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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Geographic public school district

Beaumont ISD

Jefferson County · Region 05: Beaumont · 15,862 students

Official district websiteEnrollment, registration and eligibility

Current score
69/1002025-26
Change
+2 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
−8.8 ptsvs 77.8 average · 228 rated districts serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
192 of 228tied with 14 others
D69

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving up; under the rules in force back then it scored 67 in 2021-22. The current score is below the 77.8 average for 228 rated districts serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

STAAR result

Social Studies above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters

Meets
43%vs 39.3% avg · +3.7 pts
Masters
22%vs 15.6% avg · +6.4 pts

Among 224 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.

See the full measure

Current strength

Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s) above the similar-context average

9.1% +2.4 pts vs 6.7%

  • 9.1% is 2.4 percentage points above the 6.7% average among 221 districts 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 district.

Read the full rating context and placement

Beaumont ISD is rated D by TEA, scoring 69 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 77.8 average for 228 rated districts serving a similar economic context. It is up 2 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 192nd of 228 rated districts serving a similar economic context (tied with 14 others).

2 consecutive years rated unacceptable.

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. After high school: the following fall
  7. Who this district serves
  8. Student counts behind the percentages
  9. Enrollment over time
  10. Students crossing district lines
  11. Discipline and removal from class
  12. Community around the district
  13. 25 schools in this district
  14. Spending per student
  15. Teachers
  16. Where this district ranks best
  17. Where this comes from

Official improvement and transfer notices

Dated TEA notices for campuses in this district. They are shown separately from the district rating because they describe specific campuses, support programs and transfer eligibility.

Campuses identified for federal improvement support
16

2026 TEA list

Campuses on the final PEG transfer list
7

2026–27 school year

Share of campuses identified for improvement

This district
64.0%
Selected comparison
30.5%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 rated districts reporting

+33.5 pts vs similar economic context

Share of campuses on the PEG list

This district
28.0%
Selected comparison
7.7%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 rated districts reporting

+20.3 pts vs similar economic context
See the campuses and official reasons
Official improvement and Public Education Grant notices for campuses in Beaumont ISD
CampusNoticeOfficial status or reason
Smith MSCSI + PEG transfer listComprehensive Support and Improvement · CSI Low Performance
Final 2026-27 PEG list
Marshall MSTSITargeted Support and Improvement · African American, Economically Disadvantaged, Continuously Enrolled
Odom MSCSIComprehensive Support and Improvement · CSI Low Performance
Vincent MSATS + PEG transfer listAdditional Targeted Support · White
Final 2026-27 PEG list
Amelia ElemATSAdditional Targeted Support · African American
Caldwood ElemATSAdditional Targeted Support · Economically Disadvantaged
Curtis ElemATSAdditional Targeted Support · Continuously Enrolled
Guess ElemATSAdditional Targeted Support · Continuously Enrolled
Homer Dr ElemCSI + PEG transfer listComprehensive Support and Improvement · CSI Low Performance
Final 2026-27 PEG list
Pietzsch/Mac Arthur ElemCSI + PEG transfer listComprehensive Support and Improvement · CSI Low Performance
Final 2026-27 PEG list
Dishman ElemCSIComprehensive Support and Improvement · CSI Low Performance
Blanchette ElemATSAdditional Targeted Support · English Learners
Martin ElemCSI + PEG transfer listComprehensive Support and Improvement · CSI Low Performance
Final 2026-27 PEG list
Dr Mae E Jones-Clark ElemCSIComprehensive Support and Improvement · CSI Low Performance
Charlton-Pollard ElemCSI + PEG transfer listComprehensive Support and Improvement · CSI Low Performance
Final 2026-27 PEG list
Fehl-Price ElemCSI + PEG transfer listComprehensive Support and Improvement · CSI Low Performance
Final 2026-27 PEG list

Selected comparison percentages describe how common each dated campus notice is across reporting districts in that group. They are neutral prevalence context; changing the comparison never changes a campus's official status.

Sources: TEA's 2026 Schools Identified for Improvement and Public Education Grant program, fetched 24 August 2026. A PEG listing makes a student assigned to that campus eligible to request a transfer; it does not guarantee acceptance, available space or transportation.

5 years of ratings

Follow the solid line to see how this district has changed. Turn comparison lines on or off to add context.

Compare against
90807060 Similar economic-disadvantage rateTexas averageBeaumont ISD 6766656869 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 Not Rated with 67 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
2025-26D6977.8 228 reporting81.7 1,019 reporting
2024-25D6875.5 228 reporting80.3 1,019 reporting
2023-24D6573.6 228 reporting78.7 1,017 reporting
2022-23D6674.1 227 reporting79.2 1,018 reporting
2021-22D6777.0 227 reporting80.6 1,017 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 Achievement66 D−8.9 vs similar economic context · 228 reporting
  • School Progress70 C−8.9 vs similar economic context · 228 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps65 D−9.7 vs similar economic context · 227 reporting
  • Academic Growth66 D−3.7 vs similar economic context · 228 reporting
  • Relative Performance70 C−8.5 vs similar economic context · 228 reporting
  • Beaumont ISD
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (228 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement66D4
School Progress70C10
Closing the Gaps65D5
Academic Growth66D4
Relative Performance70C10

Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 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 district that better measure is School Progress (70), so Student Achievement (66) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 70.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level58%−10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 reporting
  • Meets grade level32%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 reporting
  • Masters grade level10%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level61%−9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 reporting
  • Meets grade level36%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 reporting
  • Masters grade level9%−5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level50%−14 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 reporting
  • Meets grade level25%−9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 reporting
  • Masters grade level8%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level60%−12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 226 reporting
  • Meets grade level31%−11 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 226 reporting
  • Masters grade level11%−5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 226 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level66%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 224 reporting
  • Meets grade level43%+4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 224 reporting
  • Masters grade level22%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 224 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (228 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 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate — a comparison TEA does not publish.

Graduation

Four-Year
84.8%−10.1 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 219 rated districts reporting
Five-Year
82.3%−13.2 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 220 rated districts reporting
Six-Year
84.8%−10.2 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 220 rated districts reporting
Dropout Rate
3.1%+2.2 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 221 rated districts reporting

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

College, career and military readiness

Total credit for CCMR criteria
85.0%−1.0 pts vs similar economic context
CCMR criteria
CriterionThis district% of graduatesAveragesimilar economic contextDifferencepercentage pointsReportingselected comparison
Total credit for CCMR criteria85.0%86.0%−1.0 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 219 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course69.4%52.5%+16.9 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 221 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA12.3%21.3%−9.0 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 221 rated districts reporting
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)9.1%6.7%+2.4 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 221 rated districts reporting
Earned college credit for a dual credit course18.5%30.8%−12.3 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 221 rated districts reporting
Earned an industry-based certification34.1%42.4%−8.3 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 221 rated districts reporting
Earned a level I or level II certificate7.1%3.0%+4.1 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 221 rated districts reporting
Earned an associate degree4.3%4.6%−0.3 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 221 rated districts reporting
Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit0.1%3.0%−2.9 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 221 rated districts reporting
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness3.6%3.7%−0.1 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 221 rated districts reporting
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student6.2%9.8%−3.6 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 221 rated districts reporting
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces3.0%3.1%−0.1 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 221 rated districts reporting

Every row is a share of this district's graduates, and every row is a way of meeting CCMR — so on every row, a bigger share is better. Difference is this district minus the average for districts 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 district 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 districts 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 district 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
1,023

Class of 2023–24

Enrolled in Texas public higher education
413

40.4% of graduates

Not found in Texas public higher-ed records
543

53.1% of graduates

Not trackable
67

Fall 2024

Graduates in the report

This district
1,023
Selected comparison
652.8

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting

Enrolled in Texas public higher education

This district
413
Selected comparison
274.9

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting

Texas-public enrollment rate

This district
40.4%
Selected comparison
42.1%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting

−1.7 pts vs similar economic context

Not-found rate

This district
53.1%
Selected comparison
53.7%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting

−0.6 pts vs similar economic context

Not-trackable rate

This district
6.5%
Selected comparison
4.2%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting

+2.3 pts vs similar economic context

Most common named Texas public destinations

  1. LAMAR UNIVERSITY (003581)130
  2. LAMAR INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (036273)129
  3. UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON (003652)17

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 district serves

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

Students
15,862
Economically disadvantaged
81.8%+1.5 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
16.1%−4.3 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
13.1%−5.2 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
90.4%−3.0 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
32.9%+11.9 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Beaumont ISD

African American: 60.4%Hispanic: 28%White: 6.2%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 2.8%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 2.2%
  • African American 60.4%
  • Hispanic 28%
  • White 6.2%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 2.8%
  • Pacific Islander 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 2.2%

Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 reporting for every category shown · 228 in full cohort

African American: 11.2%Hispanic: 64.4%White: 20.7%American Indian: 0.2%Asian: 0.8%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 2.6%
  • African American 11.2%
  • Hispanic 64.4%
  • White 20.7%
  • American Indian 0.2%
  • Asian 0.8%
  • Pacific Islander 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 2.6%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
15,838
Economically disadvantaged students
12,955
Emergent bilingual students
2,555
Special education students
2,068

Early college pathways

Pathways in Technology Early College High School (P-TECH)
325

TEA-published share: 2.1%

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 15,862 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 474 (2.9%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
15,862

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
−474

Decrease · −2.9%

Change since 2021–22
−907

Decrease · −5.4%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This district
15,862
Selected comparison
7,080.1

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 rated districts reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Beaumont ISD
School yearStudents enrolledBeaumont ISDChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 16,769 First available year 7,505.7
2022–23 16,730 Decrease of 39 (0.2%) 7,504.3
2023–24 16,803 Increase of 73 (0.4%) 7,400.5
2024–25 16,336 Decrease of 467 (2.8%) 7,315.3
2025–26 15,862 Decrease of 474 (2.9%) 7,080.1

The selected comparison column is the average enrollment among reporting districts in that group. It changes with the comparison control; this district'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.

Students crossing district lines

How many students live in one public-school district and attend in another. These are movement counts, not a measure of family satisfaction or school quality.

Transfers in
75

Live in another district; attend here · 2025–26

Transfers out
3,412

Live here; attend in another public district or charter · 2025–26

Transfers in minus transfers out
−3,337

Arithmetic context only

Transfers in · 2025–26

This district
75
Selected comparison
428.6

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 200 rated districts reporting

Transfers out · 2025–26

This district
3,412
Selected comparison
1,515.2

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 rated districts reporting

Transfers in minus out · 2025–26

This district
−3,337
Selected comparison
−1,273

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 196 rated districts reporting

Official transfer totals by school year for Beaumont ISD
School yearTransfers inBeaumont ISDTransfers outBeaumont ISDIn minus outBeaumont ISDTransfers inselected comparison averageTransfers outselected comparison averageIn minus outselected comparison average
2021–22 57 2,532 −2,475 290.3 1,320.7 −1,171
2022–23 63 2,648 −2,585 335.6 1,389.4 −1,218
2023–24 74 2,742 −2,668 359.2 1,474.1 −1,260
2024–25 60 3,375 −3,315 395.1 1,499.7 −1,256
2025–26 75 3,412 −3,337 428.6 1,515.2 −1,273

Largest reported origins for transfers in

  1. Port Arthur ISD 12390723

Top reported flows only. TEA published 1 of 15 counterpart counts and masked 14.

Largest reported destinations for transfers out

  1. Harmony Public Schools - Houston West 1018621,307
  2. Ehrhart School 123805566
  3. Bob Hope School 123807344
  4. Texas College Preparatory Academies 221801193
  5. Evolution Academy Charter School 057834171

Top reported flows only. TEA published 18 of 45 counterpart counts and masked 27.

Selected comparison figures are average reported counts, not rates; group size and district enrollment affect them. They provide scale context and are not a performance judgment. This district's official totals do not change when the comparison does.

Source: TEA Student Transfer Reports, fetched 24 August 2026. The totals are TEA's official district rows; this site does not add masked detail cells. A transfer records a mismatch between district of residence and public district or charter of attendance. It does not say why a family transferred, whether the move was optional, or whether either school is better.

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
4,740

26.7% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
19,034

107.32 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
17,735

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This district
26.7%
Selected comparison
12.6%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 215 rated districts reporting

+14.1 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This district
107.32
Selected comparison
30.4

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 217 rated districts reporting

+76.9 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Beaumont ISD
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 18,532 1,726 9.3% 4,197 22.65 7.8% 15.7
2021–22 18,313 3,997 21.8% 14,874 81.22 13.0% 30.7
2022–23 18,304 4,182 22.9% 16,264 88.85 13.6% 33.9
2023–24 18,240 4,656 25.5% 18,107 99.27 13.3% 32.6
2024–25 17,735 4,740 26.7% 19,034 107.32 12.6% 30.4
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Beaumont ISD in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 4,740 26.7% 19,034 107.32 12.6% 30.4
In-school suspensions 3,269 18.4% 9,237 52.08 10.3% 20.4
Out-of-school suspensions 3,331 18.8% 9,097 51.29 5.1% 8.4
DAEP placements 587 3.3% 684 3.86 3.2% 3.9
Mandatory DAEP placements 198 1.1% 203 1.14 1.8% 2.1
Discretionary DAEP placements 414 2.3% 481 2.71 1.8% 2.1
JJAEP placements 11 0.1% 11 0.06 0.1% 0.1
Mandatory JJAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
Discretionary JJAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
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 districts can be read on the same basis. Each average uses only group members for which TEA reported that rate; this district'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.

Community around the district

A district serves a place as well as a roster. These Census estimates describe the resident community without treating its circumstances as an explanation or a verdict on students.

People living inside the district boundary
127,147

2024 Census estimate

Children ages 5–17
21,389

Living inside the boundary

Children ages 5–17 in families in poverty
5,498

25.7%

School-age child poverty rate
25.7%

5,498 of 21,389

Boundary population

This district
127,147
Selected comparison
48,292.1

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 227 rated districts reporting

School-age population

This district
21,389
Selected comparison
8,684.8

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 227 rated districts reporting

School-age population in poverty

This district
5,498
Selected comparison
2,065.4

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 227 rated districts reporting

School-age child poverty rate

This district
25.7%
Selected comparison
23.5%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 227 rated districts reporting

+2.2 pts vs similar economic context

Population averages provide neutral scale context and can differ sharply across a region, county or the state. The poverty-rate comparison is the like-for-like percentage; none of these Census measures is treated as school performance.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2024 Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates, fetched 24 August 2026. These are modeled estimates for residents inside the geographic district, not the students enrolled by the district. A family's poverty status is context, never a school-quality measure.

25 schools in this district

Number of schools in the district

This district
25
Selected comparison
11.9

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 rated districts reporting

The selected comparison is a neutral average district size. This district's school count and school-type mix remain its own facts.

Elementary
16
High School
4
Middle / Jr. High
4
K-12
1
Browse all 25 schoolsName, type, rating, score and enrollment
Schools in this district
SchoolTypeRatingScoreStudents
Dr Martin Luther King Collegiate AcademyHigh SchoolA97334
West Brook Sr HSHigh SchoolB832,171
Beaumont United HSHigh SchoolC791,864
Fletcher ElemElementaryC73576
Regina Howell ElemElementaryC71722
Marshall MSMiddle / Jr. HighD69766
Bingman PKElementaryD69509
Odom MSMiddle / Jr. HighD67828
Curtis ElemElementaryD64491
Caldwood ElemElementaryD61566
Amelia ElemElementaryD60645
Guess ElemElementaryF59699
Pietzsch/Mac Arthur ElemElementaryF591,180
Blanchette ElemElementaryF59426
Vincent MSMiddle / Jr. HighF58582
Charlton-Pollard ElemElementaryF57417
Dishman ElemElementaryF54513
Martin ElemElementaryF51530
Smith MSMiddle / Jr. HighF46501
Fehl-Price ElemElementaryF46318
Homer Dr ElemElementaryF44427
Dr Mae E Jones-Clark ElemElementaryF41504
Pathways Learning CtrK-12Not Rated—132
Jefferson Co Youth AcadHigh SchoolNot Rated—10
Beaumont New El DEAPElementaryNot Rated—11

Spending per student

The selected txschools.net comparison changes with the page-wide control. TEA's own peer group and statewide reference stay visible as separately published, fixed TEA references.

$10k$22k$34k20182020202220242025
  • Beaumont ISD
  • TEA peer group
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This district
$15,492
Selected comparison
$22,828

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 rated districts reporting

−$7,336 vs similar economic context

This district spends $3,478 less per student than TEA's peer group, and $3,480 less per student than the state average.

View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
YearBeaumont ISDTEA peer groupTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$11,412$13,287$13,054$14,276 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 rated districts reporting
2019$11,468$13,321$13,108$14,420 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 rated districts reporting
2020$13,081$14,168$14,058$15,754 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 rated districts reporting
2021$13,370$14,814$14,797$17,185 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 rated districts reporting
2022$14,443$15,701$15,708$19,267 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 rated districts reporting
2023$16,117$17,110$16,792$21,739 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 rated districts reporting
2024$16,938$18,355$18,125$21,799 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 rated districts reporting
2025$15,492$18,970$18,972$22,828 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 rated districts 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

Average salary
$59,185−$5,057 vs similar economic context
Teachers
1,060+578.2 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
14.9+1.1 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Beaumont ISD

Beginning: 15.8%1 to 5 years: 31.2%6 to 10 years: 17.5%11 to 20 years: 19.8%21 to 30 years: 10.4%Over 30 years: 5.3%
  • Beginning 15.8%
  • 1 to 5 years 31.2%
  • 6 to 10 years 17.5%
  • 11 to 20 years 19.8%
  • 21 to 30 years 10.4%
  • Over 30 years 5.3%

Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 reporting for every category shown · 228 in full cohort

Beginning: 7.4%1 to 5 years: 27.8%6 to 10 years: 17.7%11 to 20 years: 25.4%21 to 30 years: 16.2%Over 30 years: 5.5%
  • Beginning 7.4%
  • 1 to 5 years 27.8%
  • 6 to 10 years 17.7%
  • 11 to 20 years 25.4%
  • 21 to 30 years 16.2%
  • Over 30 years 5.5%

Teacher turnover over time

TEA reported a 21.0% teacher turnover rate in 2024–25.

Teacher turnover rate · 2024–25

This district
21.0%
Selected comparison
23.5%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 228 rated districts reporting

−2.5 pts vs similar economic context
District teacher turnover rate by school year for Beaumont ISD
School yearTeacher turnover rateBeaumont ISDAverage turnover rateselected comparison
2020–2119.2%19.0%
2021–2225.5%22.0%
2022–2326.3%26.4%
2023–2425.3%23.6%
2024–2521.0%23.5%

TEA defines this district rate as the share of teacher full-time equivalents from the prior fall who are not employed as teachers in the district in the current fall. That can include leaving the district or remaining in a different role; it is not a campus-level measure. The comparison average changes with the selected group; this district's reported rate does not.

Source: TEA Texas Academic Performance Reports, fetched 24 August 2026.

Where this district ranks best

Out of 160 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

1 measure

  • 1of 76

    Earned a level I or level II certificate

    Similar size · of the 76 that report this measure

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

4 measures

  • 4of 35

    Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit

    Region 05: Beaumont · of the 35 that report this measure

  • 5of 35

    Earned an associate degree

    Region 05: Beaumont · of the 35 that report this measure

  • 6of 35

    Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)

    Region 05: Beaumont · of the 35 that report this measure

  • 10of 35

    Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course

    Region 05: Beaumont · of the 35 that report this measure

These are selected high placements, not a summary. Every figure above this section is the full picture, including where this district 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 district; any tie that does appear is labeled. Every ranking this site publishes, including the ones no district 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 this district as CSV · JSON · the whole dataset