+5.7 ptsvs 81.3 average · 407 rated districts serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
79 of 407tied with 15 others
Score vs region
+4.7 ptsvs 82.3 average · 76 rated districts in Region 11: Fort Worth
Region 11: Fort Worth placement
20 of 76tied with 4 others
Score vs county
+5.8 ptsvs 81.2 average · 16 rated districts in Tarrant County
Tarrant County placement
4 of 16tied with 1 other
Score vs similar-size group
+4.6 ptsvs 82.4 average · 57 similarly sized rated districts
Similar size placement
13 of 57tied with 6 others
Score vs state
+5.3 ptsvs 81.7 average · 1,019 rated Texas districts
Texas placement
253 of 1,019tied with 49 others
B87
At a glance
Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 93 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 81.3 average for 407 rated districts serving a similar economic context.The current score is above the 82.3 average for 76 rated districts in Region 11: Fort Worth.The current score is above the 81.2 average for 16 rated districts in Tarrant County.The current score is above the 82.4 average for 57 similarly sized rated districts.The current score is above the 81.7 average for 1,019 rated Texas districts.
Evidence worth noticing
Strengths and momentum
STAAR result
All Subjects above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters
Meets
64%vs 48.8% avg · +15.2 pts
Masters
33%vs 18.2% avg · +14.8 pts
Among 407 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
Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD is rated B by TEA, scoring 87 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.3 average for 407 rated districts serving a similar economic context. It is down 1 point since 2021-22.
Ranks 79th of 407 rated districts serving a similar economic context (tied with 15 others).
Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD is rated B by TEA, scoring 87 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 82.3 average for 76 rated districts in Region 11: Fort Worth. It is down 1 point since 2021-22.
Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD is rated B by TEA, scoring 87 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.2 average for 16 rated districts in Tarrant County. It is down 1 point since 2021-22.
Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD is rated B by TEA, scoring 87 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 82.4 average for 57 similarly sized rated districts. It is down 1 point since 2021-22.
Ranks 13th of 57 similarly sized rated districts (tied with 6 others).
Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD is rated B by TEA, scoring 87 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.7 average for 1,019 rated Texas districts. It is down 1 point 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
2
2026 TEA list
Campuses on the final PEG transfer list
0
2026–27 school year
Share of campuses identified for improvement
This district
6.3%
Selected comparison
20.8%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
−14.6 pts vs similar economic context
Share of campuses on the PEG list
This district
0.0%
Selected comparison
2.3%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
−2.3 pts vs similar economic context
See the campuses and official reasons
Official improvement and Public Education Grant notices for campuses in Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD
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 A with 93 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 Achievement87 B+5.7 vs similar economic context · 407 reporting
School Progress88 B+6.7 vs similar economic context · 407 reporting
Closing the Gaps85 B+6.1 vs similar economic context · 406 reporting
Academic Growth80 B+8.3 vs similar economic context · 407 reporting
Relative Performance88 B+7.2 vs similar economic context · 407 reporting
Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD
Similar economic-disadvantage rate (407 in cohort)
Domain scores
Domain
Score
Grade
Points to next grade
Student Achievement
87
B
3
School Progress
88
B
2
Closing the Gaps
85
B
5
Academic Growth
80
B
10
Relative Performance
88
B
2
Closest to moving up: School Progress, 2 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%. For this district that better measure is School Progress (88), so
Student Achievement (87) is published above but does not enter the overall
score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 88.
Student outcomes
STAAR performance
All Subjects
Approaches grade level83%+7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting
Meets grade level64%+15 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting
Masters grade level33%+15 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
Approaches grade level83%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting
Meets grade level66%+12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting
Masters grade level33%+14 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting
Math3 performance levels
Approaches grade level83%+12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting
Meets grade level61%+19 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting
Masters grade level29%+14 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting
Science3 performance levels
Approaches grade level85%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 405 reporting
Meets grade level64%+12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 405 reporting
Masters grade level37%+15 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 405 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
Approaches grade level85%+9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 398 reporting
Meets grade level64%+16 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 398 reporting
Masters grade level39%+18 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 398 reporting
Approaches grade level
Meets grade level
Masters grade level
Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (407 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
97.0%+0.9 pts vs similar economic contextaverage fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 393 rated districts reporting
Five-Year
98.0%+1.7 pts vs similar economic contextaverage fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 389 rated districts reporting
Six-Year
98.0%+1.7 pts vs similar economic contextaverage fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 388 rated districts reporting
Dropout Rate
0.5%+0.1 pts vs similar economic contextaverage fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 395 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
82.0%−7.3 pts vs similar economic context
CCMR criteria
Criterion
This district% of graduates
Averagesimilar economic context
Differencepercentage points
Reportingselected comparison
Total credit for CCMR criteria
82.0%
89.3%
−7.3
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 392 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course
61.1%
56.5%
+4.6
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA
51.6%
26.0%
+25.6
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)
33.1%
5.5%
+27.6
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Earned college credit for a dual credit course
22.5%
34.8%
−12.3
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Earned an industry-based certification
23.9%
42.6%
−18.7
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Earned a level I or level II certificate
0.0%
1.6%
−1.6
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Earned an associate degree
0.0%
3.3%
−3.3
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit
0.0%
2.9%
−2.9
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness
3.3%
3.2%
+0.1
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student
4.6%
8.6%
−4.0
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces
2.4%
3.7%
−1.3
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 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
1,681
Class of 2023–24
Enrolled in Texas public higher education
642
38.2% of graduates
Not found in Texas public higher-ed records
789
46.9% of graduates
Not trackable
250
Fall 2024
Graduates in the report
This district
1,681
Selected comparison
336.2
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 291 rated districts reporting
Enrolled in Texas public higher education
This district
642
Selected comparison
147.7
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 291 rated districts reporting
Texas-public enrollment rate
This district
38.2%
Selected comparison
45.1%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 291 rated districts reporting
−6.9 pts vs similar economic context
Not-found rate
This district
46.9%
Selected comparison
51.8%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 291 rated districts reporting
−4.9 pts vs similar economic context
Not-trackable rate
This district
14.9%
Selected comparison
3.2%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 291 rated districts reporting
+11.7 pts vs similar economic context
Most common named Texas public destinations
TARRANT COUNTY COLLEGE DIST (003626)224
U. OF TEXAS AT ARLINGTON (003656)113
UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS (003594)51
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
23,215
Economically disadvantaged
59.5%±0.0 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
24.8%+14.4 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
16.1%−2.4 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
95.4%+0.8 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
10.8%−3.8 pts vs similar economic context
Student demographics
Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD
African American 21.7%
Hispanic 31.8%
White 26.8%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 10.4%
Pacific Islander 2.6%
Two or More Races 6.4%
Selected comparison averageFor districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting for every category shown · 407 in full cohort
African American 5.5%
Hispanic 39.6%
White 49.9%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 0.9%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3.7%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 11: Fort Worth · 76 reporting for every category shown · 76 in full cohort
African American 6.5%
Hispanic 32.7%
White 53.3%
American Indian 0.4%
Asian 2.5%
Pacific Islander 0.4%
Two or More Races 4.2%
Selected comparison averageFor Tarrant County · 16 reporting for every category shown · 16 in full cohort
African American 19.2%
Hispanic 42%
White 27.4%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 5.9%
Pacific Islander 0.4%
Two or More Races 4.9%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized districts · 57 reporting for every category shown · 57 in full cohort
African American 14.3%
Hispanic 55.2%
White 21.3%
American Indian 0.4%
Asian 5.3%
Pacific Islander 0.2%
Two or More Races 3.4%
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
23,159
Economically disadvantaged students
13,783
Emergent bilingual students
5,737
Special education students
3,726
Early college pathways
Early College High School
93
TEA-published share: 0.4%
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 23,215 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 47 (0.2%) from 2024–25.
Latest enrollment
23,215
2025–26
Change from 2024–25
−47
Decrease · −0.2%
Change since 2021–22
+341
Increase · +1.5%
Enrollment in 2025–26
This district
23,215
Selected comparison
3,425.1
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
Student enrollment by school year for Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD
School year
Students enrolledHurst-Euless-Bedford ISD
Change from previous school year
Average enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22
22,874
First available year
3,438.5
2022–23
22,947
Increase of 73 (0.3%)
3,484.9
2023–24
23,226
Increase of 279 (1.2%)
3,469.1
2024–25
23,262
Increase of 36 (0.2%)
3,470.9
2025–26
23,215
Decrease of 47 (0.2%)
3,425.1
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.
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
389
Live in another district; attend here · 2025–26
Transfers out
2,455
Live here; attend in another public district or charter · 2025–26
Transfers in minus transfers out
−2,066
Arithmetic context only
Transfers in · 2025–26
This district
389
Selected comparison
168.2
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 388 rated districts reporting
Transfers out · 2025–26
This district
2,455
Selected comparison
450.5
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 383 rated districts reporting
Transfers in minus out · 2025–26
This district
−2,066
Selected comparison
−296
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 368 rated districts reporting
Official transfer totals by school year for Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD
School year
Transfers inHurst-Euless-Bedford ISD
Transfers outHurst-Euless-Bedford ISD
In minus outHurst-Euless-Bedford ISD
Transfers inselected comparison average
Transfers outselected comparison average
In minus outselected comparison average
2021–22
315
2,153
−1,838
145.9
353.4
−219
2022–23
308
2,338
−2,030
159.6
382.8
−235
2023–24
318
2,363
−2,045
152.8
407.6
−266
2024–25
344
2,398
−2,054
161.5
440.4
−289
2025–26
389
2,455
−2,066
168.2
450.5
−296
Largest reported origins for transfers in
Birdville ISD 220902112
Fort Worth ISD 22090583
Arlington ISD 22090146
Grapevine-Colleyville ISD 22090640
Keller ISD 22090740
Top reported flows only. TEA published 7 of 25 counterpart counts and masked 18.
Largest reported destinations for transfers out
Harmony Public Schools - North Texas 161807814
Grapevine-Colleyville ISD 220906232
Birdville ISD 220902222
International Leadership of Texas (ILTexas) 057848205
Treetops School International 220801114
Top reported flows only. TEA published 24 of 56 counterpart counts and masked 32.
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
2,639
10.6% of cumulative year-end enrollment
Disciplinary actions
8,160
32.68 per 100 students
Cumulative year-end enrollment
24,971
2024–25
Share of students · 2024–25
This district
10.6%
Selected comparison
10.9%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 356 rated districts reporting
−0.3 pts vs similar economic context
Actions per 100 students · 2024–25
This district
32.68
Selected comparison
23.6
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 369 rated districts reporting
+9.1 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Hurst-Euless-Bedford 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
24,515
1,348
5.5%
3,299
13.46
8.4%
16.6
2021–22
24,840
2,890
11.6%
8,740
35.19
11.0%
23.6
2022–23
24,688
2,804
11.4%
7,876
31.90
11.4%
25.1
2023–24
25,021
2,787
11.1%
8,351
33.38
11.2%
24.9
2024–25
24,971
2,639
10.6%
8,160
32.68
10.9%
23.6
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD in 2024–25
Category
Students
Students% of enrollment
Actions
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline
2,639
10.6%
8,160
32.68
10.9%
23.6
In-school suspensions
2,464
9.9%
6,421
25.71
9.6%
18
Out-of-school suspensions
564
2.3%
1,009
4.04
3.4%
5.1
DAEP placements
580
2.3%
717
2.87
2.6%
3.1
Mandatory DAEP placements
367
1.5%
440
1.76
1.7%
2
Discretionary DAEP placements
263
1.1%
277
1.11
1.4%
1.6
JJAEP placements
11
0.0%
11
0.04
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
170,719
2024 Census estimate
Children ages 5–17
27,159
Living inside the boundary
Children ages 5–17 in families in poverty
3,626
13.4%
School-age child poverty rate
13.4%
3,626 of 27,159
Boundary population
This district
170,719
Selected comparison
21,341
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
School-age population
This district
27,159
Selected comparison
3,832.1
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
School-age population in poverty
This district
3,626
Selected comparison
600.5
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
School-age child poverty rate
This district
13.4%
Selected comparison
17.7%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
−4.3 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.
32 schools in this district
Number of schools in the district
This district
32
Selected comparison
5.8
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 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
22
High School
5
Middle / Jr. High
5
Browse all 32 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.
Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD
TEA peer group
Texas average
Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Spending per student · 2025
This district
$17,072
Selected comparison
$23,769
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
−$6,697 vs similar economic context
This district spends $1,898 less per student than TEA's peer group, and $1,900 less per student than the state average.
View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
Year
Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD
TEA peer group
Texas average
Selected comparison average
Reportingselected comparison
2018
$10,047
$13,287
$13,054
$14,418
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
2019
$11,598
$13,321
$13,108
$14,572
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
2020
$15,516
$14,168
$14,058
$15,744
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
2021
$12,690
$14,814
$14,797
$16,531
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
2022
$12,184
$15,701
$15,708
$18,241
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
2023
$14,299
$17,110
$16,792
$20,063
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
2024
$15,258
$18,355
$18,125
$22,230
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
2025
$17,072
$18,970
$18,972
$23,769
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 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
$72,610+$8,372 vs similar economic context
Teachers
1,471+1232.3 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
15.7+3.7 vs similar economic context
Teaching experience
Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD
Beginning 4.5%
1 to 5 years 22.6%
6 to 10 years 20.2%
11 to 20 years 32.5%
21 to 30 years 17.9%
Over 30 years 2.3%
Selected comparison averageFor districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting for every category shown · 407 in full cohort
Beginning 6.7%
1 to 5 years 24%
6 to 10 years 17.4%
11 to 20 years 28.3%
21 to 30 years 17.7%
Over 30 years 6%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 11: Fort Worth · 76 reporting for every category shown · 76 in full cohort
Beginning 6.5%
1 to 5 years 23.6%
6 to 10 years 20.2%
11 to 20 years 29.5%
21 to 30 years 16.2%
Over 30 years 4%
Selected comparison averageFor Tarrant County · 16 reporting for every category shown · 16 in full cohort
Beginning 5.2%
1 to 5 years 25.4%
6 to 10 years 21.5%
11 to 20 years 30.1%
21 to 30 years 15.4%
Over 30 years 2.4%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized districts · 57 reporting for every category shown · 57 in full cohort
Beginning 6.2%
1 to 5 years 26.4%
6 to 10 years 19.6%
11 to 20 years 29.7%
21 to 30 years 15.2%
Over 30 years 2.9%
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 13.5% teacher turnover rate in 2024–25.
Teacher turnover rate · 2024–25
This district
13.5%
Selected comparison
21.6%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
−8.1 pts vs similar economic context
District teacher turnover rate by school year for Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD
School year
Teacher turnover rateHurst-Euless-Bedford ISD
Average turnover rateselected comparison
2020–21
11.6%
16.4%
2021–22
14.8%
20.4%
2022–23
18.0%
24.0%
2023–24
15.9%
21.6%
2024–25
13.5%
21.6%
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 200 rankings computed across every published metric and every available comparison group, these are all the measures that meet this site’s distinctive-placement threshold. The list does not change when you change Compare against. Each measure appears once, using its strongest placement. Press Copy for a citable sentence.
#1 rankings
First-place results
2 measures
1of 16
School Progress
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 1
1of 16
Relative Performance
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 1
#2–3 rankings
Second- and third-place results
18 measures
2of 16
Attendance
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 1
3of 16
Student Achievement
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 1
3of 16
All Subjects — Approaches
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
3of 16
All Subjects — Meets
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
3of 16
All Subjects — Masters
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
3of 16
Reading — Meets
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 1
3of 16
Reading — Masters
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
3of 16
Math — Approaches
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
3of 16
Math — Meets
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
3of 16
Math — Masters
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
3of 16
Science — Approaches
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
3of 16
Science — Meets
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
3of 16
Science — Masters
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
3of 16
Social Studies — Approaches
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
3of 16
Social Studies — Meets
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 1
3of 16
Social Studies — Masters
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
3of 16
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
3of 16
Chronically absent (lowest is best)
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
#4–10 rankings
Fourth- through tenth-place results
12 measures
4of 16
Overall score
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 1 · full ranking
4of 16
Reading — Approaches
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
4of 16
Six-Year Graduation Rate
Tarrant County (standard accountability only) · of the 16 that report this measure
4of 16
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
5of 16
Closing the Gaps
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
5of 16
Academic Growth
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 1
5of 16
Five-Year Graduation Rate
Tarrant County (standard accountability only) · of the 16 that report this measure
5of 16
Earned college credit for a dual credit course
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 2
8of 16
Four-Year Graduation Rate
Tarrant County (standard accountability only) · of the 16 that report this measure
8of 16
Earned an industry-based certification
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
9of 16
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness
Tarrant County · of the 16 that report this measure
9of 16
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces
Tarrant County · of the 16 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.