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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus

Sulphur Springs HS

Hopkins County · Region 08: Mt Pleasant · 1,258 students

Current score
85/1002025-26
Change
+15 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
+3.8 ptsvs 81.2 average · 1,828 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
655 of 1,828tied with 64 others
B85

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving up; under the rules in force back then it scored 80 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 81.2 average for 1,828 rated schools serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

STAAR result

Science above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters

Meets
76%vs 50.1% avg · +25.9 pts
Masters
32%vs 23.2% avg · +8.8 pts

Among 1,614 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.

See the full measure

Current strength

Overall score above the similar-context average

85 +3.8 pts vs 81.2

  • 85 is 3.8 points above the 81.2 average among 1,828 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measure

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

Sulphur Springs HS is rated B by TEA, scoring 85 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.2 average for 1,828 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is up 15 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 655th of 1,828 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 64 others).

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. After high school: the following fall
  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 school ranks best
  13. 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
90807060 Similar economic-disadvantage rateTexas averageSulphur Springs HS 7075828885 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 B with 80 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 average
2025-26B8581.2 1,828 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25B8881.4 1,803 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24B8279.3 1,776 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23C7580.0 1,746 reporting79.1 7,377 reporting
2021-22C7082.8 1,721 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 Achievement85 B+4.5 vs similar economic context · 1,759 reporting
  • School Progress86 B+4.7 vs similar economic context · 1,752 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps82 B+3.6 vs similar economic context · 1,736 reporting
  • Academic Growth69 D−5.9 vs similar economic context · 1,707 reporting
  • Relative Performance86 B+6.6 vs similar economic context · 1,752 reporting
  • Sulphur Springs HS
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,828 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement85B5
School Progress86B4
Closing the Gaps82B8
Academic Growth69D1
Relative Performance86B4

Closest to moving up: School Progress, 4 points 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%. For this school that better measure is School Progress (86), so Student Achievement (85) 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 level83%+7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,759 reporting
  • Meets grade level55%+4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,759 reporting
  • Masters grade level15%−7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,759 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level74%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,757 reporting
  • Meets grade level54%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,757 reporting
  • Masters grade level7%−16 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,757 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level80%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,747 reporting
  • Meets grade level41%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,747 reporting
  • Masters grade level8%−10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,747 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level95%+18 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,614 reporting
  • Meets grade level76%+26 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,614 reporting
  • Masters grade level32%+9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,614 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level95%+19 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 917 reporting
  • Meets grade level58%+10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 917 reporting
  • Masters grade level24%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 917 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,828 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.

Graduation

Four-Year
97.5%+4.5 pts vs similar economic context average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 476 rated schools reporting
Five-Year
96.1%+3.2 pts vs similar economic context average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 473 rated schools reporting
Six-Year
91.4%−0.7 pts vs similar economic context average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 473 rated schools reporting
Dropout Rate
0.0%−0.4 pts vs similar economic context average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 479 rated schools reporting

These measures use TEA's standard-accountability population. Each comparison average includes only schools in that population that report that specific measure; its reporting count is shown beside the average. It is an unweighted average of those reported school rates, not a pooled rate across every student in the group.

College, career and military readiness

Total credit for CCMR criteria
91.0%+3.0 pts vs similar economic context
CCMR criteria
CriterionThis school% of graduatesAveragesimilar economic contextDifferencepercentage pointsReportingselected comparison
Total credit for CCMR criteria91.0%88.0%+3.0 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 503 rated schools reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course54.6%58.5%−3.9 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 506 rated schools reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA15.1%28.2%−13.1 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 506 rated schools reporting
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)6.2%9.8%−3.6 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 506 rated schools reporting
Earned college credit for a dual credit course43.0%34.1%+8.9 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 506 rated schools reporting
Earned an industry-based certification42.6%38.2%+4.4 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 506 rated schools reporting
Earned a level I or level II certificate0.0%1.7%−1.7 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 506 rated schools reporting
Earned an associate degree0.0%5.3%−5.3 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 506 rated schools reporting
Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit0.0%3.8%−3.8 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 506 rated schools reporting
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness8.2%3.2%+5.0 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 506 rated schools reporting
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student10.0%7.6%+2.4 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 506 rated schools reporting
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces3.4%3.4%+0.0 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 506 rated schools reporting

Every row is a share of this school's graduates, and every row is a way of meeting CCMR — so on every row, a bigger share is better. Difference is this school minus the average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate, counted in percentage points: +5.0 would mean five more graduates in every hundred met that criterion here. The selected comparison is an unweighted average of the reported school percentages, not a pooled rate across all graduates in the group. Graduates may meet several criteria, so the rows do not add up to the total.

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.

After high school: the following fall

Where school graduates appeared in Texas public higher-education records the fall after graduation. This is a limited next-step measure, not an eventual college-going or completion rate.

Graduates in the report
277

Class of 2023–24

Enrolled in Texas public higher education
121

43.7% of graduates

Not found in Texas public higher-ed records
151

54.5% of graduates

Not trackable
5

Fall 2024

Graduates in the report

This school
277
Selected comparison
217

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 400 rated schools reporting

Enrolled in Texas public higher education

This school
121
Selected comparison
95.2

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 400 rated schools reporting

Texas-public enrollment rate

This school
43.7%
Selected comparison
45.4%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 400 rated schools reporting

−1.7 pts vs similar economic context

Not-found rate

This school
54.5%
Selected comparison
50.0%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 400 rated schools reporting

+4.5 pts vs similar economic context

Not-trackable rate

This school
1.8%
Selected comparison
4.6%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 400 rated schools reporting

−2.8 pts vs similar economic context

Most common named Texas public destinations

  1. PARIS JUNIOR COLLEGE (003601)30
  2. EAST TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY (003565)19
  3. TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY (003632)12

Selected comparison counts are neutral cohort scale context. The percentages put differently sized graduating classes on the same basis, but still cover only the limited Texas-public system observed by this report.

Source: Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, high-school graduates enrolled in higher education, fetched 24 August 2026. The report covers graduates who enrolled in a Texas public college or university the following fall and includes only districts or campuses with more than 25 graduates.

“Not found” does not mean a graduate did not continue their education. It can include private or out-of-state college, work, military service, enrollment after the fall term, or another path the Texas public system does not observe.

“Not trackable” is not an outcome. THECB uses it for graduates with a non-standard identifier that could not be matched to higher-education records.

Who this school serves

Placed after the results deliberately: this is context for reading them, not an explanation of them.

Students
1,258
Economically disadvantaged
55.0%−0.4 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
15.1%+0.8 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
13.1%−5.7 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
92.2%−2.2 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
28.0%+12.9 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Sulphur Springs HS

African American: 8.6%Hispanic: 33%White: 53%American Indian: 0.1%Asian: 1.3%Pacific Islander: 0.2%Two or More Races: 3.8%
  • African American 8.6%
  • Hispanic 33%
  • White 53%
  • American Indian 0.1%
  • Asian 1.3%
  • Pacific Islander 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 3.8%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,828 reporting for every category shown · 1,828 in full cohort

African American: 9.9%Hispanic: 44.3%White: 38.7%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 2.6%Pacific Islander: 0.2%Two or More Races: 4%
  • African American 9.9%
  • Hispanic 44.3%
  • White 38.7%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 2.6%
  • Pacific Islander 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 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
1,255
Economically disadvantaged students
690
Emergent bilingual students
189
Special education students
165

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
148
Students in TEA mobility denominator
1,344
TEA-published mobility rate
11%

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 1,258 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 12 (0.9%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
1,258

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
−12

Decrease · −0.9%

Change since 2021–22
+37

Increase · +3.0%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This school
1,258
Selected comparison
633.5

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,789 rated schools reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Sulphur Springs HS
School yearStudents enrolledSulphur Springs HSChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 1,221 First available year 635.9
2022–23 1,263 Increase of 42 (3.4%) 642.3
2023–24 1,278 Increase of 15 (1.2%) 641.2
2024–25 1,270 Decrease of 8 (0.6%) 638.2
2025–26 1,258 Decrease of 12 (0.9%) 633.5

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
289

21.5% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
541

40.25 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
1,344

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This school
21.5%
Selected comparison
12.4%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,410 rated schools reporting

+9.1 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This school
40.25
Selected comparison
27.9

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,524 rated schools reporting

+12.4 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Sulphur Springs HS
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 1,328 306 23.0% 824 62.05 9.8% 19
2021–22 1,293 351 27.1% 1,126 87.08 12.4% 28.1
2022–23 1,323 273 20.6% 714 53.97 12.9% 29.7
2023–24 1,343 346 25.8% 929 69.17 12.8% 29.7
2024–25 1,344 289 21.5% 541 40.25 12.4% 27.9
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Sulphur Springs HS in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 289 21.5% 541 40.25 12.4% 27.9
In-school suspensions 241 17.9% 444 33.04 11.2% 21.6
Out-of-school suspensions Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
DAEP placements 74 5.5% 91 6.77 4.7% 5.5
Mandatory DAEP placements 20 1.5% 20 1.49 3.4% 3.9
Discretionary DAEP placements 58 4.3% 71 5.28 2.7% 3.1
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.

$7k$15k$22k20182020202220242025
  • Sulphur Springs HS
  • Parent district: Sulphur Springs ISD
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$11,442
Selected comparison
$12,264

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,800 rated schools reporting

−$822 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $11,442 per student for this campus, $21,394 per student for its parent district, Sulphur Springs 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
YearSulphur Springs HSParent district: Sulphur Springs ISDTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$8,670$11,397$13,054$7,904 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,658 rated schools reporting
2019$8,857$11,226$13,108$8,081 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,676 rated schools reporting
2020$10,068$11,398$14,058$8,649 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,692 rated schools reporting
2021$10,480$12,450$14,797$9,029 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,708 rated schools reporting
2022$10,863$13,163$15,708$10,391 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,723 rated schools reporting
2023$10,562$13,135$16,792$10,888 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,746 rated schools reporting
2024$11,020$14,094$18,125$11,733 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,773 rated schools reporting
2025$11,442$21,394$18,972$12,264 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,800 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
$67,103+$543 vs similar economic context
Teachers
104+62.6 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
12−7.4 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Sulphur Springs HS

Beginning: 6.7%1 to 5 years: 24.5%6 to 10 years: 18.5%11 to 20 years: 28.3%21 to 30 years: 13.4%Over 30 years: 8.6%
  • Beginning 6.7%
  • 1 to 5 years 24.5%
  • 6 to 10 years 18.5%
  • 11 to 20 years 28.3%
  • 21 to 30 years 13.4%
  • Over 30 years 8.6%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,828 reporting for every category shown · 1,828 in full cohort

Beginning: 5.8%1 to 5 years: 24.8%6 to 10 years: 19.2%11 to 20 years: 28.9%21 to 30 years: 16.4%Over 30 years: 4.4%
  • Beginning 5.8%
  • 1 to 5 years 24.8%
  • 6 to 10 years 19.2%
  • 11 to 20 years 28.9%
  • 21 to 30 years 16.4%
  • Over 30 years 4.4%

Average students in a class

TEA average class size by grade or subject for Sulphur Springs HS in 2024–25
Grade or subjectAverage students per classSulphur Springs HS · 2024–25Average students per classselected comparison
Secondary English15.414.8
Secondary languages other than English21.617.4
Secondary math16.815.7
Secondary science16.617.3
Secondary social studies19.617.2

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 school ranks best

Out of 181 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

3 measures

  • 1of 11

    Science — Approaches

    Hopkins County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 1of 11

    Science — Meets

    Hopkins County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 1of 11

    Science — Masters

    Hopkins County · of the 11 that report this measure

#2–3 rankings

Second- and third-place results

4 measures

  • 3of 13

    Relative Performance

    Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 3of 13

    All Subjects — Approaches

    Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 3of 13

    All Subjects — Meets

    Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 3of 13

    Math — Approaches

    Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure · tied with 1

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

12 measures

  • 4of 13

    School Progress

    Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 6of 15

    Overall score

    Hopkins County · of the 15 that report this measure

  • 6of 13

    Student Achievement

    Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 6of 13

    Closing the Gaps

    Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 7of 13

    Reading — Approaches

    Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 7of 13

    Reading — Meets

    Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 7of 11

    Academic Growth

    Hopkins County · of the 11 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 8of 45

    Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness

    Region 08: Mt Pleasant · of the 45 that report this measure

  • 8of 15

    Per-student spending

    Hopkins County · of the 15 that report this measure

  • 8of 13

    Math — Meets

    Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 10of 75

    Social Studies — Approaches

    Region 08: Mt Pleasant · of the 75 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 10of 13

    All Subjects — Masters

    Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure · tied with 1

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.

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 112901002.