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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus

The Lead Center

Starr County · Region 01: Edinburg · 11 students

Official school websiteSchool information and family resources

Current score
65/1002025-26
Score vs similar economic context
−27.1 ptsvs 92.1 average · 224 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
224 of 224among reporting schools
D65

At a glance

The current score is below the 92.1 average for 224 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

The Lead Center is rated D by TEA, scoring 65 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 92.1 average for 224 rated schools serving a similar economic context. TEA has published 1 year of scores for this school, so there is no trend to read yet.

Ranks 224th of 224 rated schools serving a similar economic context.

Put the numbers in context

Compare with

Jump to a section
  1. Overview
  2. 1 year of ratings
  3. Where the score comes from
  4. Student outcomes
  5. Who this school serves
  6. Student counts behind the percentages
  7. Teachers
  8. Where this school ranks best
  9. Where this comes from

1 year 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 65 2025-26

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
2025-26D6592.1 224 reporting81.3 7,646 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 Achievement65 D−28.1 vs similar economic context · 219 reporting
  • School Progress48 F−40.3 vs similar economic context · 218 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps—Not reported · similar economic context 90.2 · 216 reporting
  • Academic Growth—Not reported · similar economic context 87.1 · 216 reporting
  • Relative Performance48 F−29.5 vs similar economic context · 218 reporting
  • The Lead Center
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (224 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement65D5
School Progress48F12
Closing the Gaps—Not rated—
Academic Growth—Not rated—
Relative Performance48F12

Closest to moving up: Student Achievement, 5 points below C 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 (65), so School Progress (48) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 65.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level75%−17 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 219 reporting
  • Meets grade level38%−40 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 219 reporting
  • Masters grade level0%−49 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 219 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level70%−24 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 219 reporting
  • Meets grade level40%−43 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 219 reporting
  • Masters grade level0%−53 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 219 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level60%−31 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 218 reporting
  • Meets grade level0%−75 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 218 reporting
  • Masters grade level0%−45 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 218 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 90% · 194 reporting
  • Meets grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 70.4% · 194 reporting
  • Masters grade level—Not reported · Similar economic-disadvantage rate 44.4% · 194 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level100%+9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 71 reporting
  • Meets grade level67%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 71 reporting
  • Masters grade level0%−50 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 71 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (224 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
11
Economically disadvantaged
0.0%−5.6 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
0.0%−10.6 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
18.2%+3.3 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
—
Chronically absent
—

Student demographics

The Lead Center

Hispanic: 100%
  • Hispanic 100%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 224 reporting for every category shown · 224 in full cohort

African American: 4%Hispanic: 14.5%White: 49.3%American Indian: 0.5%Asian: 25.7%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 5.9%
  • African American 4%
  • Hispanic 14.5%
  • White 49.3%
  • American Indian 0.5%
  • Asian 25.7%
  • Pacific Islander 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 5.9%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
11
Economically disadvantaged students
0
Emergent bilingual students
0
Special education students
2

TEA context labels

  • New campus compared with last year’s fall enrollment

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
Not reported
Students in TEA mobility denominator
Not reported
TEA-published mobility rate
Not reported

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.

Teachers

Average salary
$72,232+$2,682 vs similar economic context
Teachers
3−51.9 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
3.4−11.2 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

The Lead Center

21 to 30 years: 93.8%Over 30 years: 6.3%
  • 21 to 30 years 93.8%
  • Over 30 years 6.3%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 224 reporting for every category shown · 224 in full cohort

Beginning: 4.1%1 to 5 years: 24.4%6 to 10 years: 19.7%11 to 20 years: 31%21 to 30 years: 16.6%Over 30 years: 2.5%
  • Beginning 4.1%
  • 1 to 5 years 24.4%
  • 6 to 10 years 19.7%
  • 11 to 20 years 31%
  • 21 to 30 years 16.6%
  • Over 30 years 2.5%

Where this school ranks best

Out of 75 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 12

    Social Studies — Approaches

    Starr County · of the 12 that report this measure

  • 1of 11

    Social Studies — Meets

    Similar size · of the 11 that report this measure

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

5 measures

  • 5of 15

    Reading — Approaches

    Similar size · of the 15 that report this measure

  • 5of 15

    Reading — Meets

    Similar size · of the 15 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 6of 16

    All Subjects — Approaches

    Similar size · of the 16 that report this measure

  • 7of 16

    All Subjects — Meets

    Similar size · of the 16 that report this measure

  • 10of 12

    Social Studies — Masters

    Starr County · of the 12 that report this measure · tied with 2

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 214901006.