+4.1 ptsvs 85.9 average · 1,193 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
404 of 1,193tied with 71 others
Score vs region
+10.2 ptsvs 79.8 average · 129 rated schools in Region 03: Victoria
Region 03: Victoria placement
16 of 129tied with 6 others
Score vs county
+13.4 ptsvs 76.6 average · 27 rated schools in Victoria County
Victoria County placement
1 of 27tied with 2 others
Score vs similar-size group
+9.2 ptsvs 80.8 average · 2,033 similarly sized rated schools
Similar size placement
395 of 2,033tied with 72 others
Score vs state
+8.7 ptsvs 81.3 average · 7,646 rated Texas schools
Texas placement
1,571 of 7,646tied with 341 others
A90
At a glance
Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 95 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 85.9 average for 1,193 rated schools serving a similar economic context.The current score is above the 79.8 average for 129 rated schools in Region 03: Victoria.The current score is above the 76.6 average for 27 rated schools in Victoria County.The current score is above the 80.8 average for 2,033 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
67%vs 61.3% avg · +5.7 pts
Masters
37%vs 29.5% avg · +7.5 pts
Among 1,165 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
Mission Valley Elem is rated A by TEA, scoring 90 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 85.9 average for 1,193 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is down 5 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 404th of 1,193 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 71 others).
Mission Valley Elem is rated A by TEA, scoring 90 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 79.8 average for 129 rated schools in Region 03: Victoria. It is down 5 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 16th of 129 rated schools in Region 03: Victoria (tied with 6 others).
Mission Valley Elem is rated A by TEA, scoring 90 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 76.6 average for 27 rated schools in Victoria County. It is down 5 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 1st of 27 rated schools in Victoria County (tied with 2 others).
Mission Valley Elem is rated A by TEA, scoring 90 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 80.8 average for 2,033 similarly sized rated schools. It is down 5 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 395th of 2,033 similarly sized rated schools (tied with 72 others).
Mission Valley Elem is rated A by TEA, scoring 90 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.3 average for 7,646 rated Texas schools. It is down 5 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 95 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 Achievement91 A+4.5 vs similar economic context · 1,165 reporting
School Progress91 A+7.6 vs similar economic context · 1,162 reporting
Closing the Gaps89 B+5.7 vs similar economic context · 1,153 reporting
Academic Growth91 A+11.8 vs similar economic context · 1,143 reporting
Relative Performance84 B+4.2 vs similar economic context · 1,162 reporting
Mission Valley Elem
Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,193 in cohort)
Domain scores
Domain
Score
Grade
Points to next grade
Student Achievement
91
A
—
School Progress
91
A
—
Closing the Gaps
89
B
1
Academic Growth
91
A
—
Relative Performance
84
B
6
Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 1 point 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%.
Student outcomes
STAAR performance
All Subjects
Approaches grade level86%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,165 reporting
Meets grade level67%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,165 reporting
Masters grade level37%+8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,165 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
Approaches grade level89%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,164 reporting
Meets grade level74%+8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,164 reporting
Masters grade level39%+8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,164 reporting
Math3 performance levels
Approaches grade level86%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,161 reporting
Meets grade level67%+12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,161 reporting
Masters grade level45%+20 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,161 reporting
Science3 performance levels
Approaches grade level79%−5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,073 reporting
Meets grade level50%−10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,073 reporting
Masters grade level11%−21 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,073 reporting
Approaches grade level
Meets grade level
Masters grade level
Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,193 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
259
Economically disadvantaged
35.1%−0.9 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
3.5%−7.2 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
15.1%−2.7 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
95.6%+0.5 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
7.4%−4.3 pts vs similar economic context
Student demographics
Mission Valley Elem
African American 1.5%
Hispanic 31.3%
White 64.5%
American Indian 0.8%
Two or More Races 1.9%
Selected comparison averageFor schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,193 reporting for every category shown · 1,193 in full cohort
African American 9.1%
Hispanic 32.3%
White 47.5%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 5.9%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 4.7%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 03: Victoria · 129 reporting for every category shown · 129 in full cohort
African American 6%
Hispanic 57.6%
White 33.3%
American Indian 0.2%
Asian 0.7%
Two or More Races 2.1%
Selected comparison averageFor Victoria County · 27 reporting for every category shown · 27 in full cohort
African American 4.7%
Hispanic 71.4%
White 21%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 0.7%
Two or More Races 1.9%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized schools · 2,033 reporting for every category shown · 2,033 in full cohort
African American 10.1%
Hispanic 51.2%
White 33.6%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 1.6%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3.1%
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
259
Economically disadvantaged students
91
Emergent bilingual students
9
Special education students
39
Campus mobility · 2024–25
Mobile students
18
Students in TEA mobility denominator
189
TEA-published mobility rate
9.5%
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 259 students in 2025–26, an increase of 20 (8.4%) from 2024–25.
Latest enrollment
259
2025–26
Change from 2024–25
+20
Increase · +8.4%
Change since 2021–22
+20
Increase · +8.4%
Enrollment in 2025–26
This school
259
Selected comparison
756.9
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,168 rated schools reporting
Student enrollment by school year for Mission Valley Elem
School year
Students enrolledMission Valley Elem
Change from previous school year
Average enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22
239
First available year
767.7
2022–23
246
Increase of 7 (2.9%)
769.2
2023–24
244
Decrease of 2 (0.8%)
769.1
2024–25
239
Decrease of 5 (2.0%)
764.3
2025–26
259
Increase of 20 (8.4%)
756.9
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
13
5.31 per 100 students
Cumulative year-end enrollment
245
2024–25
Actions per 100 students · 2024–25
This school
5.31
Selected comparison
21
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 998 rated schools reporting
−15.7 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Mission Valley 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
238
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
2021–22
257
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
2022–23
263
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
2023–24
252
Suppressed
—
12
4.76
—
22.4
2024–25
245
Suppressed
—
13
5.31
—
21
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Mission Valley Elem in 2024–25
Category
Students
Students% of enrollment
Actions
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline
Suppressed
—
13
5.31
—
21
In-school suspensions
Suppressed
—
12
4.90
—
16.1
Out-of-school suspensions
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
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.
Mission Valley Elem
Parent district: Victoria ISD
Texas average
Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Spending per student · 2025
This school
$52,100
Selected comparison
$11,928
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,169 rated schools reporting
+$40,172 vs similar economic context
For 2025, TEA reported $52,100 per student for this campus, $13,822 per student for its parent district, Victoria 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
Mission Valley Elem
Parent district: Victoria ISD
Texas average
Selected comparison average
Reportingselected comparison
2018
$6,841
$10,244
$13,054
$7,674
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,066 rated schools reporting
2019
$6,853
$10,062
$13,108
$7,805
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,082 rated schools reporting
2020
$7,131
$10,107
$14,058
$8,133
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,090 rated schools reporting
2021
$8,385
$11,099
$14,797
$8,595
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,104 rated schools reporting
2022
$8,570
$12,925
$15,708
$9,818
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,122 rated schools reporting
2023
$14,258
$13,490
$16,792
$10,409
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,141 rated schools reporting
2024
$71,119
$15,440
$18,125
$11,522
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,153 rated schools reporting
2025
$52,100
$13,822
$18,972
$11,928
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,169 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
$55,505−$12,343 vs similar economic context
Teachers
17−32.5 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
14.9+0.6 vs similar economic context
Teaching experience
Mission Valley Elem
1 to 5 years 31.8%
6 to 10 years 30.6%
11 to 20 years 18.5%
21 to 30 years 16.2%
Over 30 years 2.9%
Selected comparison averageFor schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,193 reporting for every category shown · 1,193 in full cohort
Beginning 5.1%
1 to 5 years 22.8%
6 to 10 years 19.6%
11 to 20 years 31.6%
21 to 30 years 17.3%
Over 30 years 3.4%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 03: Victoria · 129 reporting for every category shown · 129 in full cohort
Beginning 7.1%
1 to 5 years 24.6%
6 to 10 years 15.4%
11 to 20 years 29.3%
21 to 30 years 17.1%
Over 30 years 6.4%
Selected comparison averageFor Victoria County · 27 reporting for every category shown · 27 in full cohort
Beginning 10.2%
1 to 5 years 28.4%
6 to 10 years 17.9%
11 to 20 years 28.3%
21 to 30 years 11%
Over 30 years 4.2%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized schools · 2,033 reporting for every category shown · 2,033 in full cohort
Beginning 6.5%
1 to 5 years 24.6%
6 to 10 years 18%
11 to 20 years 28.6%
21 to 30 years 17.2%
Over 30 years 4.6%
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 Mission Valley Elem in 2024–25
Grade or subject
Average students per classMission Valley Elem · 2024–25
Average students per classselected comparison
Kindergarten
19.5
18.5
Grade 1
15
19
Grade 2
18.5
19.3
Grade 3
38
20
Grade 4
36
19.7
Grade 5
35
21.2
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.
Out of 105 rankings computed across every published metric and every available comparison group, these are all the measures that meet this site’s distinctive-placement threshold. The list does not change when you change Compare against. Each measure appears once, using its strongest placement. Press Copy for a citable sentence.
#1 rankings
First-place results
7 measures
1of 27
Overall score
Victoria County · of the 27 that report this measure · tied with 2
1of 27
Per-student spending
Victoria County · of the 27 that report this measure
1of 26
Chronically absent (lowest is best)
Victoria County · of the 26 that report this measure
1of 25
School Progress
Victoria County · of the 25 that report this measure
1of 25
Academic Growth
Victoria County · of the 25 that report this measure
1of 25
Reading — Meets
Victoria County · of the 25 that report this measure · tied with 1
1of 25
Math — Masters
Victoria County · of the 25 that report this measure
#2–3 rankings
Second- and third-place results
10 measures
2of 26
Attendance
Victoria County · of the 26 that report this measure · tied with 1
2of 25
Student Achievement
Victoria County · of the 25 that report this measure
2of 25
Closing the Gaps
Victoria County · of the 25 that report this measure · tied with 1
2of 25
All Subjects — Approaches
Victoria County · of the 25 that report this measure
2of 25
All Subjects — Meets
Victoria County · of the 25 that report this measure
2of 25
All Subjects — Masters
Victoria County · of the 25 that report this measure
2of 25
Reading — Approaches
Victoria County · of the 25 that report this measure
2of 25
Reading — Masters
Victoria County · of the 25 that report this measure
2of 25
Math — Approaches
Victoria County · of the 25 that report this measure
2of 25
Math — Meets
Victoria County · of the 25 that report this measure
#4–10 rankings
Fourth- through tenth-place results
4 measures
4of 25
Relative Performance
Victoria County · of the 25 that report this measure · tied with 1
6of 25
Science — Meets
Victoria County · of the 25 that report this measure
7of 25
Science — Approaches
Victoria County · of the 25 that report this measure
10of 25
Science — Masters
Victoria County · of the 25 that report this measure · tied with 2
These are selected high placements, not a summary. Every figure above
this section is the full picture, including where this school ranks poorly. Each measure appears
once here, using its strongest qualifying placement across all available comparison groups. Very large ties are left out because they do not distinguish this school; any
tie that does appear is labeled. Every ranking this site publishes, including the ones
no school would put in a press release.
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.
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 235902117.