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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus

Juvenille Justice Alternative Program

Webb County · Region 01: Edinburg · 25 students

Not Rated

At a glance

TEA did not issue an overall rating for Juvenille Justice Alternative Program 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 Juvenille Justice Alternative Program 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. Who this school serves
  6. Student counts behind the percentages
  7. Enrollment over time
  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
908070 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—77.7 2,192 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25Not Rated—77.4 2,179 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24Not Rated—74.9 2,165 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23Not Rated—75.3 2,148 reporting79.1 7,377 reporting
2021-22Not Rated—81.7 2,127 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 72.5 · 2,029 reporting
  • School Progress—Not reported · similar economic context 79 · 2,022 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps—Not reported · similar economic context 74.9 · 2,008 reporting
  • Academic Growth—Not reported · similar economic context 72.3 · 1,974 reporting
  • Relative Performance—Not reported · similar economic context 77.3 · 2,022 reporting
  • Juvenille Justice Alternative Program
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,192 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 68.7% · 2,029 reporting
  • Meets grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 42.4% · 2,029 reporting
  • Masters grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 16.6% · 2,029 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 66.7% · 2,017 reporting
  • Meets grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 38.4% · 2,017 reporting
  • Masters grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 14.4% · 2,017 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,192 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
25
Economically disadvantaged
80.0%−0.5 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
56.0%+26.9 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
28.0%+9.4 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
78.2%−15.2 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
62.0%+41.5 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Juvenille Justice Alternative Program

Hispanic: 100%
  • Hispanic 100%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,192 reporting for every category shown · 2,192 in full cohort

African American: 14%Hispanic: 67.6%White: 13.6%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 1.7%Pacific Islander: 0.2%Two or More Races: 2.6%
  • African American 14%
  • Hispanic 67.6%
  • White 13.6%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 1.7%
  • Pacific Islander 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 2.6%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
25
Economically disadvantaged students
20
Emergent bilingual students
14
Special education students
7

TEA context labels

  • Juvenile Justice Alternative Education Program (JJAEP)

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
62
Students in TEA mobility denominator
62
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.

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 25 students in 2025–26, an increase of 13 (108.3%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
25

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
+13

Increase · +108.3%

Change since 2022–23
+3

Increase · +13.6%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This school
25
Selected comparison
628.3

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,163 rated schools reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Juvenille Justice Alternative Program
School yearStudents enrolledJuvenille Justice Alternative ProgramChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 Not reported Not available —
2022–23 22 No adjacent prior year 655.7
2023–24 29 Increase of 7 (31.8%) 649.8
2024–25 12 Decrease of 17 (58.6%) 647
2025–26 25 Increase of 13 (108.3%) 628.3

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.

Source: TEA PEIMS Student Program and Special Populations Reports, fetched 24 August 2026. TEA reports these counts from its fall student snapshot; changes compare adjacent reported school years.

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
10

Rate not available

Disciplinary actions
10

Rate not available

Cumulative year-end enrollment
Not reported

2024–25

TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Juvenille Justice Alternative Program
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 Not reported 14 — 14 — — —
2021–22 Not reported Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
2022–23 Not reported 23 — 24 — — —
2023–24 Not reported 36 — 36 — — —
2024–25 Not reported 10 — 10 — — —
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Juvenille Justice Alternative Program in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 10 — 10 — — —
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 10 — 10 — — —
Mandatory JJAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
Discretionary JJAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
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.

$6k$47k$88k20182020202220242025
  • Juvenille Justice Alternative Program
  • Parent district: United ISD
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$13,127
Selected comparison
$13,076

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,178 rated schools reporting

+$51 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $13,127 per student for this campus, $14,348 per student for its parent district, United 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
YearJuvenille Justice Alternative ProgramParent district: United ISDTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$26,289$13,187$13,054$8,128 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,062 rated schools reporting
2019$36,693$12,568$13,108$8,251 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,083 rated schools reporting
2020$39,315$12,004$14,058$8,759 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,099 rated schools reporting
2021$84,063$13,076$14,797$9,393 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,110 rated schools reporting
2022$80,239$15,006$15,708$10,827 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,128 rated schools reporting
2023$6,758$14,779$16,792$11,287 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,148 rated schools reporting
2024$7,138$15,029$18,125$12,265 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,164 rated schools reporting
2025$13,127$14,348$18,972$13,076 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,178 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
$69,037+$1,989 vs similar economic context
Teachers
1−42.1 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
25+10.7 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Juvenille Justice Alternative Program

11 to 20 years: 100%
  • 11 to 20 years 100%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,192 reporting for every category shown · 2,192 in full cohort

Beginning: 6.9%1 to 5 years: 27.7%6 to 10 years: 19%11 to 20 years: 27.2%21 to 30 years: 15%Over 30 years: 3.6%
  • Beginning 6.9%
  • 1 to 5 years 27.7%
  • 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 240903006.