+14.5 ptsvs 82.5 average · 63 rated charter campuses serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
2 of 63tied with 1 other
Score vs similar-size group
+15.1 ptsvs 81.9 average · 155 similarly sized rated charter campuses
Similar size placement
1 of 155tied with 2 others
Score vs state
+15.3 ptsvs 81.7 average · 829 rated Texas charter campuses
Texas charter placement
9 of 829tied with 13 others
A97
At a glance
Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving up; under the rules in force back then it scored 100 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 82.5 average for 63 rated charter campuses serving a similar economic context.The current score is above the 81.9 average for 155 similarly sized rated charter campuses.The current score is above the 81.7 average for 829 rated Texas charter campuses.
Evidence worth noticing
Strengths and momentum
Recent domain gain
School Progress rose 2 points
91 to 932024-25 to 2025-26
93 is 16 points above
the 77 average among 60 charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
Tied for 3rd of 60 charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure; 3 charter campuses share that value.
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
Dan Chadwick Campus is rated A by TEA, scoring 97 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 82.5 average for 63 rated charter campuses serving a similar economic context. It is up 6 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 2nd of 63 rated charter campuses serving a similar economic context (tied with 1 other).
Dan Chadwick Campus is rated A by TEA, scoring 97 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.9 average for 155 similarly sized rated charter campuses. It is up 6 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 1st of 155 similarly sized rated charter campuses (tied with 2 others).
Dan Chadwick Campus is rated A by TEA, scoring 97 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.7 average for 829 rated Texas charter campuses. It is up 6 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 100 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 Achievement97 A+14.1 vs similar economic context · 63 reporting
School Progress93 A+16.0 vs similar economic context · 60 reporting
Closing the Gaps96 A+17.1 vs similar economic context · 60 reporting
Academic Growth92 A+18.6 vs similar economic context · 60 reporting
Relative Performance93 A+21.0 vs similar economic context · 60 reporting
Dan Chadwick Campus
Similar economic-disadvantage rate (63 in cohort)
Domain scores
Domain
Score
Grade
Points to next grade
Student Achievement
97
A
—
School Progress
93
A
—
Closing the Gaps
96
A
—
Academic Growth
92
A
—
Relative Performance
93
A
—
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 (97), so
School Progress (93) is published above but does not enter the overall
score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 97.
Student outcomes
STAAR performance
All Subjects
Approaches grade level88%+7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 63 reporting
Meets grade level63%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 63 reporting
Masters grade level27%+1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 63 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
Approaches grade level79%−7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 62 reporting
Meets grade level58%−9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 62 reporting
Masters grade level11%−20 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 62 reporting
Math3 performance levels
Approaches grade level100%+25 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 62 reporting
Meets grade level47%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 62 reporting
Masters grade level37%+16 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 62 reporting
Science3 performance levels
Approaches grade level95%+15 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 60 reporting
Meets grade level63%+9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 60 reporting
Masters grade level37%+12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 60 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
Approaches grade level95%+16 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 45 reporting
Meets grade level78%+25 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 45 reporting
Masters grade level43%+17 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 45 reporting
Approaches grade level
Meets grade level
Masters grade level
Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (63 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.
Completion
Four-Year
91.9%+38.3 pts vs similar economic contextaverage forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 4 rated charter campuses reporting
Five-Year
100.0%+50.0 pts vs similar economic contextaverage forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 4 rated charter campuses reporting
Six-Year
97.7%+48.3 pts vs similar economic contextaverage forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 4 rated charter campuses reporting
Dropout Rate
0.0%−2.0 pts vs similar economic contextaverage forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 4 rated charter campuses reporting
These measures use TEA's alternative-education accountability population. Each comparison average includes only charter campuses in that population that report that specific measure; its reporting count is shown beside the average. It is an unweighted average of those reported charter campus rates, not a pooled rate across every student in the group.
College, career and military readiness
Total credit for CCMR criteria
97.0%+11.6 pts vs similar economic context
CCMR criteria
Criterion
This school% of graduates
Averagesimilar economic context
Differencepercentage points
Reportingselected comparison
Total credit for CCMR criteria
97.0%
85.4%
+11.6
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 26 rated charter campuses reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course
94.4%
73.1%
+21.3
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 28 rated charter campuses reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA
36.1%
58.1%
−22.0
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 28 rated charter campuses reporting
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)
0.0%
12.8%
−12.8
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 28 rated charter campuses reporting
Earned college credit for a dual credit course
13.9%
43.7%
−29.8
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 28 rated charter campuses reporting
Earned an industry-based certification
2.8%
4.1%
−1.3
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 28 rated charter campuses reporting
Earned a level I or level II certificate
0.0%
0.0%
+0.0
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 28 rated charter campuses reporting
Earned an associate degree
0.0%
11.7%
−11.7
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 28 rated charter campuses reporting
Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit
0.0%
3.0%
−3.0
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 28 rated charter campuses reporting
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness
0.0%
0.1%
−0.1
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 28 rated charter campuses reporting
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student
11.1%
3.6%
+7.5
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 28 rated charter campuses reporting
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces
0.0%
1.6%
−1.6
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 28 rated charter campuses reporting
Every row is a share of this school's graduates, and every row is a way of
meeting CCMR — so on every row, a bigger share is better. Difference is this
school minus the average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate,
counted in percentage points: +5.0 would mean five more graduates in every hundred met that
criterion here. The selected comparison is an unweighted average of the reported charter campus percentages, not a pooled rate across all graduates in the group. Graduates may meet several criteria, so the rows do not add up to the total.
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.
After high school: the following fall
Where school graduates appeared in Texas public higher-education records the fall after graduation. This is a limited next-step measure, not an eventual college-going or completion rate.
Graduates in the report
42
Class of 2023–24
Enrolled in Texas public higher education
9
21.4% of graduates
Not found in Texas public higher-ed records
31
73.8% of graduates
Not trackable
2
Fall 2024
Graduates in the report
This school
42
Selected comparison
56.6
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 16 rated charter campuses reporting
Enrolled in Texas public higher education
This school
9
Selected comparison
27.9
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 16 rated charter campuses reporting
Texas-public enrollment rate
This school
21.4%
Selected comparison
49.4%
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 16 rated charter campuses reporting
−28.0 pts vs similar economic context
Not-found rate
This school
73.8%
Selected comparison
45.1%
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 16 rated charter campuses reporting
+28.7 pts vs similar economic context
Not-trackable rate
This school
4.8%
Selected comparison
5.5%
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 16 rated charter campuses reporting
−0.7 pts vs similar economic context
Most common named Texas public destinations
KILGORE COLLEGE (003580)5
Selected comparison counts are neutral cohort scale context. The percentages put differently sized graduating classes on the same basis, but still cover only the limited Texas-public system observed by this report.
Source: Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, high-school graduates enrolled in higher education, fetched 24 August 2026. The report covers graduates who enrolled in a Texas public college or university the following fall and includes only districts or campuses with more than 25 graduates.
“Not found” does not mean a graduate did not continue their education. It can include private or out-of-state college, work, military service, enrollment after the fall term, or another path the Texas public system does not observe.
“Not trackable” is not an outcome. THECB uses it for graduates with a non-standard identifier that could not be matched to higher-education records.
Who this school serves
Placed after the results deliberately: this is context for reading them, not an explanation of them.
Students
125
Economically disadvantaged
24.8%−0.8 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
0.0%−11.8 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
9.6%−4.3 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
96.8%+1.8 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
3.9%−9.0 pts vs similar economic context
Student demographics
Dan Chadwick Campus
African American 6.4%
Hispanic 31.2%
White 60%
Two or More Races 2.4%
Selected comparison averageFor charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 63 reporting for every category shown · 63 in full cohort
African American 9.4%
Hispanic 34.8%
White 38.5%
American Indian 0.4%
Asian 11.4%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 5.4%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized charter campuses · 155 reporting for every category shown · 155 in full cohort
African American 19%
Hispanic 61.3%
White 13.9%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 2.2%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3.2%
Texas charter average829 reporting for every category shown · 829 Texas charter campuses in full cohort
African American 17.5%
Hispanic 61.8%
White 12.2%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 5.5%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 2.5%
Student counts behind the percentages
Context only. These counts are not rankings, comparisons, or judgments about school quality.
Students in this TEA accountability summary
125
Economically disadvantaged students
31
Emergent bilingual students
0
Special education students
12
TEA context labels
Alternative education campus under AEA procedures
Alternative education type: dropout recovery school
Rated under AEA procedures
Campus mobility · 2024–25
Mobile students
49
Students in TEA mobility denominator
159
TEA-published mobility rate
30.8%
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 125 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 3 (2.3%) from 2024–25.
Latest enrollment
125
2025–26
Change from 2024–25
−3
Decrease · −2.3%
Change since 2021–22
−16
Decrease · −11.3%
Enrollment in 2025–26
This school
125
Selected comparison
533.1
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 63 rated charter campuses reporting
Student enrollment by school year for Dan Chadwick Campus
School year
Students enrolledDan Chadwick Campus
Change from previous school year
Average enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22
141
First available year
414.2
2022–23
136
Decrease of 5 (3.5%)
449.5
2023–24
128
Decrease of 8 (5.9%)
500.3
2024–25
128
No change
511.5
2025–26
125
Decrease of 3 (2.3%)
533.1
The selected comparison column is the average enrollment among reporting charter campuses 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
Not reported
Rate not available
Disciplinary actions
Not reported
Rate not available
Cumulative year-end enrollment
159
2024–25
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Dan Chadwick Campus
School year
Cumulative enrollment
Studentsall discipline
Students% of enrollment
Actionsall discipline
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21
173
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
2021–22
174
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
2022–23
170
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
2023–24
164
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
2024–25
159
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Dan Chadwick Campus in 2024–25
Category
Students
Students% of enrollment
Actions
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
In-school suspensions
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
Out-of-school suspensions
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
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 charter campuses 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.
Dan Chadwick Campus
Parent district: East Texas Charter Schools
Texas average
Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Spending per student · 2025
This school
$11,890
Selected comparison
$10,313
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 60 rated charter campuses reporting
+$1,577 vs similar economic context
For 2025, TEA reported $11,890 per student for this campus, $13,323 per student for its parent district, East Texas Charter Schools, $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
Dan Chadwick Campus
Parent district: East Texas Charter Schools
Texas average
Selected comparison average
Reportingselected comparison
2018
$9,036
$10,435
$13,054
$6,870
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 35 rated charter campuses reporting
2019
$8,876
$10,354
$13,108
$7,211
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 36 rated charter campuses reporting
2020
$9,208
$10,555
$14,058
$7,606
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 39 rated charter campuses reporting
2021
$10,093
$11,567
$14,797
$8,384
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 44 rated charter campuses reporting
2022
$10,430
$11,951
$15,708
$9,015
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 50 rated charter campuses reporting
2023
$10,610
$11,746
$16,792
$9,950
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 56 rated charter campuses reporting
2024
$12,306
$13,626
$18,125
$9,960
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 58 rated charter campuses reporting
2025
$11,890
$13,323
$18,972
$10,313
average forcharter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 60 rated charter campuses 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
$72,669+$15,785 vs similar economic context
Teachers
11−23.4 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
11.9−21.3 vs similar economic context
Teaching experience
Dan Chadwick Campus
Beginning 18.1%
11 to 20 years 38.1%
21 to 30 years 30.5%
Over 30 years 13.3%
Selected comparison averageFor charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 63 reporting for every category shown · 63 in full cohort
Beginning 12.2%
1 to 5 years 42.7%
6 to 10 years 21.5%
11 to 20 years 14.3%
21 to 30 years 5.5%
Over 30 years 0.8%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized charter campuses · 155 reporting for every category shown · 155 in full cohort
Beginning 13.3%
1 to 5 years 42.3%
6 to 10 years 18.8%
11 to 20 years 16.9%
21 to 30 years 5.8%
Over 30 years 1.7%
Texas charter average829 reporting for every category shown · 829 Texas charter campuses in full cohort
Beginning 13%
1 to 5 years 44.3%
6 to 10 years 19.6%
11 to 20 years 15.4%
21 to 30 years 4.8%
Over 30 years 0.9%
Average students in a class
TEA average class size by grade or subject for Dan Chadwick Campus in 2024–25
Grade or subject
Average students per classDan Chadwick Campus · 2024–25
Average students per classselected comparison
Secondary English
8.6
15.2
Secondary languages other than English
8
16.6
Secondary math
11.3
14.5
Secondary science
13.9
17.3
Secondary social studies
13.7
16.8
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 116 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.
#1 rankings
First-place results
5 measures
1of 822
Math — Approaches
Texas charter average · of the 822 that report this measure · tied with 8
1of 155
Overall score
Similar size · of the 155 that report this measure · tied with 2
1of 155
Student Achievement
Similar size · of the 155 that report this measure
1of 74
Five-Year Completion Rate
Similar size (alternative-education accountability only) · of the 74 that report this measure
1of 28
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 28 that report this measure
#2–3 rankings
Second- and third-place results
3 measures
2of 60
Academic Growth
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 60 that report this measure
3of 60
School Progress
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 60 that report this measure · tied with 2
3of 60
Relative Performance
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 60 that report this measure · tied with 2
#4–10 rankings
Fourth- through tenth-place results
15 measures
4of 149
Attendance
Similar size · of the 149 that report this measure · tied with 2
4of 94
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course
Similar size · of the 94 that report this measure · tied with 2
4of 60
Closing the Gaps
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 60 that report this measure
4of 45
Social Studies — Approaches
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 45 that report this measure · tied with 1
5of 45
Social Studies — Meets
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 45 that report this measure
5of 45
Social Studies — Masters
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 45 that report this measure
6of 149
Chronically absent (lowest is best)
Similar size · of the 149 that report this measure
7of 154
Math — Masters
Similar size · of the 154 that report this measure
7of 60
Science — Approaches
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 60 that report this measure
8of 74
Four-Year Completion Rate
Similar size (alternative-education accountability only) · of the 74 that report this measure
8of 28
Earned an industry-based certification
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 28 that report this measure
9of 145
Science — Masters
Similar size · of the 145 that report this measure
10of 74
Six-Year Completion Rate
Similar size (alternative-education accountability only) · of the 74 that report this measure
10of 60
Per-student spending
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 60 that report this measure
10of 26
College, career or military ready
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 26 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 092801001.