+5.4 ptsvs 77.6 average · 2,074 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
686 of 2,074tied with 63 others
Score vs region
−0.3 ptsvs 83.3 average · 1,303 rated schools in Region 04: Houston
Region 04: Houston placement
697 of 1,303tied with 44 others
Score vs county
−0.4 ptsvs 83.4 average · 911 rated schools in Harris County
Harris County placement
484 of 911tied with 34 others
Score vs similar-size group
+2.4 ptsvs 80.6 average · 4,394 similarly sized rated schools
Similar size placement
1,927 of 4,394tied with 147 others
Score vs state
+1.7 ptsvs 81.3 average · 7,646 rated Texas schools
Texas placement
3,601 of 7,646tied with 244 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 90 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 77.6 average for 2,074 rated schools serving a similar economic context.The current score is level with the 83.3 average for 1,303 rated schools in Region 04: Houston.The current score is level with the 83.4 average for 911 rated schools in Harris County.The current score is above the 80.6 average for 4,394 similarly sized rated schools.The current score is above 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
46%vs 40.5% avg · +5.5 pts
Masters
21%vs 16.1% avg · +4.9 pts
Among 1,924 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
Donna Lewis Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 83 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 77.6 average for 2,074 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is down 10 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 686th of 2,074 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 63 others).
Donna Lewis Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 83 out of 100 for 2025-26 — level with the 83.3 average for 1,303 rated schools in Region 04: Houston. It is down 10 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 697th of 1,303 rated schools in Region 04: Houston (tied with 44 others).
Donna Lewis Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 83 out of 100 for 2025-26 — level with the 83.4 average for 911 rated schools in Harris County. It is down 10 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 484th of 911 rated schools in Harris County (tied with 34 others).
Donna Lewis Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 83 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 80.6 average for 4,394 similarly sized rated schools. It is down 10 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 1,927th of 4,394 similarly sized rated schools (tied with 147 others).
Donna Lewis Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 83 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above 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 Achievement74 C+3.7 vs similar economic context · 1,924 reporting
School Progress83 B+4.2 vs similar economic context · 1,921 reporting
Closing the Gaps83 B+8.1 vs similar economic context · 1,908 reporting
Academic Growth81 B+7.9 vs similar economic context · 1,891 reporting
Relative Performance83 B+6.3 vs similar economic context · 1,920 reporting
Donna Lewis Elem
Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,074 in cohort)
Domain scores
Domain
Score
Grade
Points to next grade
Student Achievement
74
C
6
School Progress
83
B
7
Closing the Gaps
83
B
7
Academic Growth
81
B
9
Relative Performance
83
B
7
Closest to moving up: School Progress, 7 points below A 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 (83), so
Student Achievement (74) 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 level72%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,924 reporting
Meets grade level46%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,924 reporting
Masters grade level21%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,924 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
Approaches grade level70%+1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,923 reporting
Meets grade level43%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,923 reporting
Masters grade level18%+0 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,923 reporting
Math3 performance levels
Approaches grade level81%+15 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,918 reporting
Meets grade level57%+18 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,918 reporting
Masters grade level28%+13 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,918 reporting
Science3 performance levels
Approaches grade level47%−16 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,811 reporting
Meets grade level19%−15 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,811 reporting
Masters grade level5%−9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,811 reporting
Approaches grade level
Meets grade level
Masters grade level
Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,074 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
688
Economically disadvantaged
92.7%+1.6 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
75.3%+34.4 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
11.6%−6.0 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
94.2%+1.2 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
16.9%−6.2 pts vs similar economic context
Student demographics
Donna Lewis Elem
African American 13%
Hispanic 83.8%
White 1.5%
American Indian 0.1%
Asian 0.1%
Two or More Races 1.5%
Selected comparison averageFor schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,074 reporting for every category shown · 2,074 in full cohort
African American 14.9%
Hispanic 76.4%
White 5.5%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 1.3%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 1.6%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 04: Houston · 1,303 reporting for every category shown · 1,303 in full cohort
African American 19.1%
Hispanic 53.8%
White 16.9%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 6.7%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3.1%
Selected comparison averageFor Harris County · 911 reporting for every category shown · 911 in full cohort
African American 19.3%
Hispanic 59.1%
White 13.1%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 5.4%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 2.7%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized schools · 4,394 reporting for every category shown · 4,394 in full cohort
African American 12.4%
Hispanic 54%
White 24.3%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 5.2%
Pacific Islander 0.2%
Two or More Races 3.6%
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
687
Economically disadvantaged students
637
Emergent bilingual students
517
Special education students
80
Campus mobility · 2024–25
Mobile students
75
Students in TEA mobility denominator
562
TEA-published mobility rate
13.3%
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 688 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 1 (0.1%) from 2024–25.
Latest enrollment
688
2025–26
Change from 2024–25
−1
Decrease · −0.1%
Change since 2021–22
+24
Increase · +3.6%
Enrollment in 2025–26
This school
688
Selected comparison
569.8
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,052 rated schools reporting
Student enrollment by school year for Donna Lewis Elem
School year
Students enrolledDonna Lewis Elem
Change from previous school year
Average enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22
664
First available year
614.9
2022–23
662
Decrease of 2 (0.3%)
611.2
2023–24
671
Increase of 9 (1.4%)
601.4
2024–25
689
Increase of 18 (2.7%)
594.9
2025–26
688
Decrease of 1 (0.1%)
569.8
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
Suppressed
Rate not available
Disciplinary actions
Suppressed
Rate not available
Cumulative year-end enrollment
750
2024–25
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Donna Lewis 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
698
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
2021–22
729
10
1.4%
16
2.19
12.5%
29.6
2022–23
732
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
2023–24
767
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
2024–25
750
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Donna Lewis Elem in 2024–25
Category
Students
Students% of enrollment
Actions
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
In-school suspensions
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
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 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.
Donna Lewis Elem
Parent district: Spring ISD
Texas average
Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Spending per student · 2025
This school
$9,990
Selected comparison
$13,240
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,054 rated schools reporting
−$3,250 vs similar economic context
For 2025, TEA reported $9,990 per student for this campus, $18,440 per student for its parent district, Spring 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
Donna Lewis Elem
Parent district: Spring ISD
Texas average
Selected comparison average
Reportingselected comparison
2018
$7,442
$12,612
$13,054
$8,322
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,957 rated schools reporting
2019
$7,475
$15,637
$13,108
$8,336
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,983 rated schools reporting
2020
$7,643
$15,486
$14,058
$8,840
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,987 rated schools reporting
2021
$8,416
$14,638
$14,797
$9,658
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,990 rated schools reporting
2022
$8,249
$14,042
$15,708
$11,227
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,007 rated schools reporting
2023
$10,823
$15,536
$16,792
$11,744
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,031 rated schools reporting
2024
$10,131
$17,211
$18,125
$12,669
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,041 rated schools reporting
2025
$9,990
$18,440
$18,972
$13,240
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,054 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
$68,988+$674 vs similar economic context
Teachers
42+2.0 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
16.4+1.7 vs similar economic context
Teaching experience
Donna Lewis Elem
1 to 5 years 38.1%
6 to 10 years 14.3%
11 to 20 years 42.9%
21 to 30 years 4.8%
Selected comparison averageFor schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,074 reporting for every category shown · 2,074 in full cohort
Beginning 7.5%
1 to 5 years 27.2%
6 to 10 years 18.8%
11 to 20 years 27.1%
21 to 30 years 14.8%
Over 30 years 3.4%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 04: Houston · 1,303 reporting for every category shown · 1,303 in full cohort
Beginning 7.7%
1 to 5 years 27.3%
6 to 10 years 20.6%
11 to 20 years 27.2%
21 to 30 years 13.5%
Over 30 years 2.6%
Selected comparison averageFor Harris County · 911 reporting for every category shown · 911 in full cohort
Beginning 8.9%
1 to 5 years 28.4%
6 to 10 years 20.3%
11 to 20 years 26.2%
21 to 30 years 13%
Over 30 years 2.5%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized schools · 4,394 reporting for every category shown · 4,394 in full cohort
Beginning 6.1%
1 to 5 years 26.6%
6 to 10 years 19.9%
11 to 20 years 29%
21 to 30 years 15.3%
Over 30 years 2.9%
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 Donna Lewis Elem in 2024–25
Grade or subject
Average students per classDonna Lewis Elem · 2024–25
Average students per classselected comparison
Kindergarten
20.6
18.1
Grade 1
14
18.3
Grade 2
12.1
18.3
Grade 3
16.4
18.5
Grade 4
18.5
18.5
Grade 5
20.1
19.3
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.
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 101919123.