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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus

James & Mitzi Cross Elem

Harris County · Region 04: Houston · 1,137 students

Official school websiteSchool information and family resources

Current score
78/1002025-26
Score vs similar economic context
−3.3 ptsvs 81.3 average · 1,776 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
1,126 of 1,776tied with 72 others
C78

At a glance

The current score is below the 81.3 average for 1,776 rated schools serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

STAAR result

Reading above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters

Meets
62%vs 56.5% avg · +5.5 pts
Masters
38%vs 23.6% avg · +14.4 pts

Among 1,706 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

James & Mitzi Cross Elem is rated C by TEA, scoring 78 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 81.3 average for 1,776 rated schools serving a similar economic context. TEA has published 1 year of scores for this school, so there is no trend to read yet.

Ranks 1,126th of 1,776 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 72 others).

Put the numbers in context

Compare with

Jump to a section
  1. Overview
  2. 1 year of ratings
  3. Where the score comes from
  4. Student outcomes
  5. Who this school serves
  6. Student counts behind the percentages
  7. Teachers
  8. Where this comes from

1 year 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 78 2025-26

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
2025-26C7881.3 1,776 reporting81.3 7,646 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 Achievement78 C−2.6 vs similar economic context · 1,708 reporting
  • School Progress79 C−2.3 vs similar economic context · 1,701 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps76 C−2.5 vs similar economic context · 1,686 reporting
  • Academic Growth70 C−5.0 vs similar economic context · 1,661 reporting
  • Relative Performance79 C−0.2 vs similar economic context · 1,701 reporting
  • James & Mitzi Cross Elem
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,776 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement78C2
School Progress79C1
Closing the Gaps76C4
Academic Growth70C10
Relative Performance79C1

Closest to moving up: School Progress, 1 point 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 (79), so Student Achievement (78) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 79.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level75%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,708 reporting
  • Meets grade level51%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,708 reporting
  • Masters grade level26%+4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,708 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level83%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,706 reporting
  • Meets grade level62%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,706 reporting
  • Masters grade level38%+14 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,706 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level70%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,697 reporting
  • Meets grade level46%+1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,697 reporting
  • Masters grade level18%±0 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,697 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level64%−14 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,567 reporting
  • Meets grade level29%−21 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,567 reporting
  • Masters grade level12%−12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,567 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,776 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
1,137
Economically disadvantaged
53.9%−0.4 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
23.1%+9.1 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
19.3%+0.5 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
—
Chronically absent
—

Student demographics

James & Mitzi Cross Elem

African American: 44%Hispanic: 27.1%White: 9.2%American Indian: 0.4%Asian: 12%Two or More Races: 7.2%
  • African American 44%
  • Hispanic 27.1%
  • White 9.2%
  • American Indian 0.4%
  • Asian 12%
  • Two or More Races 7.2%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,776 reporting for every category shown · 1,776 in full cohort

African American: 9.9%Hispanic: 43.5%White: 39.4%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 2.7%Pacific Islander: 0.2%Two or More Races: 4.1%
  • African American 9.9%
  • Hispanic 43.5%
  • White 39.4%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 2.7%
  • Pacific Islander 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 4.1%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
1,137
Economically disadvantaged students
613
Emergent bilingual students
263
Special education students
220

TEA context labels

  • New campus compared with last year’s fall enrollment

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
Not reported
Students in TEA mobility denominator
Not reported
TEA-published mobility rate
Not reported

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.

Teachers

Average salary
$71,361+$4,753 vs similar economic context
Teachers
84+42.5 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
13.5−6.0 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

James & Mitzi Cross Elem

Beginning: 15.4%1 to 5 years: 27%6 to 10 years: 26.2%11 to 20 years: 21.4%21 to 30 years: 8.9%Over 30 years: 1.2%
  • Beginning 15.4%
  • 1 to 5 years 27%
  • 6 to 10 years 26.2%
  • 11 to 20 years 21.4%
  • 21 to 30 years 8.9%
  • Over 30 years 1.2%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,776 reporting for every category shown · 1,776 in full cohort

Beginning: 5.8%1 to 5 years: 24.9%6 to 10 years: 19.2%11 to 20 years: 28.8%21 to 30 years: 16.4%Over 30 years: 4.3%
  • Beginning 5.8%
  • 1 to 5 years 24.9%
  • 6 to 10 years 19.2%
  • 11 to 20 years 28.8%
  • 21 to 30 years 16.4%
  • Over 30 years 4.3%

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 101914150.