+4.3 ptsvs 77.7 average · 251 rated districts serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
70 of 251tied with 9 others
Score vs region
+3.2 ptsvs 78.8 average · 32 rated districts in Region 18: Midland
Region 18: Midland placement
11 of 32tied with 1 other
Score vs similar-size group
−1.2 ptsvs 83.2 average · 221 similarly sized rated districts
Similar size placement
126 of 221tied with 10 others
Score vs state
+0.3 ptsvs 81.7 average · 1,019 rated Texas districts
Texas placement
487 of 1,019tied with 51 others
B82
At a glance
Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving up; under the rules in force back then it scored 86 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 77.7 average for 251 rated districts serving a similar economic context.The current score is above the 78.8 average for 32 rated districts in Region 18: Midland.The current score is below the 83.2 average for 221 similarly sized rated districts.The current score is level with the 81.7 average for 1,019 rated Texas districts.
Evidence worth noticing
Strengths and momentum
Current strength
Earned college credit for a dual credit course above the similar-context average
90.9%+60.6 pts vs 30.3%
90.9% is 60.6 percentage points above
the 30.3% average among 244 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
1st of 244 districts 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 district.
Read the full rating context and placement
Culberson County-Allamoore ISD is rated B by TEA, scoring 82 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 77.7 average for 251 rated districts serving a similar economic context. It is up 1 point since 2021-22.
Ranks 70th of 251 rated districts serving a similar economic context (tied with 9 others).
Culberson County-Allamoore ISD is rated B by TEA, scoring 82 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 78.8 average for 32 rated districts in Region 18: Midland. It is up 1 point since 2021-22.
Culberson County-Allamoore ISD is rated B by TEA, scoring 82 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 83.2 average for 221 similarly sized rated districts. It is up 1 point since 2021-22.
Ranks 126th of 221 similarly sized rated districts (tied with 10 others).
Culberson County-Allamoore ISD is rated B by TEA, scoring 82 out of 100 for 2025-26 — level with the 81.7 average for 1,019 rated Texas districts. It is up 1 point since 2021-22.
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 B with 86 that year.
Comparison lines follow the current rated cohort backward through time. The table gives the number in that fixed cohort that reported a score each year; it can be smaller than cohort membership.
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 Achievement85 B+10.0 vs similar economic context · 251 reporting
School Progress85 B+6.2 vs similar economic context · 251 reporting
Closing the Gaps74 C−0.5 vs similar economic context · 250 reporting
Academic Growth62 D−7.5 vs similar economic context · 251 reporting
Relative Performance85 B+6.6 vs similar economic context · 251 reporting
Culberson County-Allamoore ISD
Similar economic-disadvantage rate (251 in cohort)
Domain scores
Domain
Score
Grade
Points to next grade
Student Achievement
85
B
5
School Progress
85
B
5
Closing the Gaps
74
C
6
Academic Growth
62
D
8
Relative Performance
85
B
5
Closest to moving up: Student Achievement, 5 points below A 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%.
Student outcomes
STAAR performance
All Subjects
Approaches grade level68%±0 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 reporting
Meets grade level38%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 reporting
Masters grade level11%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
Approaches grade level75%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 reporting
Meets grade level47%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 reporting
Masters grade level13%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 reporting
Math3 performance levels
Approaches grade level52%−12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 reporting
Meets grade level20%−14 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 reporting
Masters grade level5%−7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 reporting
Science3 performance levels
Approaches grade level79%+7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 249 reporting
Meets grade level45%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 249 reporting
Masters grade level15%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 249 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
Approaches grade level82%+13 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 247 reporting
Meets grade level52%+12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 247 reporting
Masters grade level16%+0 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 247 reporting
Approaches grade level
Meets grade level
Masters grade level
Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (251 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
100.0%+4.9 pts vs similar economic contextaverage fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 242 rated districts reporting
Five-Year
100.0%+4.3 pts vs similar economic contextaverage fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 243 rated districts reporting
Six-Year
100.0%+4.9 pts vs similar economic contextaverage fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 243 rated districts reporting
Dropout Rate
0.0%−0.9 pts vs similar economic contextaverage fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 244 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
95.0%+8.9 pts vs similar economic context
CCMR criteria
Criterion
This district% of graduates
Averagesimilar economic context
Differencepercentage points
Reportingselected comparison
Total credit for CCMR criteria
95.0%
86.1%
+8.9
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 242 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course
22.7%
53.1%
−30.4
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 244 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA
22.7%
20.9%
+1.8
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 244 rated districts reporting
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)
0.0%
6.5%
−6.5
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 244 rated districts reporting
Earned college credit for a dual credit course
90.9%
30.3%
+60.6
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 244 rated districts reporting
Earned an industry-based certification
18.2%
42.4%
−24.2
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 244 rated districts reporting
Earned a level I or level II certificate
18.2%
2.8%
+15.4
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 244 rated districts reporting
Earned an associate degree
68.2%
4.4%
+63.8
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 244 rated districts reporting
Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit
0.0%
2.8%
−2.8
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 244 rated districts reporting
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness
0.0%
3.9%
−3.9
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 244 rated districts reporting
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student
9.1%
10.0%
−0.9
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 244 rated districts reporting
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces
4.5%
3.1%
+1.4
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 244 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.
Who this district serves
Placed after the results deliberately: this is context for reading them, not an explanation of them.
Students
378
Economically disadvantaged
80.4%+1.3 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
5.3%−14.7 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
10.1%−8.1 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
90.5%−2.9 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
41.0%+20.4 pts vs similar economic context
Student demographics
Culberson County-Allamoore ISD
African American 0.8%
Hispanic 82.2%
White 10.3%
American Indian 0.8%
Asian 4.2%
Pacific Islander 0.3%
Two or More Races 1.3%
Selected comparison averageFor districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 reporting for every category shown · 251 in full cohort
African American 10.5%
Hispanic 63.3%
White 22.4%
American Indian 0.2%
Asian 0.8%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 2.6%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 18: Midland · 32 reporting for every category shown · 32 in full cohort
African American 2%
Hispanic 65.8%
White 28.4%
American Indian 0.2%
Asian 1.3%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 2.3%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized districts · 221 reporting for every category shown · 221 in full cohort
African American 3.5%
Hispanic 37%
White 55.7%
American Indian 0.4%
Asian 0.3%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3%
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
377
Economically disadvantaged students
303
Emergent bilingual students
20
Special education students
38
Early college pathways
Pathways in Technology Early College High School (P-TECH)
113
TEA-published share: 30%
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 378 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 3 (0.8%) from 2024–25.
Latest enrollment
378
2025–26
Change from 2024–25
−3
Decrease · −0.8%
Change since 2021–22
+18
Increase · +5.0%
Enrollment in 2025–26
This district
378
Selected comparison
7,015.5
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 rated districts reporting
Student enrollment by school year for Culberson County-Allamoore ISD
School year
Students enrolledCulberson County-Allamoore ISD
Change from previous school year
Average enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22
360
First available year
7,372
2022–23
366
Increase of 6 (1.7%)
7,380
2023–24
393
Increase of 27 (7.4%)
7,306.9
2024–25
381
Decrease of 12 (3.1%)
7,249.3
2025–26
378
Decrease of 3 (0.8%)
7,015.5
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
Not reported
Live in another district; attend here · 2025–26
Transfers out
18
Live here; attend in another public district or charter · 2025–26
Transfers in minus transfers out
Not available
Arithmetic context only
Transfers out · 2025–26
This district
18
Selected comparison
1,470.5
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 245 rated districts reporting
Official transfer totals by school year for Culberson County-Allamoore ISD
School year
Transfers inCulberson County-Allamoore ISD
Transfers outCulberson County-Allamoore ISD
In minus outCulberson County-Allamoore ISD
Transfers inselected comparison average
Transfers outselected comparison average
In minus outselected comparison average
2021–22
Not reported
18
Not available
—
1,271.1
—
2022–23
Not reported
27
Not available
—
1,336
—
2023–24
Not reported
13
Not available
—
1,413.7
—
2024–25
Not reported
16
Not available
—
1,448.8
—
2025–26
Not reported
18
Not available
—
1,470.5
—
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
29
7.1% of cumulative year-end enrollment
Disciplinary actions
57
14.04 per 100 students
Cumulative year-end enrollment
406
2024–25
Share of students · 2024–25
This district
7.1%
Selected comparison
12.4%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 237 rated districts reporting
−5.3 pts vs similar economic context
Actions per 100 students · 2024–25
This district
14.04
Selected comparison
29.8
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 239 rated districts reporting
−15.8 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Culberson County-Allamoore 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
410
Suppressed
—
12
2.93
—
16.2
2021–22
409
32
7.8%
52
12.71
12.8%
30.4
2022–23
407
46
11.3%
99
24.32
13.5%
33.6
2023–24
421
44
10.4%
71
16.86
13.0%
32
2024–25
406
29
7.1%
57
14.04
12.4%
29.8
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Culberson County-Allamoore ISD in 2024–25
Category
Students
Students% of enrollment
Actions
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline
29
7.1%
57
14.04
12.4%
29.8
In-school suspensions
21
5.2%
30
7.39
10.2%
19.9
Out-of-school suspensions
12
3.0%
17
4.19
5.0%
8.2
DAEP placements
Suppressed
—
10
2.46
—
3.8
Mandatory DAEP placements
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
Discretionary DAEP placements
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
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
2,272
2024 Census estimate
Children ages 5–17
378
Living inside the boundary
Children ages 5–17 in families in poverty
103
27.2%
School-age child poverty rate
27.2%
103 of 378
Boundary population
This district
2,272
Selected comparison
47,059
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 250 rated districts reporting
School-age population
This district
378
Selected comparison
8,521.5
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 250 rated districts reporting
School-age population in poverty
This district
103
Selected comparison
1,988.9
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 250 rated districts reporting
School-age child poverty rate
This district
27.2%
Selected comparison
23.1%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 250 rated districts reporting
+4.1 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.
1 schools in this district
Number of schools in the district
This district
1
Selected comparison
11.7
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 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.
K-12
1
Browse all 1 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.
Culberson County-Allamoore ISD
TEA peer group
Texas average
Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Spending per student · 2025
This district
$139,294
Selected comparison
$22,551
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 rated districts reporting
+$116,743 vs similar economic context
This district spends $113,365 more per student than TEA's peer group, and $120,322 more per student than the state average.
View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
Year
Culberson County-Allamoore ISD
TEA peer group
Texas average
Selected comparison average
Reportingselected comparison
2018
$51,350
$14,290
$13,054
$14,158
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 rated districts reporting
2019
$22,958
$14,384
$13,108
$14,358
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 rated districts reporting
2020
$34,176
$16,581
$14,058
$15,555
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 rated districts reporting
2021
$55,115
$17,863
$14,797
$16,974
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 rated districts reporting
2022
$44,548
$19,817
$15,708
$18,932
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 rated districts reporting
2023
$118,074
$21,827
$16,792
$21,405
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 rated districts reporting
2024
$83,756
$23,517
$18,125
$21,440
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 rated districts reporting
2025
$139,294
$25,929
$18,972
$22,551
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 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
$53,678−$10,636 vs similar economic context
Teachers
37−435.3 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
10.3−3.7 vs similar economic context
Teaching experience
Culberson County-Allamoore ISD
Beginning 2.7%
1 to 5 years 21%
6 to 10 years 21.8%
11 to 20 years 27.2%
21 to 30 years 16.3%
Over 30 years 10.9%
Selected comparison averageFor districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 reporting for every category shown · 251 in full cohort
Beginning 7.5%
1 to 5 years 27.6%
6 to 10 years 17.5%
11 to 20 years 25.5%
21 to 30 years 16.4%
Over 30 years 5.5%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 18: Midland · 32 reporting for every category shown · 32 in full cohort
Beginning 10.8%
1 to 5 years 24.3%
6 to 10 years 16.7%
11 to 20 years 24.3%
21 to 30 years 17.4%
Over 30 years 6.6%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized districts · 221 reporting for every category shown · 221 in full cohort
Beginning 6.7%
1 to 5 years 21.3%
6 to 10 years 16.8%
11 to 20 years 28.7%
21 to 30 years 20%
Over 30 years 6.5%
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 20.4% teacher turnover rate in 2024–25.
Teacher turnover rate · 2024–25
This district
20.4%
Selected comparison
23.2%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 251 rated districts reporting
−2.8 pts vs similar economic context
District teacher turnover rate by school year for Culberson County-Allamoore ISD
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.
#1 rankings
First-place results
3 measures
1of 251
Per-student spending
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 251 that report this measure
1of 244
Earned college credit for a dual credit course
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 244 that report this measure
1of 244
Earned an associate degree
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 244 that report this measure
#2–3 rankings
Second- and third-place results
1 measure
2of 31
Earned a level I or level II certificate
Region 18: Midland · of the 31 that report this measure
#4–10 rankings
Fourth- through tenth-place results
7 measures
4of 29
Social Studies — Approaches
Region 18: Midland · of the 29 that report this measure
5of 32
Relative Performance
Region 18: Midland · of the 32 that report this measure
5of 31
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces
Region 18: Midland · of the 31 that report this measure
6of 32
School Progress
Region 18: Midland · of the 32 that report this measure
6of 29
Social Studies — Meets
Region 18: Midland · of the 29 that report this measure · tied with 1
7of 32
Student Achievement
Region 18: Midland · of the 32 that report this measure · tied with 2
9of 30
College, career or military ready
Region 18: Midland · of the 30 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 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.