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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Open-enrollment charter campus · Alternative Education Accountability

Pro-Vision MS

The Pro-Vision Academy · Houston · 98 students

Official school websiteSchool information and family resources

Current score
66/1002025-26
Change
+10 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
−14.1 ptsvs 80.1 average · 276 rated charter campuses serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
242 of 276tied with 2 others
D66

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving up; under the rules in force back then it scored 57 in 2021-22. The current score is below the 80.1 average for 276 rated charter campuses serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

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

Pro-Vision MS is rated D by TEA, scoring 66 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 80.1 average for 276 rated charter campuses serving a similar economic context. It is up 10 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 242nd of 276 rated charter campuses serving a similar economic context (tied with 2 others).

3 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. 5 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

Targeted Support and Improvement

Official support label: TSI

Identification reason: African American, Economically Disadvantaged, Special Education

TEA track year 0 · Title I campus

Open the official TEA list and methodology

Schools identified for improvement

This school
Listed
Selected comparison
31.5%

average for charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 rated charter campuses reporting

Schools on the PEG list

This school
Not listed
Selected comparison
0.0%

average for charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 rated charter campuses 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.

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
9080706050 Similar economic-disadvantage rateTexas charter averagePro-Vision MS 5653656366 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. Under the original scoring it was rated Not Rated with 57 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.

View the yearly scores and comparisons
Rating history with comparisons
YearRatingScoreSelected comparisonSimilar economic-disadvantage rateStateTexas charter average
2025-26D6680.1 276 reporting81.7 829 reporting
2024-25D6378.6 271 reporting81.3 797 reporting
2023-24D6576.3 263 reporting79.5 776 reporting
2022-23F5375.6 254 reporting79.6 749 reporting
2021-22F5683.7 239 reporting84.5 700 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 Achievement62 D−12.0 vs similar economic context · 276 reporting
  • School Progress62 D−19.1 vs similar economic context · 276 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps74 C−2.6 vs similar economic context · 271 reporting
  • Academic Growth62 D−11.1 vs similar economic context · 263 reporting
  • Relative Performance—Not reported · similar economic context 79.4 · 272 reporting
  • Pro-Vision MS
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (276 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement62D8
School Progress62D8
Closing the Gaps74C6
Academic Growth62D8
Relative Performance—Not rated—

Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 6 points 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%.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level36%−32 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 reporting
  • Meets grade level11%−29 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 reporting
  • Masters grade level1%−14 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level49%−19 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 reporting
  • Meets grade level16%−28 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 reporting
  • Masters grade level0%−16 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level25%−41 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 274 reporting
  • Meets grade level6%−29 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 274 reporting
  • Masters grade level1%−12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 274 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level48%−23 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 257 reporting
  • Meets grade level19%−20 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 257 reporting
  • Masters grade level7%−9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 257 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level18%−50 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 175 reporting
  • Meets grade level0%−38 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 175 reporting
  • Masters grade level0%−17 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 175 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (276 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 charter campuses 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 charter campuses 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
98
Economically disadvantaged
96.9%+4.0 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
0.0%−45.8 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
14.3%+2.0 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
89.3%−3.5 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
44.8%+21.5 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Pro-Vision MS

African American: 92.9%Hispanic: 6.1%Two or More Races: 1%
  • African American 92.9%
  • Hispanic 6.1%
  • Two or More Races 1%

Selected comparison average For charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 reporting for every category shown · 276 in full cohort

African American: 17.9%Hispanic: 76.2%White: 2.9%American Indian: 0.2%Asian: 1.5%Two or More Races: 1.3%
  • African American 17.9%
  • Hispanic 76.2%
  • White 2.9%
  • American Indian 0.2%
  • Asian 1.5%
  • Two or More Races 1.3%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
98
Economically disadvantaged students
95
Emergent bilingual students
0
Special education students
14

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
65
Students in TEA mobility denominator
181
TEA-published mobility rate
35.9%

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 98 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 42 (30.0%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
98

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
−42

Decrease · −30.0%

Change since 2021–22
−88

Decrease · −47.3%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This school
98
Selected comparison
510.4

average for charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 274 rated charter campuses reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Pro-Vision MS
School yearStudents enrolledPro-Vision MSChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 186 First available year 484.5
2022–23 183 Decrease of 3 (1.6%) 497.4
2023–24 168 Decrease of 15 (8.2%) 508.2
2024–25 140 Decrease of 28 (16.7%) 510.9
2025–26 98 Decrease of 42 (30.0%) 510.4

The selected comparison column is the average enrollment among reporting charter campuses 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
Not reported

Rate not available

Disciplinary actions
Not reported

Rate not available

Cumulative year-end enrollment
179

2024–25

TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Pro-Vision MS
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 241 Suppressed — 12 4.98 — 6.3
2021–22 191 Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
2022–23 218 Not reported — Not reported — — —
2023–24 210 Not reported — Not reported — — —
2024–25 179 Not reported — Not reported — — —
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Pro-Vision MS 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 charter campuses 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.

$4k$12k$20k20182020202220242025
  • Pro-Vision MS
  • Parent district: The Pro-Vision Academy
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$11,635
Selected comparison
$12,055

average for charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 273 rated charter campuses reporting

−$420 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $11,635 per student for this campus, $15,712 per student for its parent district, The Pro-Vision Academy, $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
YearPro-Vision MSParent district: The Pro-Vision AcademyTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$7,204$12,384$13,054$8,732 average for charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 160 rated charter campuses reporting
2019$5,685$10,942$13,108$8,455 average for charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 208 rated charter campuses reporting
2020$4,663$9,393$14,058$9,118 average for charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 216 rated charter campuses reporting
2021$6,563$12,657$14,797$9,582 average for charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 235 rated charter campuses reporting
2022$6,519$17,728$15,708$11,560 average for charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 248 rated charter campuses reporting
2023$7,899$15,401$16,792$11,575 average for charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 257 rated charter campuses reporting
2024$9,669$14,061$18,125$11,505 average for charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 264 rated charter campuses reporting
2025$11,635$15,712$18,972$12,055 average for charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 273 rated charter campuses 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
$66,216+$1,927 vs similar economic context
Teachers
4−24.5 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
22.1+4.2 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Pro-Vision MS

1 to 5 years: 20.5%6 to 10 years: 43.2%11 to 20 years: 29.5%21 to 30 years: 6.8%
  • 1 to 5 years 20.5%
  • 6 to 10 years 43.2%
  • 11 to 20 years 29.5%
  • 21 to 30 years 6.8%

Selected comparison average For charter campuses with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 reporting for every category shown · 276 in full cohort

Beginning: 13.4%1 to 5 years: 47.4%6 to 10 years: 19.7%11 to 20 years: 14.6%21 to 30 years: 4%Over 30 years: 0.8%
  • Beginning 13.4%
  • 1 to 5 years 47.4%
  • 6 to 10 years 19.7%
  • 11 to 20 years 14.6%
  • 21 to 30 years 4%
  • Over 30 years 0.8%

Average students in a class

TEA average class size by grade or subject for Pro-Vision MS in 2024–25
Grade or subjectAverage students per classPro-Vision MS · 2024–25Average students per classselected comparison
Grade 61923.5
Secondary English23.119.1
Secondary math26.919.7
Secondary science28.720.5
Secondary social studies26.820.6

These are TEA's actual class-size averages for the grade or subject shown, not the student-to-teacher ratio. TEA reported 5 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 101868002.