reporting
  • Meets grade level59%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,847 reporting
  • Masters grade level29%+7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,847 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level74%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,839 reporting
  • Meets grade level46%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,839 reporting
  • Masters grade level18%+1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,839 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level64%−12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,693 reporting
  • Meets grade level31%−17 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,693 reporting
  • Masters grade level11%−11 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,693 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,937 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
516
Economically disadvantaged
60.7%−0.4 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
6.4%−9.7 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
26.2%+7.4 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
96.0%+1.8 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
7.8%−8.3 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Cedar Grove Elem

African American: 6.8%Hispanic: 31.8%White: 55%American Indian: 0.2%Asian: 1.2%Two or More Races: 5%
  • African American 6.8%
  • Hispanic 31.8%
  • White 55%
  • American Indian 0.2%
  • Asian 1.2%
  • Two or More Races 5%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,937 reporting for every category shown · 1,937 in full cohort

African American: 10.4%Hispanic: 48.7%White: 34.3%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 2.2%Pacific Islander: 0.2%Two or More Races: 3.8%
  • African American 10.4%
  • Hispanic 48.7%
  • White 34.3%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 2.2%
  • Pacific Islander 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 3.8%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
516
Economically disadvantaged students
313
Emergent bilingual students
33
Special education students
135

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
66
Students in TEA mobility denominator
553
TEA-published mobility rate
11.9%

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 516 students in 2025–26, an increase of 3 (0.6%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
516

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
+3

Increase · +0.6%

Change since 2021–22
+25

Increase · +5.1%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This school
516
Selected comparison
624.9

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,903 rated schools reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Cedar Grove Elem
School yearStudents enrolledCedar Grove ElemChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 491 First available year 636.6
2022–23 513 Increase of 22 (4.5%) 640.8
2023–24 530 Increase of 17 (3.3%) 638.9
2024–25 513 Decrease of 17 (3.2%) 634.9
2025–26 516 Increase of 3 (0.6%) 624.9

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
66

11.9% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
116

20.98 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
553

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This school
11.9%
Selected comparison
12.7%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,470 rated schools reporting

−0.8 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This school
20.98
Selected comparison
28.9

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,594 rated schools reporting

−7.9 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Cedar Grove Elem
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 535 45 8.4% 58 10.84 9.7% 18.9
2021–22 536 47 8.8% 66 12.31 12.6% 28.7
2022–23 564 52 9.2% 85 15.07 13.0% 30.7
2023–24 578 76 13.2% 145 25.09 13.0% 30.5
2024–25 553 66 11.9% 116 20.98 12.7% 28.9
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Cedar Grove Elem in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 66 11.9% 116 20.98 12.7% 28.9
In-school suspensions 65 11.8% 107 19.35 11.4% 22.3
Out-of-school suspensions Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
DAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
Mandatory DAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Discretionary DAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
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.

$5k$13k$20k20182020202220242025
  • Cedar Grove Elem
  • Parent district: Livingston ISD
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$8,190
Selected comparison
$12,492

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,910 rated schools reporting

−$4,302 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $8,190 per student for this campus, $16,088 per student for its parent district, Livingston 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
YearCedar Grove ElemParent district: Livingston ISDTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$5,762$11,489$13,054$7,923 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,771 rated schools reporting
2019$6,202$11,790$13,108$8,069 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,788 rated schools reporting
2020$6,199$11,775$14,058$8,678 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,807 rated schools reporting
2021$7,396$12,927$14,797$9,105 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,820 rated schools reporting
2022$6,665$13,133$15,708$10,435 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,838 rated schools reporting
2023$6,518$13,857$16,792$11,111 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,862 rated schools reporting
2024$7,166$14,408$18,125$11,948 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,889 rated schools reporting
2025$8,190$16,088$18,972$12,492 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,910 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
$70,055+$3,668 vs similar economic context
Teachers
31−11.2 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
16.7−2.5 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Cedar Grove Elem

Beginning: 3.2%1 to 5 years: 25.6%6 to 10 years: 25.9%11 to 20 years: 25.9%21 to 30 years: 16.2%Over 30 years: 3.2%
  • Beginning 3.2%
  • 1 to 5 years 25.6%
  • 6 to 10 years 25.9%
  • 11 to 20 years 25.9%
  • 21 to 30 years 16.2%
  • Over 30 years 3.2%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,937 reporting for every category shown · 1,937 in full cohort

Beginning: 6%1 to 5 years: 25.5%6 to 10 years: 19.1%11 to 20 years: 28.4%21 to 30 years: 16.2%Over 30 years: 4.2%
  • Beginning 6%
  • 1 to 5 years 25.5%
  • 6 to 10 years 19.1%
  • 11 to 20 years 28.4%
  • 21 to 30 years 16.2%
  • Over 30 years 4.2%

Average students in a class

TEA average class size by grade or subject for Cedar Grove Elem in 2024–25
Grade or subjectAverage students per classCedar Grove Elem · 2024–25Average students per classselected comparison
Grade 120.818.2
Grade 219.618.4
Grade 322.218.6
Grade 418.218.9
Grade 520.419.6

These are TEA's actual class-size averages for the grade or subject shown, not the student-to-teacher ratio. TEA reported 5 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

2 measures

  • 2of 17

    Reading — Masters

    Polk County · of the 17 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 3of 17

    Reading — Approaches

    Polk County · of the 17 that report this measure

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

11 measures

  • 4of 18

    Attendance

    Polk County · of the 18 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 4of 17

    All Subjects — Masters

    Polk County · of the 17 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 4of 17

    Reading — Meets

    Polk County · of the 17 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 4of 16

    Math — Masters

    Polk County · of the 16 that report this measure

  • 5of 17

    Chronically absent (lowest is best)

    Polk County · of the 17 that report this measure

  • 7of 16

    Math — Approaches

    Polk County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 7of 16

    Math — Meets

    Polk County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 8of 17

    All Subjects — Approaches

    Polk County · of the 17 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 8of 17

    All Subjects — Meets

    Polk County · of the 17 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 9of 16

    School Progress

    Polk County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 9of 16

    Relative Performance

    Polk County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 2

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 187907104.