+8.1 ptsvs 83.9 average · 1,410 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
168 of 1,410tied with 95 others
Score vs region
+10.5 ptsvs 81.5 average · 182 rated schools in Region 17: Lubbock
Region 17: Lubbock placement
25 of 182tied with 8 others
Score vs county
+6.1 ptsvs 85.9 average · 12 rated schools in Hockley County
Hockley County placement
5 of 12tied with 1 other
Score vs similar-size group
+11.8 ptsvs 80.2 average · 3,763 similarly sized rated schools
Similar size placement
330 of 3,763tied with 128 others
Score vs state
+10.7 ptsvs 81.3 average · 7,646 rated Texas schools
Texas placement
838 of 7,646tied with 318 others
A92
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 83.9 average for 1,410 rated schools serving a similar economic context.The current score is above the 81.5 average for 182 rated schools in Region 17: Lubbock.The current score is above the 85.9 average for 12 rated schools in Hockley County.The current score is above the 80.2 average for 3,763 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
76%vs 57.5% avg · +18.5 pts
Masters
41%vs 26.2% avg · +14.8 pts
Among 1,369 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
Sundown Elem is rated A by TEA, scoring 92 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 83.9 average for 1,410 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is down 2 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 168th of 1,410 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 95 others).
Sundown Elem is rated A by TEA, scoring 92 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.5 average for 182 rated schools in Region 17: Lubbock. It is down 2 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 25th of 182 rated schools in Region 17: Lubbock (tied with 8 others).
Sundown Elem is rated A by TEA, scoring 92 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 85.9 average for 12 rated schools in Hockley County. It is down 2 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 5th of 12 rated schools in Hockley County (tied with 1 other).
Sundown Elem is rated A by TEA, scoring 92 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 80.2 average for 3,763 similarly sized rated schools. It is down 2 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 330th of 3,763 similarly sized rated schools (tied with 128 others).
Sundown Elem is rated A by TEA, scoring 92 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.3 average for 7,646 rated Texas schools. It is down 2 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 Achievement92 A+7.7 vs similar economic context · 1,369 reporting
School Progress92 A+9.7 vs similar economic context · 1,365 reporting
Closing the Gaps93 A+11.8 vs similar economic context · 1,355 reporting
Academic Growth92 A+14.5 vs similar economic context · 1,340 reporting
Relative Performance91 A+11.6 vs similar economic context · 1,365 reporting
Sundown Elem
Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,410 in cohort)
Domain scores
Domain
Score
Grade
Points to next grade
Student Achievement
92
A
—
School Progress
92
A
—
Closing the Gaps
93
A
—
Academic Growth
92
A
—
Relative Performance
91
A
—
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 level91%+11 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,369 reporting
Meets grade level76%+19 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,369 reporting
Masters grade level41%+15 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,369 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
Approaches grade level90%+8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,368 reporting
Meets grade level75%+13 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,368 reporting
Masters grade level41%+13 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,368 reporting
Math3 performance levels
Approaches grade level95%+17 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,363 reporting
Meets grade level84%+33 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,363 reporting
Masters grade level44%+22 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,363 reporting
Science3 performance levels
Approaches grade level85%+4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,264 reporting
Meets grade level55%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,264 reporting
Masters grade level30%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,264 reporting
Approaches grade level
Meets grade level
Masters grade level
Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,410 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
379
Economically disadvantaged
41.2%−1.1 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
2.1%−9.4 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
12.4%−5.8 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
96.4%+1.6 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
5.1%−7.8 pts vs similar economic context
Student demographics
Sundown Elem
African American 6.9%
Hispanic 52.5%
White 38.3%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 1.1%
Two or More Races 1.1%
Selected comparison averageFor schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,410 reporting for every category shown · 1,410 in full cohort
African American 9.4%
Hispanic 36.2%
White 45.2%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 4.3%
Pacific Islander 0.2%
Two or More Races 4.4%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 17: Lubbock · 182 reporting for every category shown · 182 in full cohort
African American 5%
Hispanic 61%
White 30.8%
American Indian 0.2%
Asian 1%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 1.9%
Selected comparison averageFor Hockley County · 12 reporting for every category shown · 12 in full cohort
African American 2.2%
Hispanic 61.1%
White 34.3%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 0.3%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 1.8%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized schools · 3,763 reporting for every category shown · 3,763 in full cohort
African American 11.6%
Hispanic 54.6%
White 27.1%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 3%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3.3%
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
379
Economically disadvantaged students
156
Emergent bilingual students
8
Special education students
47
Campus mobility · 2024–25
Mobile students
13
Students in TEA mobility denominator
176
TEA-published mobility rate
7.4%
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 379 students in 2025–26, an increase of 148 (64.1%) from 2024–25.
Latest enrollment
379
2025–26
Change from 2024–25
+148
Increase · +64.1%
Change since 2021–22
+118
Increase · +45.2%
Enrollment in 2025–26
This school
379
Selected comparison
703.2
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,378 rated schools reporting
Student enrollment by school year for Sundown Elem
School year
Students enrolledSundown Elem
Change from previous school year
Average enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22
261
First available year
701.2
2022–23
260
Decrease of 1 (0.4%)
708.2
2023–24
242
Decrease of 18 (6.9%)
709.4
2024–25
231
Decrease of 11 (4.5%)
706.6
2025–26
379
Increase of 148 (64.1%)
703.2
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
Suppressed
Rate not available
Cumulative year-end enrollment
305
2024–25
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Sundown 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
260
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
2021–22
265
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
2022–23
257
13
5.1%
16
6.23
11.4%
24.8
2023–24
254
11
4.3%
19
7.48
11.3%
25.2
2024–25
305
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Sundown Elem in 2024–25
Category
Students
Students% of enrollment
Actions
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
In-school suspensions
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
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.
Sundown Elem
Parent district: Sundown ISD
Texas average
Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Spending per student · 2025
This school
$11,767
Selected comparison
$11,970
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,380 rated schools reporting
−$203 vs similar economic context
For 2025, TEA reported $11,767 per student for this campus, $25,375 per student for its parent district, Sundown 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
Sundown Elem
Parent district: Sundown ISD
Texas average
Selected comparison average
Reportingselected comparison
2018
$10,796
$17,258
$13,054
$7,812
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,262 rated schools reporting
2019
$10,596
$16,682
$13,108
$8,019
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,281 rated schools reporting
2020
$10,863
$16,645
$14,058
$8,391
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,290 rated schools reporting
2021
$10,977
$18,616
$14,797
$8,793
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,308 rated schools reporting
2022
$11,353
$21,134
$15,708
$10,120
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,322 rated schools reporting
2023
$10,415
$19,873
$16,792
$10,608
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,342 rated schools reporting
2024
$10,753
$21,122
$18,125
$11,703
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,359 rated schools reporting
2025
$11,767
$25,375
$18,972
$11,970
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,380 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
$62,333−$5,026 vs similar economic context
Teachers
24−21.8 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
15.7+1.7 vs similar economic context
Teaching experience
Sundown Elem
Beginning 4.1%
1 to 5 years 25.7%
6 to 10 years 20.7%
11 to 20 years 22%
21 to 30 years 12.9%
Over 30 years 14.5%
Selected comparison averageFor schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,410 reporting for every category shown · 1,410 in full cohort
Beginning 5.3%
1 to 5 years 23.4%
6 to 10 years 19.5%
11 to 20 years 30.7%
21 to 30 years 17.1%
Over 30 years 3.8%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 17: Lubbock · 182 reporting for every category shown · 182 in full cohort
Beginning 7.4%
1 to 5 years 25.5%
6 to 10 years 18.1%
11 to 20 years 27.1%
21 to 30 years 16.6%
Over 30 years 4.7%
Selected comparison averageFor Hockley County · 12 reporting for every category shown · 12 in full cohort
Beginning 3.1%
1 to 5 years 25.8%
6 to 10 years 18.1%
11 to 20 years 27.4%
21 to 30 years 17.8%
Over 30 years 7.6%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized schools · 3,763 reporting for every category shown · 3,763 in full cohort
Beginning 6.2%
1 to 5 years 25.5%
6 to 10 years 18.9%
11 to 20 years 28.9%
21 to 30 years 16.5%
Over 30 years 3.6%
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 Sundown Elem in 2024–25
Grade or subject
Average students per classSundown Elem · 2024–25
Average students per classselected comparison
Kindergarten
13.5
18
Grade 1
20
18.6
Grade 2
13.5
18.8
Grade 3
9.6
19.5
Grade 4
9.7
19.3
Grade 5
12.5
20.6
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 102 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
2 measures
1of 11
All Subjects — Masters
Hockley County · of the 11 that report this measure · tied with 1
1of 11
Math — Masters
Hockley County · of the 11 that report this measure
#2–3 rankings
Second- and third-place results
7 measures
2of 171
Math — Meets
Region 17: Lubbock · of the 171 that report this measure
2of 11
Academic Growth
Hockley County · of the 11 that report this measure
2of 11
All Subjects — Meets
Hockley County · of the 11 that report this measure
2of 11
Reading — Masters
Hockley County · of the 11 that report this measure
3of 11
Reading — Approaches
Hockley County · of the 11 that report this measure
3of 11
Reading — Meets
Hockley County · of the 11 that report this measure
3of 11
Math — Approaches
Hockley County · of the 11 that report this measure
#4–10 rankings
Fourth- through tenth-place results
9 measures
4of 12
Attendance
Hockley County · of the 12 that report this measure
4of 12
Chronically absent (lowest is best)
Hockley County · of the 12 that report this measure
4of 11
Student Achievement
Hockley County · of the 11 that report this measure · tied with 2
4of 11
School Progress
Hockley County · of the 11 that report this measure
4of 11
Relative Performance
Hockley County · of the 11 that report this measure · tied with 1
4of 11
All Subjects — Approaches
Hockley County · of the 11 that report this measure
5of 12
Overall score
Hockley County · of the 12 that report this measure · tied with 1
5of 11
Closing the Gaps
Hockley County · of the 11 that report this measure · tied with 1
6of 12
Per-student spending
Hockley County · of the 12 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.
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 110907101.