−9.1 ptsvs 78.1 average · 64 rated charter school systems serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
52 of 64tied with 4 others
Score vs similar-size group
−8.4 ptsvs 77.4 average · 28 similarly sized rated charter school systems
Similar size placement
21 of 28tied with 2 others
Score vs state
−10.7 ptsvs 79.7 average · 165 rated Texas charter school systems
Texas charter placement
138 of 165tied with 5 others
D69
At a glance
Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 81 in 2021-22. The current score is below the 78.1 average for 64 rated charter school systems serving a similar economic context.The current score is below the 77.4 average for 28 similarly sized rated charter school systems.The current score is below the 79.7 average for 165 rated Texas charter school systems.
Evidence worth noticing
Strengths and momentum
STAAR result
Science above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters
Meets
40%vs 34.6% avg · +5.4 pts
Masters
14%vs 12.6% avg · +1.4 pts
Among 62 charter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
Chronically absent lower than the similar-context average
16.1%−11 pts vs 27.1%
16.1% is 11 percentage points lower than
the 27.1% average among 64 charter school systems 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 charter school system.
Read the full rating context and placement
Excellence In Leadership Academy is rated D by TEA, scoring 69 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 78.1 average for 64 rated charter school systems serving a similar economic context. It is down 12 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 52nd of 64 rated charter school systems serving a similar economic context (tied with 4 others).
Excellence In Leadership Academy is rated D by TEA, scoring 69 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 77.4 average for 28 similarly sized rated charter school systems. It is down 12 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 21st of 28 similarly sized rated charter school systems (tied with 2 others).
Excellence In Leadership Academy is rated D by TEA, scoring 69 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 79.7 average for 165 rated Texas charter school systems. It is down 12 points since 2021-22.
Dated TEA notices for campuses in this charter school system. They are shown separately from the charter school system rating because they describe specific campuses, support programs and transfer eligibility.
Campuses identified for federal improvement support
1
2026 TEA list
Campuses on the final PEG transfer list
0
2026–27 school year
Share of campuses identified for improvement
This charter school system
100.0%
Selected comparison
34.5%
average forcharter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 rated charter school systems reporting
+65.5 pts vs similar economic context
Share of campuses on the PEG list
This charter school system
0.0%
Selected comparison
0.0%
average forcharter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 rated charter school systems reporting
±0.0 pts vs similar economic context
See the campuses and official reasons
Official improvement and Public Education Grant notices for campuses in Excellence In Leadership Academy
Targeted Support and Improvement · Special Education
Selected comparison percentages describe how common each dated campus notice is across reporting charter school systems 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 charter school system 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 81 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 Achievement64 D−9.8 vs similar economic context · 64 reporting
School Progress69 D−9.9 vs similar economic context · 64 reporting
Closing the Gaps70 C−5.7 vs similar economic context · 63 reporting
Academic Growth65 D−7.6 vs similar economic context · 62 reporting
Relative Performance69 D−8.0 vs similar economic context · 63 reporting
Excellence In Leadership Academy
Similar economic-disadvantage rate (64 in cohort)
Domain scores
Domain
Score
Grade
Points to next grade
Student Achievement
64
D
6
School Progress
69
D
1
Closing the Gaps
70
C
10
Academic Growth
65
D
5
Relative Performance
69
D
1
Closest to moving up: School Progress, 1 point 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 charter school system that better measure is School Progress (69), so
Student Achievement (64) is published above but does not enter the overall
score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 69.
Student outcomes
STAAR performance
All Subjects
Approaches grade level63%−5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 reporting
Meets grade level36%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 reporting
Masters grade level12%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
Approaches grade level70%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 reporting
Meets grade level47%+4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 reporting
Masters grade level12%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 reporting
Math3 performance levels
Approaches grade level55%−10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 reporting
Meets grade level25%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 reporting
Masters grade level11%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 reporting
Science3 performance levels
Approaches grade level57%−11 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 62 reporting
Meets grade level40%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 62 reporting
Masters grade level14%+1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 62 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
Approaches grade level76%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 53 reporting
Meets grade level35%−6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 53 reporting
Masters grade level6%−13 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 53 reporting
Approaches grade level
Meets grade level
Masters grade level
Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (64 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 charter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate — a comparison TEA does not publish.
Counts in the comparison controls describe full cohort membership, not the denominator of every average. Each average uses only charter school systems for which TEA reported that measure; metric-specific reporting counts are shown on the STAAR, graduation and CCMR rows and may vary.
Who this charter school system serves
Placed after the results deliberately: this is context for reading them, not an explanation of them.
Students
168
Economically disadvantaged
82.7%−0.7 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
52.4%+21.3 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
17.3%+2.6 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
93.7%+1.7 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
16.1%−11.0 pts vs similar economic context
Student demographics
Excellence In Leadership Academy
Hispanic 100%
Selected comparison averageFor charter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 reporting for every category shown · 64 in full cohort
African American 24.2%
Hispanic 66.5%
White 5.3%
American Indian 0.2%
Asian 2%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 1.8%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized charter school systems · 28 reporting for every category shown · 28 in full cohort
African American 23.8%
Hispanic 51.8%
White 20.3%
American Indian 0.2%
Asian 1%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 2.8%
Texas charter average165 reporting for every category shown · 165 Texas charter school systems in full cohort
African American 21%
Hispanic 54.7%
White 15.7%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 5.3%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 2.9%
Student counts behind the percentages
Context only. These counts are not rankings, comparisons, or judgments about school quality.
Students in this TEA accountability summary
168
Economically disadvantaged students
139
Emergent bilingual students
88
Special education students
29
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 168 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 15 (8.2%) from 2024–25.
Latest enrollment
168
2025–26
Change from 2024–25
−15
Decrease · −8.2%
Change since 2021–22
−133
Decrease · −44.2%
Enrollment in 2025–26
This charter school system
168
Selected comparison
3,432.1
average forcharter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 rated charter school systems reporting
Student enrollment by school year for Excellence In Leadership Academy
School year
Students enrolledExcellence In Leadership Academy
Change from previous school year
Average enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22
301
First available year
3,040.4
2022–23
263
Decrease of 38 (12.6%)
3,198.5
2023–24
220
Decrease of 43 (16.3%)
3,276.3
2024–25
183
Decrease of 37 (16.8%)
3,396.4
2025–26
168
Decrease of 15 (8.2%)
3,432.1
The selected comparison column is the average enrollment among reporting charter school systems in that group. It changes with the comparison control; this charter school system'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 entering this charter system
How many students live in a geographic school district and attend this charter system. These are movement counts, not a quality rating.
Transfers in
168
Live in a geographic district; attend this charter system · 2025–26
Transfers in · 2025–26
This charter school system
168
Selected comparison
3,432.1
average forcharter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 rated charter school systems reporting
Official transfers into Excellence In Leadership Academy by school year
School year
Transfers inExcellence In Leadership Academy
Transfers inselected charter comparison average
2021–22
301
3,040.4
2022–23
263
3,198.5
2023–24
220
3,276.3
2024–25
183
3,396.4
2025–26
168
3,432.1
Largest reported resident-district origins
Mission CISD 10890867
La Joya ISD 10891266
McAllen ISD 10890614
Sharyland ISD 10891111
Top reported flows only. TEA published 4 of 8 counterpart counts and masked 4.
TEA does not publish a transfers-out total or a resident population for this charter system. A charter system is not a geographic attendance boundary, so a net transfer balance cannot be calculated and this page does not label the system a transfer gainer or loser.
Selected comparison figures are average reported transfer-in counts among charter systems, not rates; system size affects them. They provide scale context and are not a performance judgment. This charter system’s official total does not change when the comparison does.
Source: TEA Student Transfer Reports, fetched 24 August 2026. The total and origin rows are TEA’s published charter-system figures; this site does not add masked detail cells. A transfer-in count does not say why a family chose the charter or whether one 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
Suppressed
Rate not available
Disciplinary actions
Suppressed
Rate not available
Cumulative year-end enrollment
194
2024–25
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Excellence In Leadership Academy
School year
Cumulative enrollment
Studentsall discipline
Students% of enrollment
Actionsall discipline
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21
324
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
2021–22
319
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
2022–23
290
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
2023–24
238
26
10.9%
44
18.49
8.9%
14.6
2024–25
194
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Excellence In Leadership Academy in 2024–25
Category
Students
Students% of enrollment
Actions
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
In-school suspensions
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
Out-of-school suspensions
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
DAEP placements
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
Mandatory DAEP placements
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
Discretionary DAEP placements
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
JJAEP placements
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
Mandatory JJAEP placements
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
Discretionary JJAEP placements
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
Expulsions
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
Mandatory expulsions
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
Discretionary expulsions
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
Selected comparisons use rates, not raw counts, so differently sized charter school systems can be read on the same basis. Each average uses only group members for which TEA reported that rate; this charter school system'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.
1 schools in this charter school system
Number of schools in the charter school system
This charter school system
1
Selected comparison
6.4
average forcharter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 rated charter school systems reporting
The selected comparison is a neutral average charter school system size. This charter school system's school count and school-type mix remain its own facts.
Elementary
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.
Excellence In Leadership Academy
TEA peer group
Texas average
Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Spending per student · 2025
This charter school system
$16,073
Selected comparison
$15,561
average forcharter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 rated charter school systems reporting
+$512 vs similar economic context
This charter school system spends $9,856 less per student than TEA's peer group, and $2,899 less per student than the state average.
View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
Year
Excellence In Leadership Academy
TEA peer group
Texas average
Selected comparison average
Reportingselected comparison
2018
$10,452
$14,290
$13,054
$10,290
average forcharter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 55 rated charter school systems reporting
2019
$11,218
$14,384
$13,108
$10,514
average forcharter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 56 rated charter school systems reporting
2020
$10,994
$16,581
$14,058
$11,211
average forcharter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 57 rated charter school systems reporting
2021
$11,683
$17,863
$14,797
$12,340
average forcharter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 59 rated charter school systems reporting
2022
$14,779
$19,817
$15,708
$15,463
average forcharter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 62 rated charter school systems reporting
2023
$14,847
$21,827
$16,792
$15,166
average forcharter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 63 rated charter school systems reporting
2024
$17,795
$23,517
$18,125
$15,775
average forcharter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 rated charter school systems reporting
2025
$16,073
$25,929
$18,972
$15,561
average forcharter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 rated charter school systems 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
$59,620−$4,064 vs similar economic context
Teachers
16−187.8 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
10.6−5.9 vs similar economic context
Teaching experience
Excellence In Leadership Academy
Beginning 5.7%
1 to 5 years 50%
6 to 10 years 25.3%
11 to 20 years 19%
Selected comparison averageFor charter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 reporting for every category shown · 64 in full cohort
Beginning 10.2%
1 to 5 years 40.3%
6 to 10 years 20.6%
11 to 20 years 19.2%
21 to 30 years 7.4%
Over 30 years 2.3%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized charter school systems · 28 reporting for every category shown · 28 in full cohort
Beginning 10.9%
1 to 5 years 30.1%
6 to 10 years 18.2%
11 to 20 years 25.6%
21 to 30 years 13.3%
Over 30 years 2.1%
Texas charter average165 reporting for every category shown · 165 Texas charter school systems in full cohort
Beginning 11.4%
1 to 5 years 36.3%
6 to 10 years 19.7%
11 to 20 years 20.6%
21 to 30 years 8.2%
Over 30 years 1.9%
Teacher turnover over time
TEA reported a 50.0% teacher turnover rate in 2024–25.
Teacher turnover rate · 2024–25
This charter school system
50.0%
Selected comparison
32.0%
average forcharter school systems with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 64 rated charter school systems reporting
+18.0 pts vs similar economic context
Charter-system teacher turnover rate by school year for Excellence In Leadership Academy
School year
Teacher turnover rateExcellence In Leadership Academy
Average turnover rateselected comparison
2020–21
10.0%
24.9%
2021–22
19.0%
29.0%
2022–23
31.8%
35.6%
2023–24
30.4%
34.3%
2024–25
50.0%
32.0%
TEA defines this charter school system rate as the share of teacher full-time equivalents from the prior fall who are not employed as teachers in the charter school system in the current fall. That can include leaving the charter school system or remaining in a different role; it is not a campus-level measure. The comparison average changes with the selected group; this charter school system's reported rate does not.
Out of 72 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
1 measure
8of 28
Science — Masters
Similar size · of the 28 that report this measure
These are selected high placements, not a summary. Every figure above
this section is the full picture, including where this charter school system 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 charter school system; any
tie that does appear is labeled. Every ranking this site publishes, including the ones
no charter school system 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.