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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus · Alternative Education Accountability

Fredda Nottingham Alternative Education Center

Liberty County · Region 04: Houston · 6 students

Official school websiteSchool information and family resources

Not Rated

At a glance

TEA did not issue an overall rating for Fredda Nottingham Alternative Education Center for 2025-26. Everything TEA did publish for this school is below.

Read the full rating context and placement

TEA did not issue an overall rating for Fredda Nottingham Alternative Education Center 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. After high school: the following fall
  6. Who this school serves
  7. Student counts behind the percentages
  8. Discipline and removal from class
  9. Spending per student
  10. Teachers
  11. 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—77.4 2,273 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25Not Rated—77.1 2,259 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24Not Rated—74.3 2,243 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23Not Rated—74.7 2,229 reporting79.1 7,377 reporting
2021-22Not Rated—81.7 2,208 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 71.4 · 2,106 reporting
  • School Progress—Not reported · similar economic context 78.6 · 2,099 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps—Not reported · similar economic context 74.6 · 2,084 reporting
  • Academic Growth—Not reported · similar economic context 72.2 · 2,052 reporting
  • Relative Performance—Not reported · similar economic context 76.8 · 2,099 reporting
  • Fredda Nottingham Alternative Education Center
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,273 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 67.6% · 2,106 reporting
  • Meets grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 41.3% · 2,106 reporting
  • Masters grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 16.2% · 2,106 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 70.1% · 2,105 reporting
  • Meets grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 45.6% · 2,105 reporting
  • Masters grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 17.9% · 2,105 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 65.9% · 2,095 reporting
  • Meets grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 37.9% · 2,095 reporting
  • Masters grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 14.2% · 2,095 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,273 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.

Completion

Four-Year
92.0%+18.9 pts vs similar economic context average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 55 rated schools reporting
Five-Year
97.3%+19.1 pts vs similar economic context average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 55 rated schools reporting
Six-Year
100.0%+20.5 pts vs similar economic context average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 55 rated schools reporting
Dropout Rate
4.2%−1.1 pts vs similar economic context average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 55 rated schools reporting

These measures use TEA's alternative-education accountability population. Each comparison average includes only schools in that population that report that specific measure; its reporting count is shown beside the average. It is an unweighted average of those reported school rates, not a pooled rate across every student in the group.

College, career and military readiness

Total credit for CCMR criteria
95.0%+10.9 pts vs similar economic context
CCMR criteria
CriterionThis school% of graduatesAveragesimilar economic contextDifferencepercentage pointsReportingselected comparison
Total credit for CCMR criteria95.0%84.1%+10.9 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 353 rated schools reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course36.8%57.4%−20.6 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 356 rated schools reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA0.0%21.9%−21.9 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 356 rated schools reporting
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)0.0%11.8%−11.8 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 356 rated schools reporting
Earned college credit for a dual credit course0.0%28.8%−28.8 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 356 rated schools reporting
Earned an industry-based certification57.9%33.9%+24.0 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 356 rated schools reporting
Earned a level I or level II certificate0.0%2.6%−2.6 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 356 rated schools reporting
Earned an associate degree0.0%6.9%−6.9 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 356 rated schools reporting
Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit0.0%6.1%−6.1 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 356 rated schools reporting
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness10.5%3.1%+7.4 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 356 rated schools reporting
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student0.0%8.0%−8.0 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 356 rated schools reporting
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces0.0%2.7%−2.7 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 356 rated schools 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 for schools 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 school 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 schools 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
28

Class of 2023–24

Enrolled in Texas public higher education
0

0.0% of graduates

Not found in Texas public higher-ed records
27

96.4% of graduates

Not trackable
1

Fall 2024

Graduates in the report

This school
28
Selected comparison
262.9

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 314 rated schools reporting

Enrolled in Texas public higher education

This school
0
Selected comparison
104.1

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 314 rated schools reporting

Texas-public enrollment rate

This school
0.0%
Selected comparison
39.2%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 314 rated schools reporting

−39.2 pts vs similar economic context

Not-found rate

This school
96.4%
Selected comparison
54.3%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 314 rated schools reporting

+42.1 pts vs similar economic context

Not-trackable rate

This school
3.6%
Selected comparison
6.6%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 314 rated schools reporting

−3.0 pts vs similar economic context

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
6
Economically disadvantaged
83.3%−0.7 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
16.7%−16.1 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
16.7%−1.8 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
76.4%−16.8 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
79.2%+57.8 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Fredda Nottingham Alternative Education Center

African American: 16.7%Hispanic: 66.7%White: 16.7%
  • African American 16.7%
  • Hispanic 66.7%
  • White 16.7%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,273 reporting for every category shown · 2,273 in full cohort

African American: 14.4%Hispanic: 71%White: 10.4%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 1.5%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 2.3%
  • African American 14.4%
  • Hispanic 71%
  • White 10.4%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 1.5%
  • Pacific Islander 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 2.3%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
6
Economically disadvantaged students
5
Emergent bilingual students
1
Special education students
1

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
24
Students in TEA mobility denominator
24
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.

Students in TEA’s all-discipline count
Not reported

Rate not available

Disciplinary actions
Not reported

Rate not available

Cumulative year-end enrollment
24

2024–25

TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Fredda Nottingham Alternative Education Center
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 30 Not reported — Not reported — — —
2021–22 37 Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
2022–23 50 Not reported — Not reported — — —
2023–24 32 Not reported — Not reported — — —
2024–25 24 Not reported — Not reported — — —
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Fredda Nottingham Alternative Education Center in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected 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 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.

$7k$55k$102k20182020202220242025
  • Fredda Nottingham Alternative Education Center
  • Parent district: Dayton ISD
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$23,965
Selected comparison
$13,184

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,257 rated schools reporting

+$10,781 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $23,965 per student for this campus, $13,680 per student for its parent district, Dayton 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
YearFredda Nottingham Alternative Education CenterParent district: Dayton ISDTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$97,473$10,617$13,054$8,251 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,143 rated schools reporting
2019$13,798$10,935$13,108$8,343 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,171 rated schools reporting
2020$49,528$10,885$14,058$8,858 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,183 rated schools reporting
2021$31,181$11,709$14,797$9,544 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,190 rated schools reporting
2022$16,449$12,717$15,708$11,036 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,208 rated schools reporting
2023$31,726$13,418$16,792$11,496 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,228 rated schools reporting
2024$10,149$13,857$18,125$12,412 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,242 rated schools reporting
2025$23,965$13,680$18,972$13,184 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,257 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

Average salary
$76,139+$8,697 vs similar economic context
Teachers
1−42.0 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
12.3−2.0 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Fredda Nottingham Alternative Education Center

Over 30 years: 100%
  • Over 30 years 100%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,273 reporting for every category shown · 2,273 in full cohort

Beginning: 7%1 to 5 years: 27.5%6 to 10 years: 19%11 to 20 years: 27.2%21 to 30 years: 15%Over 30 years: 3.6%
  • Beginning 7%
  • 1 to 5 years 27.5%
  • 6 to 10 years 19%
  • 11 to 20 years 27.2%
  • 21 to 30 years 15%
  • Over 30 years 3.6%

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 146902007.