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 MS

Hopkins County · Region 08: Mt Pleasant · 912 students

Current score
70/1002025-26
Change
−18 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
−11.3 ptsvs 81.3 average · 1,814 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
1,607 of 1,814tied with 31 others
C70

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 86 in 2021-22. The current score is below the 81.3 average for 1,814 rated schools serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

No academic result met this site’s published threshold for a selected positive signal against Similar economic-disadvantage rate.

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 MS is rated C by TEA, scoring 70 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 81.3 average for 1,814 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is down 18 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 1,607th of 1,814 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 31 others).

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 school ranks best
  13. 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.

Schools identified for improvement

This school
Listed
Selected comparison
22.3%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,814 rated schools reporting

Schools on the PEG list

This school
Not listed
Selected comparison
1.4%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,814 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.

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 MS 8885817370 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 86 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
2025-26C7081.3 1,814 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25C7381.4 1,789 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24B8179.3 1,763 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23B8580.0 1,734 reporting79.1 7,377 reporting
2021-22B8882.9 1,708 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 Achievement75 C−5.6 vs similar economic context · 1,746 reporting
  • School Progress72 C−9.3 vs similar economic context · 1,739 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps57 F−21.5 vs similar economic context · 1,724 reporting
  • Academic Growth64 D−11.0 vs similar economic context · 1,697 reporting
  • Relative Performance72 C−7.3 vs similar economic context · 1,739 reporting
  • Sulphur Springs MS
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,814 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement75C5
School Progress72C8
Closing the Gaps57F3
Academic Growth64D6
Relative Performance72C8

Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 3 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 Student Achievement (75), so School Progress (72) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 75.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level67%−9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,746 reporting
  • Meets grade level41%−10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,746 reporting
  • Masters grade level20%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,746 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level70%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,744 reporting
  • Meets grade level45%−11 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,744 reporting
  • Masters grade level21%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,744 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level64%−10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,735 reporting
  • Meets grade level39%−6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,735 reporting
  • Masters grade level20%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,735 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level70%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,605 reporting
  • Meets grade level48%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,605 reporting
  • Masters grade level23%−0 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,605 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level60%−16 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 912 reporting
  • Meets grade level31%−17 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 912 reporting
  • Masters grade level13%−9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 912 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,814 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
912
Economically disadvantaged
54.5%−0.4 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
16.9%+2.7 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
19.1%+0.3 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
94.4%±0.0 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
14.1%−0.9 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Sulphur Springs MS

African American: 9.3%Hispanic: 32.3%White: 52.5%American Indian: 0.8%Asian: 0.8%Pacific Islander: 0.2%Two or More Races: 4.1%
  • African American 9.3%
  • Hispanic 32.3%
  • White 52.5%
  • American Indian 0.8%
  • Asian 0.8%
  • Pacific Islander 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 4.1%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,814 reporting for every category shown · 1,814 in full cohort

African American: 9.9%Hispanic: 43.9%White: 39%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 2.7%Pacific Islander: 0.2%Two or More Races: 4.1%
  • African American 9.9%
  • Hispanic 43.9%
  • White 39%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 2.7%
  • Pacific Islander 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 4.1%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
912
Economically disadvantaged students
497
Emergent bilingual students
154
Special education students
174

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
101
Students in TEA mobility denominator
1,007
TEA-published mobility rate
10%

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 912 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 49 (5.1%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
912

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
−49

Decrease · −5.1%

Change since 2021–22
−105

Decrease · −10.3%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This school
912
Selected comparison
636.6

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,775 rated schools reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Sulphur Springs MS
School yearStudents enrolledSulphur Springs MSChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 1,017 First available year 639.3
2022–23 974 Decrease of 43 (4.2%) 645.4
2023–24 969 Decrease of 5 (0.5%) 645.4
2024–25 961 Decrease of 8 (0.8%) 642
2025–26 912 Decrease of 49 (5.1%) 636.6

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
213

21.1% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
513

50.94 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
1,007

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This school
21.1%
Selected comparison
12.5%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,400 rated schools reporting

+8.6 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This school
50.94
Selected comparison
28.1

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,507 rated schools reporting

+22.8 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Sulphur Springs MS
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 1,080 164 15.2% 337 31.20 9.8% 19
2021–22 1,087 228 21.0% 527 48.48 12.4% 28
2022–23 1,029 231 22.4% 590 57.34 12.9% 29.6
2023–24 1,017 254 25.0% 708 69.62 12.8% 29.7
2024–25 1,007 213 21.1% 513 50.94 12.5% 28.1
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Sulphur Springs MS in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 213 21.1% 513 50.94 12.5% 28.1
In-school suspensions 194 19.3% 411 40.81 11.2% 21.8
Out-of-school suspensions 37 3.7% 46 4.57 6.3% 9
DAEP placements 49 4.9% 56 5.56 4.7% 5.5
Mandatory DAEP placements 11 1.1% 11 1.09 3.4% 3.9
Discretionary DAEP placements 40 4.0% 45 4.47 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.

$6k$14k$22k20182020202220242025
  • Sulphur Springs MS
  • Parent district: Sulphur Springs ISD
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$7,894
Selected comparison
$12,174

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,786 rated schools reporting

−$4,280 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $7,894 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 MSParent district: Sulphur Springs ISDTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$6,819$11,397$13,054$7,899 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,647 rated schools reporting
2019$7,446$11,226$13,108$8,066 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,663 rated schools reporting
2020$7,441$11,398$14,058$8,632 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,678 rated schools reporting
2021$7,519$12,450$14,797$9,010 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,695 rated schools reporting
2022$7,739$13,163$15,708$10,376 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,710 rated schools reporting
2023$8,404$13,135$16,792$10,883 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,734 rated schools reporting
2024$8,557$14,094$18,125$11,729 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,760 rated schools reporting
2025$7,894$21,394$18,972$12,174 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,786 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
$61,324−$5,255 vs similar economic context
Teachers
60+18.1 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
15.2−4.2 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Sulphur Springs MS

Beginning: 18.2%1 to 5 years: 19%6 to 10 years: 31.8%11 to 20 years: 22.7%21 to 30 years: 5%Over 30 years: 3.3%
  • Beginning 18.2%
  • 1 to 5 years 19%
  • 6 to 10 years 31.8%
  • 11 to 20 years 22.7%
  • 21 to 30 years 5%
  • Over 30 years 3.3%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,814 reporting for every category shown · 1,814 in full cohort

Beginning: 5.8%1 to 5 years: 24.9%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 24.9%
  • 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 MS in 2024–25
Grade or subjectAverage students per classSulphur Springs MS · 2024–25Average students per classselected comparison
Grade 616.217.6
Secondary English16.414.9
Secondary languages other than English25.817.4
Secondary math15.215.8
Secondary science17.317.3
Secondary social studies1917.3

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 school ranks best

Out of 117 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.

#2–3 rankings

Second- and third-place results

1 measure

  • 3of 11

    Science — Masters

    Hopkins County · of the 11 that report this measure · tied with 2

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

9 measures

  • 6of 13

    Reading — Masters

    Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 6of 13

    Math — Masters

    Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 7of 14

    Chronically absent (lowest is best)

    Hopkins County · of the 14 that report this measure

  • 8of 13

    All Subjects — Masters

    Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 8of 11

    Science — Meets

    Hopkins County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 9of 14

    Attendance

    Hopkins County · of the 14 that report this measure

  • 9of 11

    Science — Approaches

    Hopkins County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 10of 13

    Student Achievement

    Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 10of 11

    Academic Growth

    Hopkins County · of the 11 that report this measure

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 112901041.