−9.7 ptsvs 79.7 average · 371 rated districts serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
335 of 371tied with 4 others
Score vs region
−12.0 ptsvs 82 average · 80 rated districts in Region 10: Richardson
Region 10: Richardson placement
77 of 80among reporting districts
Score vs county
−12.0 ptsvs 82 average · 8 rated districts in Fannin County
Score vs similar-size group
−9.6 ptsvs 79.6 average · 199 similarly sized rated districts
Similar size placement
180 of 199tied with 1 other
Score vs state
−11.7 ptsvs 81.7 average · 1,019 rated Texas districts
Texas placement
942 of 1,019tied with 8 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 77 in 2021-22. The current score is below the 79.7 average for 371 rated districts serving a similar economic context.The current score is below the 82 average for 80 rated districts in Region 10: Richardson.The current score is below the 82 average for 8 rated districts in Fannin County.The current score is below the 79.6 average for 199 similarly sized rated districts.The current score is below the 81.7 average for 1,019 rated Texas districts.
Evidence worth noticing
Strengths and momentum
Current strength
Four-Year Graduation Rate above the similar-context average
97.4%+1.2 pts vs 96.2%
97.4% is 1.2 percentage points above
the 96.2% average among 354 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure (standard accountability only).
Five-Year Graduation Rate above the similar-context average
99.2%+2.4 pts vs 96.8%
99.2% is 2.4 percentage points above
the 96.8% average among 355 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure (standard accountability only).
Six-Year Graduation Rate above the similar-context average
98.3%+1.9 pts vs 96.4%
98.3% is 1.9 percentage points above
the 96.4% average among 352 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure (standard accountability only).
Five-Year Graduation Rate above the Region 10: Richardson average
99.2%+1.6 pts vs 97.6%
99.2% is 1.6 percentage points above
the 97.6% average among 80 districts in Region 10: Richardson reporting this measure (standard accountability only).
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 district.
Read the full rating context and placement
Bonham ISD is rated C by TEA, scoring 70 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 79.7 average for 371 rated districts serving a similar economic context. It is down 3 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 335th of 371 rated districts serving a similar economic context (tied with 4 others).
Bonham ISD is rated C by TEA, scoring 70 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 82 average for 80 rated districts in Region 10: Richardson. It is down 3 points since 2021-22.
Bonham ISD is rated C by TEA, scoring 70 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 82 average for 8 rated districts in Fannin County. It is down 3 points since 2021-22.
Bonham ISD is rated C by TEA, scoring 70 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 79.6 average for 199 similarly sized rated districts. It is down 3 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 180th of 199 similarly sized rated districts (tied with 1 other).
Bonham ISD is rated C by TEA, scoring 70 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 81.7 average for 1,019 rated Texas districts. It is down 3 points since 2021-22.
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
3
2026 TEA list
Campuses on the final PEG transfer list
1
2026–27 school year
Share of campuses identified for improvement
This district
60.0%
Selected comparison
25.9%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 rated districts reporting
+34.1 pts vs similar economic context
Share of campuses on the PEG list
This district
20.0%
Selected comparison
4.1%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 rated districts reporting
+15.9 pts vs similar economic context
See the campuses and official reasons
Official improvement and Public Education Grant notices for campuses in Bonham ISD
Comprehensive 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.
Follow the solid line to see how this district 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 C with 77 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 Achievement73 C−5.7 vs similar economic context · 371 reporting
School Progress74 C−6.4 vs similar economic context · 371 reporting
Closing the Gaps60 D−16.7 vs similar economic context · 370 reporting
Academic Growth62 D−8.7 vs similar economic context · 371 reporting
Relative Performance74 C−6.0 vs similar economic context · 371 reporting
Bonham ISD
Similar economic-disadvantage rate (371 in cohort)
Domain scores
Domain
Score
Grade
Points to next grade
Student Achievement
73
C
7
School Progress
74
C
6
Closing the Gaps
60
D
10
Academic Growth
62
D
8
Relative Performance
74
C
6
Closest to moving up: School Progress, 6 points below B 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 (74), so
Student Achievement (73) is published above but does not enter the overall
score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 74.
Student outcomes
STAAR performance
All Subjects
Approaches grade level68%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 reporting
Meets grade level39%−6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 reporting
Masters grade level13%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
Approaches grade level67%−7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 reporting
Meets grade level43%−7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 reporting
Masters grade level15%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 reporting
Math3 performance levels
Approaches grade level63%−5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 reporting
Meets grade level31%−7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 reporting
Masters grade level7%−6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 reporting
Science3 performance levels
Approaches grade level79%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 368 reporting
Meets grade level45%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 368 reporting
Masters grade level17%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 368 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
Approaches grade level71%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 365 reporting
Meets grade level37%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 365 reporting
Masters grade level16%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 365 reporting
Approaches grade level
Meets grade level
Masters grade level
Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (371 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
97.4%+1.2 pts vs similar economic contextaverage fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 354 rated districts reporting
Five-Year
99.2%+2.4 pts vs similar economic contextaverage fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 355 rated districts reporting
Six-Year
98.3%+1.9 pts vs similar economic contextaverage fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 352 rated districts reporting
Dropout Rate
0.0%−0.5 pts vs similar economic contextaverage fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 358 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
94.0%+5.2 pts vs similar economic context
CCMR criteria
Criterion
This district% of graduates
Averagesimilar economic context
Differencepercentage points
Reportingselected comparison
Total credit for CCMR criteria
94.0%
88.8%
+5.2
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 354 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course
90.2%
57.6%
+32.6
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 358 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA
15.4%
23.9%
−8.5
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 358 rated districts reporting
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)
21.1%
5.6%
+15.5
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 358 rated districts reporting
Earned college credit for a dual credit course
7.3%
31.8%
−24.5
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 358 rated districts reporting
Earned an industry-based certification
36.6%
43.5%
−6.9
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 358 rated districts reporting
Earned a level I or level II certificate
0.0%
1.9%
−1.9
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 358 rated districts reporting
Earned an associate degree
0.0%
3.8%
−3.8
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 358 rated districts reporting
Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit
0.0%
2.6%
−2.6
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 358 rated districts reporting
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness
2.4%
3.6%
−1.2
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 358 rated districts reporting
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student
13.0%
9.4%
+3.6
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 358 rated districts reporting
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces
0.0%
3.5%
−3.5
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 358 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 fordistricts 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
113
Class of 2023–24
Enrolled in Texas public higher education
40
35.4% of graduates
Not found in Texas public higher-ed records
70
61.9% of graduates
Not trackable
3
Fall 2024
Graduates in the report
This district
113
Selected comparison
401.5
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 273 rated districts reporting
Enrolled in Texas public higher education
This district
40
Selected comparison
173.3
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 273 rated districts reporting
Texas-public enrollment rate
This district
35.4%
Selected comparison
43.3%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 273 rated districts reporting
−7.9 pts vs similar economic context
Not-found rate
This district
61.9%
Selected comparison
53.1%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 273 rated districts reporting
+8.8 pts vs similar economic context
Not-trackable rate
This district
2.7%
Selected comparison
3.6%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 273 rated districts reporting
−0.9 pts vs similar economic context
Most common named Texas public destinations
GRAYSON COLLEGE (003570)22
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
1,943
Economically disadvantaged
69.3%+1.1 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
17.8%+3.4 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
22.8%+4.3 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
94.1%−0.2 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
18.4%+1.9 pts vs similar economic context
Student demographics
Bonham ISD
African American 6.4%
Hispanic 33%
White 52.4%
American Indian 0.7%
Asian 0.6%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 6.9%
Selected comparison averageFor districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 reporting for every category shown · 371 in full cohort
African American 7%
Hispanic 49.5%
White 39%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 0.8%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3.4%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 10: Richardson · 80 reporting for every category shown · 80 in full cohort
African American 12.1%
Hispanic 33.2%
White 44.6%
American Indian 0.5%
Asian 5%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 4.4%
Selected comparison averageFor Fannin County · 8 reporting for every category shown · 8 in full cohort
African American 2.4%
Hispanic 20.9%
White 70.8%
American Indian 0.7%
Asian 0.1%
Two or More Races 5.1%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized districts · 199 reporting for every category shown · 199 in full cohort
African American 6.5%
Hispanic 44.8%
White 43.8%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 0.9%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3.7%
Statewide average1,019 reporting for every category shown · 1,019 Texas districts in full cohort
African American 6.3%
Hispanic 43.1%
White 45.4%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 1.4%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3.3%
Student counts behind the percentages
Context only. These counts are not rankings, comparisons, or judgments about school quality.
Students in this TEA accountability summary
1,939
Economically disadvantaged students
1,344
Emergent bilingual students
345
Special education students
443
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 1,943 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 86 (4.2%) from 2024–25.
Latest enrollment
1,943
2025–26
Change from 2024–25
−86
Decrease · −4.2%
Change since 2021–22
+56
Increase · +3.0%
Enrollment in 2025–26
This district
1,943
Selected comparison
4,228.3
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 rated districts reporting
Student enrollment by school year for Bonham ISD
School year
Students enrolledBonham ISD
Change from previous school year
Average enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22
1,887
First available year
4,316.8
2022–23
1,899
Increase of 12 (0.6%)
4,357.3
2023–24
1,974
Increase of 75 (3.9%)
4,329.3
2024–25
2,029
Increase of 55 (2.8%)
4,314.4
2025–26
1,943
Decrease of 86 (4.2%)
4,228.3
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.
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
64
Live in another district; attend here · 2025–26
Transfers out
454
Live here; attend in another public district or charter · 2025–26
Transfers in minus transfers out
−390
Arithmetic context only
Transfers in · 2025–26
This district
64
Selected comparison
293.3
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 346 rated districts reporting
Transfers out · 2025–26
This district
454
Selected comparison
730.2
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 357 rated districts reporting
Transfers in minus out · 2025–26
This district
−390
Selected comparison
−486
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 335 rated districts reporting
Official transfer totals by school year for Bonham ISD
School year
Transfers inBonham ISD
Transfers outBonham ISD
In minus outBonham ISD
Transfers inselected comparison average
Transfers outselected comparison average
In minus outselected comparison average
2021–22
93
476
−383
202.4
596.1
−439
2022–23
92
458
−366
228.4
633.7
−452
2023–24
91
455
−364
248.9
690.4
−484
2024–25
97
444
−347
280.3
712
−471
2025–26
64
454
−390
293.3
730.2
−486
Largest reported origins for transfers in
Dodd City ISD 07490417
Ector ISD 07490516
Sam Rayburn ISD 07491714
Top reported flows only. TEA published 3 of 12 counterpart counts and masked 9.
Largest reported destinations for transfers out
Sam Rayburn ISD 074917101
Dodd City ISD 07490492
Leonard ISD 07490942
Ector ISD 07490540
Bells ISD 09190139
Top reported flows only. TEA published 11 of 26 counterpart counts and masked 15.
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
234
10.8% of cumulative year-end enrollment
Disciplinary actions
452
20.78 per 100 students
Cumulative year-end enrollment
2,175
2024–25
Share of students · 2024–25
This district
10.8%
Selected comparison
11.7%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 339 rated districts reporting
−0.9 pts vs similar economic context
Actions per 100 students · 2024–25
This district
20.78
Selected comparison
26.6
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 349 rated districts reporting
−5.8 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Bonham ISD
School year
Cumulative enrollment
Studentsall discipline
Students% of enrollment
Actionsall discipline
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21
1,971
141
7.2%
239
12.13
8.8%
18.3
2021–22
2,067
224
10.8%
448
21.67
12.1%
27.2
2022–23
2,132
280
13.1%
661
31.00
12.4%
29.2
2023–24
2,147
278
12.9%
603
28.09
12.2%
28.6
2024–25
2,175
234
10.8%
452
20.78
11.7%
26.6
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Bonham ISD in 2024–25
Category
Students
Students% of enrollment
Actions
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline
234
10.8%
452
20.78
11.7%
26.6
In-school suspensions
219
10.1%
367
16.87
10.0%
19.3
Out-of-school suspensions
17
0.8%
20
0.92
4.1%
6.3
DAEP placements
55
2.5%
65
2.99
2.9%
3.5
Mandatory DAEP placements
38
1.8%
45
2.07
1.8%
2.1
Discretionary DAEP placements
17
0.8%
20
0.92
1.6%
1.9
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 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
17,996
2024 Census estimate
Children ages 5–17
2,350
Living inside the boundary
Children ages 5–17 in families in poverty
409
17.4%
School-age child poverty rate
17.4%
409 of 2,350
Boundary population
This district
17,996
Selected comparison
27,288.9
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 370 rated districts reporting
School-age population
This district
2,350
Selected comparison
4,846.1
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 370 rated districts reporting
School-age population in poverty
This district
409
Selected comparison
991.9
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 370 rated districts reporting
School-age child poverty rate
This district
17.4%
Selected comparison
19.8%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 370 rated districts reporting
−2.4 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.
5 schools in this district
Number of schools in the district
This district
5
Selected comparison
7.4
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 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
3
High School
1
Middle / Jr. High
1
Browse all 5 schoolsName, type, rating, score and enrollment
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.
Bonham ISD
TEA peer group
Texas average
Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Spending per student · 2025
This district
$32,897
Selected comparison
$23,305
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 rated districts reporting
+$9,592 vs similar economic context
This district spends $13,407 more per student than TEA's peer group, and $13,925 more per student than the state average.
View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
Year
Bonham ISD
TEA peer group
Texas average
Selected comparison average
Reportingselected comparison
2018
$24,442
$12,629
$13,054
$14,034
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 rated districts reporting
2019
$16,102
$12,702
$13,108
$14,429
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 rated districts reporting
2020
$13,103
$13,696
$14,058
$15,514
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 rated districts reporting
2021
$13,945
$14,225
$14,797
$16,549
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 rated districts reporting
2022
$14,932
$15,710
$15,708
$17,858
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 rated districts reporting
2023
$20,109
$16,917
$16,792
$19,671
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 rated districts reporting
2024
$15,070
$18,225
$18,125
$21,323
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 rated districts reporting
2025
$32,897
$19,490
$18,972
$23,305
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 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
$64,327+$596 vs similar economic context
Teachers
139−143.8 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
13.9+0.8 vs similar economic context
Teaching experience
Bonham ISD
Beginning 21.2%
1 to 5 years 14%
6 to 10 years 13.2%
11 to 20 years 29.9%
21 to 30 years 19.5%
Over 30 years 2.1%
Selected comparison averageFor districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 reporting for every category shown · 371 in full cohort
Beginning 7.3%
1 to 5 years 26.3%
6 to 10 years 17.3%
11 to 20 years 26.4%
21 to 30 years 17%
Over 30 years 5.7%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 10: Richardson · 80 reporting for every category shown · 80 in full cohort
Beginning 6.6%
1 to 5 years 25%
6 to 10 years 18.8%
11 to 20 years 28.7%
21 to 30 years 16.7%
Over 30 years 4.2%
Selected comparison averageFor Fannin County · 8 reporting for every category shown · 8 in full cohort
Beginning 5.7%
1 to 5 years 12.7%
6 to 10 years 17.2%
11 to 20 years 29.3%
21 to 30 years 25.5%
Over 30 years 9.6%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized districts · 199 reporting for every category shown · 199 in full cohort
Beginning 5.5%
1 to 5 years 25.1%
6 to 10 years 17.9%
11 to 20 years 28.7%
21 to 30 years 17.7%
Over 30 years 5.2%
Statewide average1,019 reporting for every category shown · 1,019 Texas districts in full cohort
Beginning 6.4%
1 to 5 years 23.9%
6 to 10 years 17.7%
11 to 20 years 28.7%
21 to 30 years 17.7%
Over 30 years 5.5%
Teacher turnover over time
TEA reported a 18.2% teacher turnover rate in 2024–25.
Teacher turnover rate · 2024–25
This district
18.2%
Selected comparison
23.1%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 rated districts reporting
−4.9 pts vs similar economic context
District teacher turnover rate by school year for Bonham ISD
School year
Teacher turnover rateBonham ISD
Average turnover rateselected comparison
2020–21
19.0%
18.0%
2021–22
19.8%
21.8%
2022–23
27.4%
25.6%
2023–24
19.9%
22.6%
2024–25
18.2%
23.1%
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.
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.
#4–10 rankings
Fourth- through tenth-place results
3 measures
9of 80
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student
Region 10: Richardson · of the 80 that report this measure
10of 80
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course
Region 10: Richardson · of the 80 that report this measure
10of 80
Per-student spending
Region 10: Richardson · of the 80 that report this measure
Other top-5% rankings
High placements in larger reporting groups
1 measure
17of 358
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 358 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 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.