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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus

Mike Moses Elem

Nacogdoches County · Region 07: Kilgore · 484 students

Current score
51/1002025-26
Change
+1 ptssince 2022-23
Score vs similar economic context
−26.3 ptsvs 77.3 average · 2,378 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
2,350 of 2,378tied with 6 others
F51

At a glance

The available rating history is moving up. The current score is below the 77.3 average for 2,378 rated schools serving a similar economic context.

Read the full rating context and placement

Mike Moses Elem is rated F by TEA, scoring 51 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 77.3 average for 2,378 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is up 1 point since 2022-23.

Ranks 2,350th of 2,378 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 6 others).

4 consecutive years rated unacceptable. At three or more years, Texas law provides for state intervention.

Put the numbers in context

Compare with

Jump to a section
  1. Overview
  2. Official improvement and transfer notices
  3. 4 years of ratings
  4. Where the score comes from
  5. Student outcomes
  6. Who this school serves
  7. Student counts behind the percentages
  8. Enrollment over time
  9. Discipline and removal from class
  10. Spending per student
  11. Teachers and actual class size
  12. Where this comes from

Official improvement and transfer notices

Official state and federal designations can carry support, reporting requirements or a family transfer option that a single A–F rating does not explain.

2026 federal improvement status

Comprehensive Support and Improvement

Official support label: Comprehensive Identified

Identification reason: CSI Low Performance

TEA track year 3 · Title I campus

Open the official TEA list and methodology

2026-27 school year

Public Education Grant transfer eligibility

Students assigned to this campus may request a transfer under the state's PEG program.

A request is not guaranteed. A receiving district may apply its enrollment rules, and transportation is not automatically provided.

Read the official PEG rules and list

Schools identified for improvement

This school
Listed
Selected comparison
35.2%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,378 rated schools reporting

Schools on the PEG list

This school
Listed
Selected comparison
8.7%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,378 rated schools reporting

Selected comparison percentages are the share of reporting schools in that group found on each dated list. They are neutral prevalence context; changing the comparison never changes this school's official status.

These are dated TEA statuses, fetched 24 August 2026; they are not added to or subtracted from this site's rating.

4 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
9080706050 Similar economic-disadvantage rateTexas averageMike Moses Elem 50525951 2022-232023-242024-252025-26

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
2025-26F5177.3 2,378 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25F5977.0 2,365 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24F5273.9 2,348 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23F5074.1 2,336 reporting79.1 7,377 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 Achievement47 F−23.8 vs similar economic context · 2,217 reporting
  • School Progress55 F−23.5 vs similar economic context · 2,210 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps41 F−33.5 vs similar economic context · 2,196 reporting
  • Academic Growth55 F−17.4 vs similar economic context · 2,168 reporting
  • Relative Performance48 F−28.7 vs similar economic context · 2,210 reporting
  • Mike Moses Elem
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,378 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement47F13
School Progress55F5
Closing the Gaps41F19
Academic Growth55F5
Relative Performance48F12

Closest to moving up: School Progress, 5 points below D 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 (55), so Student Achievement (47) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 55.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level38%−29 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,217 reporting
  • Meets grade level18%−23 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,217 reporting
  • Masters grade level5%−11 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,217 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level44%−25 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,216 reporting
  • Meets grade level23%−22 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,216 reporting
  • Masters grade level6%−12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,216 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level36%−30 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,206 reporting
  • Meets grade level16%−22 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,206 reporting
  • Masters grade level4%−10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,206 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level26%−38 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,064 reporting
  • Meets grade level6%−29 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,064 reporting
  • Masters grade level1%−13 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,064 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,378 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
484
Economically disadvantaged
86.4%−0.6 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
35.3%−0.8 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
15.7%−2.6 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
93.2%+0.1 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
21.5%−0.7 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Mike Moses Elem

African American: 38.4%Hispanic: 53.5%White: 5%Asian: 0.4%Two or More Races: 2.7%
  • African American 38.4%
  • Hispanic 53.5%
  • White 5%
  • Asian 0.4%
  • Two or More Races 2.7%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,378 reporting for every category shown · 2,378 in full cohort

African American: 14.3%Hispanic: 73.6%White: 8.3%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 1.4%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 2%
  • African American 14.3%
  • Hispanic 73.6%
  • White 8.3%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 1.4%
  • Pacific Islander 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 2%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
484
Economically disadvantaged students
418
Emergent bilingual students
171
Special education students
76

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
69
Students in TEA mobility denominator
460
TEA-published mobility rate
15%

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 484 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 19 (3.8%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
484

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
−19

Decrease · −3.8%

Change since 2022–23
−50

Decrease · −9.4%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This school
484
Selected comparison
604.7

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,349 rated schools reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Mike Moses Elem
School yearStudents enrolledMike Moses ElemChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2022–23 534 First available year 636.7
2023–24 506 Decrease of 28 (5.2%) 628.9
2024–25 503 Decrease of 3 (0.6%) 625.4
2025–26 484 Decrease of 19 (3.8%) 604.7

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
103

19.4% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
246

46.24 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
532

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This school
19.4%
Selected comparison
13.3%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,601 rated schools reporting

+6.1 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This school
46.24
Selected comparison
32

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,722 rated schools reporting

+14.2 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Mike Moses Elem
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2022–23 561 84 15.0% 215 38.32 13.6% 33.7
2023–24 556 162 29.1% 465 83.63 13.7% 33.9
2024–25 532 103 19.4% 246 46.24 13.3% 32
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Mike Moses Elem in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 103 19.4% 246 46.24 13.3% 32
In-school suspensions 79 14.8% 124 23.31 11.7% 23
Out-of-school suspensions 54 10.2% 102 19.17 8.8% 14.2
DAEP placements 17 3.2% 20 3.76 5.3% 6.4
Mandatory DAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Discretionary DAEP placements 17 3.2% 20 3.76 3.4% 4
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.

$6k$13k$20k20232025
  • Mike Moses Elem
  • Parent district: Nacogdoches ISD
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$7,450
Selected comparison
$13,330

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,363 rated schools reporting

−$5,880 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $7,450 per student for this campus, $18,361 per student for its parent district, Nacogdoches 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
YearMike Moses ElemParent district: Nacogdoches ISDTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2023$6,191$15,304$16,792$11,587 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,334 rated schools reporting
2024$7,425$17,167$18,125$12,569 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,348 rated schools reporting
2025$7,450$18,361$18,972$13,330 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,363 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
$56,120−$11,615 vs similar economic context
Teachers
36−6.3 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
13.7−0.7 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Mike Moses Elem

Beginning: 7%1 to 5 years: 57.2%6 to 10 years: 15.2%11 to 20 years: 10.7%21 to 30 years: 3.9%Over 30 years: 5.6%
  • Beginning 7%
  • 1 to 5 years 57.2%
  • 6 to 10 years 15.2%
  • 11 to 20 years 10.7%
  • 21 to 30 years 3.9%
  • Over 30 years 5.6%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,378 reporting for every category shown · 2,378 in full cohort

Beginning: 7.1%1 to 5 years: 27.4%6 to 10 years: 19%11 to 20 years: 27.2%21 to 30 years: 15.1%Over 30 years: 3.5%
  • Beginning 7.1%
  • 1 to 5 years 27.4%
  • 6 to 10 years 19%
  • 11 to 20 years 27.2%
  • 21 to 30 years 15.1%
  • Over 30 years 3.5%

Average students in a class

TEA average class size by grade or subject for Mike Moses Elem in 2024–25
Grade or subjectAverage students per classMike Moses Elem · 2024–25Average students per classselected comparison
Kindergarten18.318.1
Grade 118.518.4
Grade 221.318.4
Grade 319.818.8
Grade 421.618.7
Grade 521.719.7

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.

Source: TEA Texas Academic Performance Reports, fetched 24 August 2026.

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 174904112.