Districts, charter school systems & campuses · Source: Texas Education Agency
Spring Garden ElemB83vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Traditional public school campus
Spring Garden Elem
Tarrant County · Region 11: Fort Worth · 593 students
Current score
83/1002025-26
Change
−10 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
−0.6 ptsvs 83.6 average · 1,460 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
794 of 1,460tied with 56 others
Score vs region
+2.5 ptsvs 80.5 average · 839 rated schools in Region 11: Fort Worth
Region 11: Fort Worth placement
342 of 839tied with 28 others
Score vs county
+3.0 ptsvs 80 average · 466 rated schools in Tarrant County
Tarrant County placement
181 of 466tied with 16 others
Score vs similar-size group
+2.6 ptsvs 80.4 average · 4,706 similarly sized rated schools
Similar size placement
2,028 of 4,706tied with 151 others
Score vs state
+1.7 ptsvs 81.3 average · 7,646 rated Texas schools
Texas placement
3,601 of 7,646tied with 244 others
B83
At a glance
Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 93 in 2021-22. The current score is below the 83.6 average for 1,460 rated schools serving a similar economic context.The current score is above the 80.5 average for 839 rated schools in Region 11: Fort Worth.The current score is above the 80 average for 466 rated schools in Tarrant County.The current score is above the 80.4 average for 4,706 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
59%vs 56.8% avg · +2.2 pts
Masters
33%vs 25.7% avg · +7.3 pts
Among 1,417 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
Spring Garden Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 83 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 83.6 average for 1,460 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is down 10 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 794th of 1,460 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 56 others).
Spring Garden Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 83 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 80.5 average for 839 rated schools in Region 11: Fort Worth. It is down 10 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 342nd of 839 rated schools in Region 11: Fort Worth (tied with 28 others).
Spring Garden Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 83 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 80 average for 466 rated schools in Tarrant County. It is down 10 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 181st of 466 rated schools in Tarrant County (tied with 16 others).
Spring Garden Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 83 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 80.4 average for 4,706 similarly sized rated schools. It is down 10 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 2,028th of 4,706 similarly sized rated schools (tied with 151 others).
Spring Garden Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 83 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.3 average for 7,646 rated Texas schools. It is down 10 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 93 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 Achievement86 B+2.1 vs similar economic context · 1,417 reporting
School Progress81 B−1.2 vs similar economic context · 1,414 reporting
Closing the Gaps77 C−3.8 vs similar economic context · 1,405 reporting
Academic Growth80 B+2.8 vs similar economic context · 1,390 reporting
Relative Performance81 B+1.6 vs similar economic context · 1,414 reporting
Spring Garden Elem
Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,460 in cohort)
Domain scores
Domain
Score
Grade
Points to next grade
Student Achievement
86
B
4
School Progress
81
B
9
Closing the Gaps
77
C
3
Academic Growth
80
B
10
Relative Performance
81
B
9
Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 3 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%. For this school that better measure is Student Achievement (86), so
School Progress (81) is published above but does not enter the overall
score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 86.
Student outcomes
STAAR performance
All Subjects
Approaches grade level79%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,417 reporting
Meets grade level59%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,417 reporting
Masters grade level33%+7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,417 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
Approaches grade level84%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,416 reporting
Meets grade level66%+4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,416 reporting
Masters grade level44%+17 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,416 reporting
Math3 performance levels
Approaches grade level76%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,412 reporting
Meets grade level53%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,412 reporting
Masters grade level24%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,412 reporting
Science3 performance levels
Approaches grade level70%−11 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,315 reporting
Meets grade level50%−6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,315 reporting
Masters grade level24%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,315 reporting
Approaches grade level
Meets grade level
Masters grade level
Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,460 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
593
Economically disadvantaged
42.8%−0.9 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
14.6%+3.0 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
20.4%+2.2 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
96.3%+1.5 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
6.3%−6.8 pts vs similar economic context
Student demographics
Spring Garden Elem
African American 20.5%
Hispanic 23.6%
White 39%
American Indian 0.2%
Asian 6.3%
Pacific Islander 0.7%
Two or More Races 9.7%
Selected comparison averageFor schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,460 reporting for every category shown · 1,460 in full cohort
African American 9.2%
Hispanic 37.2%
White 44.7%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 4%
Pacific Islander 0.2%
Two or More Races 4.4%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 11: Fort Worth · 839 reporting for every category shown · 839 in full cohort
African American 15.4%
Hispanic 39.6%
White 34.4%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 5.3%
Pacific Islander 0.3%
Two or More Races 4.6%
Selected comparison averageFor Tarrant County · 466 reporting for every category shown · 466 in full cohort
African American 21.3%
Hispanic 45.2%
White 22.9%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 5.4%
Pacific Islander 0.3%
Two or More Races 4.6%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized schools · 4,706 reporting for every category shown · 4,706 in full cohort
African American 12.2%
Hispanic 54.6%
White 24.4%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 4.7%
Pacific Islander 0.2%
Two or More Races 3.6%
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
589
Economically disadvantaged students
252
Emergent bilingual students
86
Special education students
120
Campus mobility · 2024–25
Mobile students
59
Students in TEA mobility denominator
479
TEA-published mobility rate
12.3%
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 593 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 6 (1.0%) from 2024–25.
Latest enrollment
593
2025–26
Change from 2024–25
−6
Decrease · −1.0%
Change since 2021–22
+24
Increase · +4.2%
Enrollment in 2025–26
This school
593
Selected comparison
695.8
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,426 rated schools reporting
Student enrollment by school year for Spring Garden Elem
School year
Students enrolledSpring Garden Elem
Change from previous school year
Average enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22
569
First available year
693.5
2022–23
580
Increase of 11 (1.9%)
699.1
2023–24
602
Increase of 22 (3.8%)
700
2024–25
599
Decrease of 3 (0.5%)
696.7
2025–26
593
Decrease of 6 (1.0%)
695.8
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
39
6.0% of cumulative year-end enrollment
Disciplinary actions
73
11.28 per 100 students
Cumulative year-end enrollment
647
2024–25
Share of students · 2024–25
This school
6.0%
Selected comparison
11.1%
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,128 rated schools reporting
−5.1 pts vs similar economic context
Actions per 100 students · 2024–25
This school
11.28
Selected comparison
24.1
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,208 rated schools reporting
−12.8 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Spring Garden 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
661
14
2.1%
18
2.72
9.2%
17.4
2021–22
644
36
5.6%
60
9.32
11.3%
24.2
2022–23
643
40
6.2%
62
9.64
11.6%
25.4
2023–24
658
43
6.5%
88
13.37
11.5%
25.8
2024–25
647
39
6.0%
73
11.28
11.1%
24.1
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Spring Garden Elem in 2024–25
Category
Students
Students% of enrollment
Actions
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline
39
6.0%
73
11.28
11.1%
24.1
In-school suspensions
38
5.9%
67
10.36
9.9%
18.5
Out-of-school suspensions
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
DAEP placements
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
Mandatory DAEP placements
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
Discretionary DAEP placements
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
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.
Spring Garden Elem
Parent district: Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD
Texas average
Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Spending per student · 2025
This school
$9,273
Selected comparison
$12,004
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,430 rated schools reporting
−$2,731 vs similar economic context
For 2025, TEA reported $9,273 per student for this campus, $17,072 per student for its parent district, Hurst-Euless-Bedford 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
Spring Garden Elem
Parent district: Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD
Texas average
Selected comparison average
Reportingselected comparison
2018
$6,787
$10,047
$13,054
$7,786
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,311 rated schools reporting
2019
$6,872
$11,598
$13,108
$7,995
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,331 rated schools reporting
2020
$6,514
$15,516
$14,058
$8,410
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,340 rated schools reporting
2021
$8,283
$12,690
$14,797
$8,832
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,360 rated schools reporting
2022
$8,401
$12,184
$15,708
$10,194
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,372 rated schools reporting
2023
$8,765
$14,299
$16,792
$10,633
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,392 rated schools reporting
2024
$9,188
$15,258
$18,125
$11,651
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,408 rated schools reporting
2025
$9,273
$17,072
$18,972
$12,004
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,430 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
$72,953+$5,738 vs similar economic context
Teachers
39−6.2 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
15.2−5.8 vs similar economic context
Teaching experience
Spring Garden Elem
1 to 5 years 20.6%
6 to 10 years 25.3%
11 to 20 years 30.9%
21 to 30 years 23.2%
Selected comparison averageFor schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,460 reporting for every category shown · 1,460 in full cohort
Beginning 5.4%
1 to 5 years 23.6%
6 to 10 years 19.5%
11 to 20 years 30.5%
21 to 30 years 17%
Over 30 years 3.9%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 11: Fort Worth · 839 reporting for every category shown · 839 in full cohort
Beginning 5.6%
1 to 5 years 24%
6 to 10 years 20.6%
11 to 20 years 30%
21 to 30 years 16.7%
Over 30 years 2.8%
Selected comparison averageFor Tarrant County · 466 reporting for every category shown · 466 in full cohort
Beginning 6.2%
1 to 5 years 24%
6 to 10 years 20.5%
11 to 20 years 29.9%
21 to 30 years 16.3%
Over 30 years 2.7%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized schools · 4,706 reporting for every category shown · 4,706 in full cohort
Beginning 6.1%
1 to 5 years 26.4%
6 to 10 years 19.8%
11 to 20 years 29%
21 to 30 years 15.4%
Over 30 years 3.1%
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 Spring Garden Elem in 2024–25
Grade or subject
Average students per classSpring Garden Elem · 2024–25
Average students per classselected comparison
Kindergarten
20.4
18
Grade 1
16.9
18.5
Grade 2
19.2
18.7
Grade 3
23.6
19.4
Grade 4
22.5
19.3
Grade 5
22.4
20.5
Grade 6
23
18
These are TEA's actual class-size averages for the grade or subject shown, not the student-to-teacher ratio. TEA reported 7 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.
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 220916121.