Districts, charter school systems & campuses · Source: Texas Education Agency
Claybon ElemB80vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Traditional public school campus
Claybon Elem
Kaufman County · Region 10: Richardson · 551 students
Current score
80/1002025-26
Change
−10 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
−2.8 ptsvs 82.8 average · 1,573 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
1,000 of 1,573tied with 60 others
Score vs region
−2.2 ptsvs 82.2 average · 1,157 rated schools in Region 10: Richardson
Region 10: Richardson placement
709 of 1,157tied with 25 others
Score vs county
+2.4 ptsvs 77.6 average · 62 rated schools in Kaufman County
Kaufman County placement
28 of 62tied with 2 others
Score vs similar-size group
−0.2 ptsvs 80.2 average · 4,766 similarly sized rated schools
Similar size placement
2,525 of 4,766tied with 160 others
Score vs state
−1.3 ptsvs 81.3 average · 7,646 rated Texas schools
Texas placement
4,402 of 7,646tied with 276 others
B80
At a glance
Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 90 in 2021-22. The current score is below the 82.8 average for 1,573 rated schools serving a similar economic context.The current score is below the 82.2 average for 1,157 rated schools in Region 10: Richardson.The current score is above the 77.6 average for 62 rated schools in Kaufman County.The current score is level with the 80.2 average for 4,766 similarly sized rated schools.The current score is below the 81.3 average for 7,646 rated Texas schools.
Evidence worth noticing
Strengths and momentum
STAAR result
All Subjects above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters
Meets
58%vs 55.2% avg · +2.8 pts
Masters
30%vs 24.5% avg · +5.5 pts
Among 1,523 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
A precomputed strengths set is not available for this pinned entity. The page’s direct numeric comparisons still update to that pin.
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
Claybon Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 80 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 82.8 average for 1,573 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is down 10 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 1,000th of 1,573 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 60 others).
Claybon Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 80 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 82.2 average for 1,157 rated schools in Region 10: Richardson. It is down 10 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 709th of 1,157 rated schools in Region 10: Richardson (tied with 25 others).
Claybon Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 80 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 77.6 average for 62 rated schools in Kaufman County. It is down 10 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 28th of 62 rated schools in Kaufman County (tied with 2 others).
Claybon Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 80 out of 100 for 2025-26 — level with the 80.2 average for 4,766 similarly sized rated schools. It is down 10 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 2,525th of 4,766 similarly sized rated schools (tied with 160 others).
Claybon Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 80 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 81.3 average for 7,646 rated Texas schools. It is down 10 points since 2021-22.
Follow the solid line to see how this school has changed. Turn comparison lines on or off to add context.
Compare against
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 A with 90 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.
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 Achievement83 B+0.1 vs similar economic context · 1,523 reporting
School Progress80 B−1.9 vs similar economic context · 1,519 reporting
Closing the Gaps74 C−6.2 vs similar economic context · 1,508 reporting
Academic Growth70 C−6.4 vs similar economic context · 1,491 reporting
Relative Performance80 B+0.6 vs similar economic context · 1,519 reporting
Claybon Elem
Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,573 in cohort)
Domain scores
Domain
Score
Grade
Points to next grade
Student Achievement
83
B
7
School Progress
80
B
10
Closing the Gaps
74
C
6
Academic Growth
70
C
10
Relative Performance
80
B
10
Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 6 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 Student Achievement (83), so
School Progress (80) is published above but does not enter the overall
score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 83.
Student outcomes
STAAR performance
All Subjects
Approaches grade level78%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,523 reporting
Meets grade level58%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,523 reporting
Masters grade level30%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,523 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
Approaches grade level81%+0 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,521 reporting
Meets grade level63%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,521 reporting
Masters grade level33%+7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,521 reporting
Math3 performance levels
Approaches grade level75%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,516 reporting
Meets grade level52%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,516 reporting
Masters grade level28%+8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,516 reporting
Approaches grade level
Meets grade level
Masters grade level
Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,573 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
551
Economically disadvantaged
46.0%−0.7 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
8.5%−3.8 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
25.8%+7.4 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
95.2%+0.5 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
9.9%−3.7 pts vs similar economic context
Student demographics
Claybon Elem
African American 32.5%
Hispanic 22.9%
White 35.6%
American Indian 0.5%
Asian 2.7%
Two or More Races 5.6%
Selected comparison averageFor schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,573 reporting for every category shown · 1,573 in full cohort
African American 9.3%
Hispanic 38.7%
White 43.7%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 3.6%
Pacific Islander 0.2%
Two or More Races 4.3%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 10: Richardson · 1,157 reporting for every category shown · 1,157 in full cohort
African American 17.4%
Hispanic 43.5%
White 24.5%
American Indian 0.6%
Asian 9.9%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 4%
Selected comparison averageFor Kaufman County · 62 reporting for every category shown · 62 in full cohort
African American 24.7%
Hispanic 39.8%
White 29.6%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 1.3%
Pacific Islander 0.2%
Two or More Races 4.2%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized schools · 4,766 reporting for every category shown · 4,766 in full cohort
African American 12.1%
Hispanic 54.9%
White 24.5%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 4.5%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3.5%
Statewide average7,646 reporting for every category shown · 7,646 Texas schools in full cohort
African American 11.5%
Hispanic 52.6%
White 27.8%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 4.2%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3.4%
Student counts behind the percentages
Context only. These counts are not rankings, comparisons, or judgments about school quality.
Students in this TEA accountability summary
550
Economically disadvantaged students
253
Emergent bilingual students
47
Special education students
142
Campus mobility · 2024–25
Mobile students
57
Students in TEA mobility denominator
485
TEA-published mobility rate
11.8%
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 551 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 32 (5.5%) from 2024–25.
Latest enrollment
551
2025–26
Change from 2024–25
−32
Decrease · −5.5%
Change since 2021–22
+36
Increase · +7.0%
Enrollment in 2025–26
This school
551
Selected comparison
670.4
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,534 rated schools reporting
Student enrollment by school year for Claybon Elem
School year
Students enrolledClaybon Elem
Change from previous school year
Average enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22
515
First available year
668.7
2022–23
575
Increase of 60 (11.7%)
674
2023–24
553
Decrease of 22 (3.8%)
673.7
2024–25
583
Increase of 30 (5.4%)
670.4
2025–26
551
Decrease of 32 (5.5%)
670.4
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.
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
22
3.6% of cumulative year-end enrollment
Disciplinary actions
45
7.28 per 100 students
Cumulative year-end enrollment
618
2024–25
Share of students · 2024–25
This school
3.6%
Selected comparison
11.6%
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,210 rated schools reporting
−8.0 pts vs similar economic context
Actions per 100 students · 2024–25
This school
7.28
Selected comparison
25.3
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,305 rated schools reporting
−18.0 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Claybon Elem
School year
Cumulative enrollment
Studentsall discipline
Students% of enrollment
Actionsall discipline
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21
594
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
2021–22
563
Suppressed
—
10
1.78
—
24.8
2022–23
613
Suppressed
—
23
3.75
—
26.3
2023–24
591
12
2.0%
21
3.55
11.9%
27
2024–25
618
22
3.6%
45
7.28
11.6%
25.3
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Claybon Elem in 2024–25
Category
Students
Students% of enrollment
Actions
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline
22
3.6%
45
7.28
11.6%
25.3
In-school suspensions
20
3.2%
36
5.83
10.5%
19.5
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.
Claybon Elem
Parent district: Forney ISD
Texas average
Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Spending per student · 2025
This school
$8,462
Selected comparison
$11,914
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,541 rated schools reporting
−$3,452 vs similar economic context
For 2025, TEA reported $8,462 per student for this campus, $19,790 per student for its parent district, Forney 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
Year
Claybon Elem
Parent district: Forney ISD
Texas average
Selected comparison average
Reportingselected comparison
2018
$5,943
$9,960
$13,054
$7,808
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,418 rated schools reporting
2019
$6,075
$12,041
$13,108
$7,998
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,437 rated schools reporting
2020
$6,301
$13,290
$14,058
$8,471
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,448 rated schools reporting
2021
$7,333
$20,660
$14,797
$8,883
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,468 rated schools reporting
2022
$9,876
$21,445
$15,708
$10,194
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,480 rated schools reporting
2023
$8,453
$28,149
$16,792
$10,610
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,497 rated schools reporting
2024
$8,722
$32,204
$18,125
$11,553
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,514 rated schools reporting
2025
$8,462
$19,790
$18,972
$11,914
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,541 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
$66,766−$328 vs similar economic context
Teachers
41−3.1 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
13.6−6.9 vs similar economic context
Teaching experience
Claybon Elem
Beginning 4.9%
1 to 5 years 39.5%
6 to 10 years 15.1%
11 to 20 years 23%
21 to 30 years 17.3%
Selected comparison averageFor schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,573 reporting for every category shown · 1,573 in full cohort
Beginning 5.5%
1 to 5 years 23.9%
6 to 10 years 19.5%
11 to 20 years 29.9%
21 to 30 years 16.8%
Over 30 years 4.1%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 10: Richardson · 1,157 reporting for every category shown · 1,157 in full cohort
Beginning 6.9%
1 to 5 years 29%
6 to 10 years 20.1%
11 to 20 years 27.5%
21 to 30 years 13.7%
Over 30 years 2.8%
Selected comparison averageFor Kaufman County · 62 reporting for every category shown · 62 in full cohort
Beginning 8.2%
1 to 5 years 34%
6 to 10 years 18.6%
11 to 20 years 21.9%
21 to 30 years 14.8%
Over 30 years 2.5%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized schools · 4,766 reporting for every category shown · 4,766 in full cohort
Beginning 6.1%
1 to 5 years 26.3%
6 to 10 years 19.6%
11 to 20 years 29%
21 to 30 years 15.6%
Over 30 years 3.1%
Statewide average7,646 reporting for every category shown · 7,646 Texas schools in full cohort
Beginning 6.2%
1 to 5 years 25.6%
6 to 10 years 19.2%
11 to 20 years 28.7%
21 to 30 years 15.9%
Over 30 years 3.7%
Average students in a class
TEA average class size by grade or subject for Claybon Elem in 2024–25
Grade or subject
Average students per classClaybon Elem · 2024–25
Average students per classselected comparison
Kindergarten
16.4
18
Grade 1
20.8
18.4
Grade 2
16.7
18.6
Grade 3
15.8
19.2
Grade 4
19.8
19.1
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.
Out of 90 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.
#4–10 rankings
Fourth- through tenth-place results
5 measures
6of 59
All Subjects — Masters
Kaufman County · of the 59 that report this measure
6of 59
Reading — Masters
Kaufman County · of the 59 that report this measure
7of 59
Reading — Meets
Kaufman County · of the 59 that report this measure · tied with 1
8of 57
Math — Masters
Kaufman County · of the 57 that report this measure
10of 59
Chronically absent (lowest is best)
Kaufman County · of the 59 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.
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 129902103.