Recent domain gain
Academic Growth rose 6 points
65 to 71 2024-25 to 2025-26
See the full measureGeographic public school district
Jim Hogg County ISD
Jim Hogg County · Region 01: Edinburg · 930 students
Official district websiteEnrollment, registration and eligibility
- Current score
- 79/1002025-26
- Change
- −6 ptssince 2021-22
- Score vs similar economic context
- +1.4 ptsvs 77.6 average · 215 rated districts serving a similar economic context
- Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
- 91 of 215tied with 12 others
- Score vs region
- −4.9 ptsvs 83.9 average · 37 rated districts in Region 01: Edinburg
- Region 01: Edinburg placement
- 31 of 37tied with 1 other
- Score vs similar-size group
- −3.2 ptsvs 82.2 average · 275 similarly sized rated districts
- Similar size placement
- 188 of 275tied with 12 others
- Score vs state
- −2.7 ptsvs 81.7 average · 1,019 rated Texas districts
- Texas placement
- 645 of 1,019tied with 39 others
C79
At a glance
Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 91 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 77.6 average for 215 rated districts serving a similar economic context.The current score is below the 83.9 average for 37 rated districts in Region 01: Edinburg.The current score is below the 82.2 average for 275 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
Earned a level I or level II certificate above the similar-context average
32.9% +30 pts vs 2.9%
- 32.9% is 30 percentage points above the 2.9% average among 210 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
- 3rd of 210 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
STAAR result
Math above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters
- Meets
- 39%vs 33.5% avg · +5.5 pts
- Masters
- 14%vs 11.4% avg · +2.6 pts
Among 215 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measureRecent domain gain
Academic Growth rose 6 points
65 to 71 2024-25 to 2025-26
See the full measureCurrent strength
Earned college credit for a dual credit course above the Region 01: Edinburg average
67.1% +33.7 pts vs 33.4%
- 67.1% is 33.7 percentage points above the 33.4% average among 37 districts in Region 01: Edinburg reporting this measure.
- 1st of 37 districts in Region 01: Edinburg reporting this measure.
Current strength
Earned a level I or level II certificate above the Region 01: Edinburg average
32.9% +30.7 pts vs 2.2%
- 32.9% is 30.7 percentage points above the 2.2% average among 37 districts in Region 01: Edinburg reporting this measure.
- 1st of 37 districts in Region 01: Edinburg reporting this measure.
Recent domain gain
Academic Growth rose 6 points
65 to 71 2024-25 to 2025-26
See the full measureCurrent strength
Earned a level I or level II certificate above the similar-size average
32.9% +30.9 pts vs 2%
- 32.9% is 30.9 percentage points above the 2% average among 273 similarly sized districts reporting this measure.
- 2nd of 273 similarly sized districts reporting this measure.
Current strength
Four-Year Graduation Rate above the similar-size average
98.8% +2 pts vs 96.8%
- 98.8% is 2 percentage points above the 96.8% average among 273 similarly sized districts reporting this measure (standard accountability only).
Recent domain gain
Academic Growth rose 6 points
65 to 71 2024-25 to 2025-26
See the full measureCurrent strength
Four-Year Graduation Rate above the Texas average
98.8% +2.7 pts vs 96.1%
- 98.8% is 2.7 percentage points above the 96.1% average among 975 Texas districts reporting this measure (standard accountability only).
Current strength
Five-Year Graduation Rate above the Texas average
97.6% +1.2 pts vs 96.4%
- 97.6% is 1.2 percentage points above the 96.4% average among 972 Texas districts reporting this measure (standard accountability only).
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
Jim Hogg County ISD is rated C by TEA, scoring 79 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 77.6 average for 215 rated districts serving a similar economic context. It is down 6 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 91st of 215 rated districts serving a similar economic context (tied with 12 others).
Jim Hogg County ISD is rated C by TEA, scoring 79 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 83.9 average for 37 rated districts in Region 01: Edinburg. It is down 6 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 31st of 37 rated districts in Region 01: Edinburg (tied with 1 other).
Jim Hogg County ISD is rated C by TEA, scoring 79 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 82.2 average for 275 similarly sized rated districts. It is down 6 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 188th of 275 similarly sized rated districts (tied with 12 others).
Jim Hogg County ISD is rated C by TEA, scoring 79 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 81.7 average for 1,019 rated Texas districts. It is down 6 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 645th of 1,019 rated Texas districts (tied with 39 others).
Put the numbers in context
Compare with
Jump to a section
- Overview
- 5 years of ratings
- Where the score comes from
- Student outcomes
- After high school: the following fall
- Who this district serves
- Student counts behind the percentages
- Enrollment over time
- Students crossing district lines
- Discipline and removal from class
- Community around the district
- 3 schools in this district
- Spending per student
- Teachers
- Where this district ranks best
- Where this comes from
5 years of ratings
Follow the solid line to see how this district has changed. Turn comparison lines on or off to add context.
Compare against
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 91 that year.
Comparison lines follow the current rated cohort backward through time. The table gives the number in that fixed cohort that reported a score each year; it can be smaller than cohort membership.
View the yearly scores and comparisons
| Year | Rating | Score | Selected comparisonSimilar economic-disadvantage rate | StateTexas average |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | C | 79 | 77.6 215 reporting | 81.7 1,019 reporting |
| 2024-25 | C | 79 | 75.1 215 reporting | 80.3 1,019 reporting |
| 2023-24 | B | 84 | 73.5 215 reporting | 78.7 1,017 reporting |
| 2022-23 | B | 82 | 73.9 214 reporting | 79.2 1,018 reporting |
| 2021-22 | B | 85 | 76.8 214 reporting | 80.6 1,017 reporting |
Where the score comes from
Texas builds the overall rating from the better of Student Achievement and School Progress, weighted 70%, plus Closing the Gaps at 30%. School Progress is itself the better of Academic Growth and Relative Performance. The 60, 70, 80 and 90 rules mark the letter-grade thresholds.
- Jim Hogg County ISD
- Similar economic-disadvantage rate (215 in cohort)
| Domain | Score | Grade | Points to next grade |
|---|---|---|---|
| Student Achievement | 75 | C | 5 |
| School Progress | 81 | B | 9 |
| Closing the Gaps | 75 | C | 5 |
| Academic Growth | 71 | C | 9 |
| Relative Performance | 81 | B | 9 |
Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 5 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 (81), so Student Achievement (75) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 81.
Student outcomes
STAAR performance
- Approaches grade level
- Meets grade level
- Masters grade level
- Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (215 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
- 98.8%+3.9 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 208 rated districts reporting
- Five-Year
- 97.6%+2.2 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 209 rated districts reporting
- Six-Year
- 95.2%+0.2 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 209 rated districts reporting
- Dropout Rate
- 0.0%−0.9 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 210 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%−3.9 pts vs similar economic context
| Criterion | This district% of graduates | Averagesimilar economic context | Differencepercentage points | Reportingselected comparison |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total credit for CCMR criteria | 82.0% | 85.9% | −3.9 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 208 rated districts reporting |
| Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course | 30.6% | 52.3% | −21.7 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 210 rated districts reporting |
| Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA | 29.4% | 20.7% | +8.7 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 210 rated districts reporting |
| Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s) | 4.7% | 6.6% | −1.9 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 210 rated districts reporting |
| Earned college credit for a dual credit course | 67.1% | 30.4% | +36.7 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 210 rated districts reporting |
| Earned an industry-based certification | 51.8% | 42.5% | +9.3 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 210 rated districts reporting |
| Earned a level I or level II certificate | 32.9% | 2.9% | +30.0 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 210 rated districts reporting |
| Earned an associate degree | 1.2% | 4.7% | −3.5 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 210 rated districts reporting |
| Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit | 0.0% | 3.1% | −3.1 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 210 rated districts reporting |
| Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness | 2.4% | 3.6% | −1.2 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 210 rated districts reporting |
| Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student | 12.9% | 9.9% | +3.0 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 210 rated districts reporting |
| Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces | 4.7% | 3.1% | +1.6 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 210 rated districts reporting |
Every row is a share of this district's graduates, and every row is a way of meeting CCMR — so on every row, a bigger share is better. Difference is this district minus the average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate, counted in percentage points: +5.0 would mean five more graduates in every hundred met that criterion here. The selected comparison is an unweighted average of the reported district percentages, not a pooled rate across all graduates in the group. Graduates may meet several criteria, so the rows do not add up to the total.
Counts in the comparison controls describe full cohort membership, not the denominator of every average. Each average uses only districts for which TEA reported that measure; metric-specific reporting counts are shown on the STAAR, graduation and CCMR rows and may vary.
After high school: the following fall
Where district graduates appeared in Texas public higher-education records the fall after graduation. This is a limited next-step measure, not an eventual college-going or completion rate.
- Graduates in the report
- 82
Class of 2023–24
- Enrolled in Texas public higher education
- 36
43.9% of graduates
- Not found in Texas public higher-ed records
- 46
56.1% of graduates
- Not trackable
- 0
Fall 2024
Graduates in the report
- This district
- 82
- Selected comparison
- 665.9
Enrolled in Texas public higher education
- This district
- 36
- Selected comparison
- 279.9
Texas-public enrollment rate
- This district
- 43.9%
- Selected comparison
- 42.1%
Not-found rate
- This district
- 56.1%
- Selected comparison
- 53.5%
Not-trackable rate
- This district
- 0.0%
- Selected comparison
- 4.4%
Most common named Texas public destinations
- U. OF TEXAS-RIO GRANDE VALLEY (003599)6
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
- 930
- Economically disadvantaged
- 83.3%+1.8 pts vs similar economic context
- English learners
- 3.3%−18.1 pts vs similar economic context
- Special education
- 17.2%−1.0 pts vs similar economic context
- Attendance
- 92.0%−1.3 pts vs similar economic context
- Chronically absent
- 26.4%+5.0 pts vs similar economic context
Student demographics
Jim Hogg County ISD
- African American 0.1%
- Hispanic 95.7%
- White 3.1%
- Asian 0.6%
- Two or More Races 0.4%
Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 215 reporting for every category shown · 215 in full cohort
- African American 11.7%
- Hispanic 66.2%
- White 18.6%
- American Indian 0.2%
- Asian 0.8%
- Pacific Islander 0.1%
- Two or More Races 2.5%
Selected comparison average For Region 01: Edinburg · 37 reporting for every category shown · 37 in full cohort
- African American 0.1%
- Hispanic 97.2%
- White 2.2%
- Asian 0.3%
- Two or More Races 0.1%
Selected comparison average For similarly sized districts · 275 reporting for every category shown · 275 in full cohort
- African American 4.9%
- Hispanic 39.7%
- White 50.9%
- American Indian 0.3%
- Asian 0.5%
- Pacific Islander 0.1%
- Two or More Races 3.5%
Statewide average 1,019 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
- 927
- Economically disadvantaged students
- 772
- Emergent bilingual students
- 31
- Special education students
- 159
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 930 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 37 (3.8%) from 2024–25.
- Latest enrollment
- 930
2025–26
- Change from 2024–25
- −37
Decrease · −3.8%
- Change since 2021–22
- −148
Decrease · −13.7%
Enrollment in 2025–26
- This district
- 930
- Selected comparison
- 7,284.9
| School year | Students enrolledJim Hogg County ISD | Change from previous school year | Average enrollmentselected comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021–22 | 1,078 | First available year | 7,723.3 |
| 2022–23 | 1,072 | Decrease of 6 (0.6%) | 7,727.7 |
| 2023–24 | 1,000 | Decrease of 72 (6.7%) | 7,621.5 |
| 2024–25 | 967 | Decrease of 33 (3.3%) | 7,529.7 |
| 2025–26 | 930 | Decrease of 37 (3.8%) | 7,284.9 |
The selected comparison column is the average enrollment among reporting districts in that group. It changes with the comparison control; this district's own counts do not.
Source: TEA PEIMS Student Program and Special Populations Reports, fetched 24 August 2026. TEA reports these counts from its fall student snapshot; changes compare adjacent reported school years.
These counts show how enrollment changed, not why. Attendance-zone changes, school openings or closures, grade reconfigurations, transfers and population shifts can affect the total.
Students crossing district lines
How many students live in one public-school district and attend in another. These are movement counts, not a measure of family satisfaction or school quality.
- Transfers in
- 20
Live in another district; attend here · 2025–26
- Transfers out
- 65
Live here; attend in another public district or charter · 2025–26
- Transfers in minus transfers out
- −45
Arithmetic context only
Transfers in · 2025–26
- This district
- 20
- Selected comparison
- 445.6
Transfers out · 2025–26
- This district
- 65
- Selected comparison
- 1,604.1
Transfers in minus out · 2025–26
- This district
- −45
- Selected comparison
- −1,365
| School year | Transfers inJim Hogg County ISD | Transfers outJim Hogg County ISD | In minus outJim Hogg County ISD | Transfers inselected comparison average | Transfers outselected comparison average | In minus outselected comparison average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021–22 | Suppressed | 59 | Not available | — | 1,388.6 | — |
| 2022–23 | 16 | 52 | −36 | 346.6 | 1,460.6 | −1,292 |
| 2023–24 | 15 | 72 | −57 | 373.7 | 1,544.3 | −1,335 |
| 2024–25 | 15 | 69 | −54 | 412.7 | 1,585.1 | −1,348 |
| 2025–26 | 20 | 65 | −45 | 445.6 | 1,604.1 | −1,365 |
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
- 134
13.3% of cumulative year-end enrollment
- Disciplinary actions
- 405
40.30 per 100 students
- Cumulative year-end enrollment
- 1,005
2024–25
Share of students · 2024–25
- This district
- 13.3%
- Selected comparison
- 12.8%
Actions per 100 students · 2024–25
- This district
- 40.3
- Selected comparison
- 31.3
| School year | Cumulative enrollment | Studentsall discipline | Students% of enrollment | Actionsall discipline | Actionsper 100 students | Studentsselected comparison average % | Actionsselected comparison average per 100 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020–21 | 1,178 | 29 | 2.5% | 49 | 4.16 | 7.8% | 15.6 |
| 2021–22 | 1,130 | 153 | 13.5% | 400 | 35.40 | 13.2% | 31.6 |
| 2022–23 | 1,102 | 196 | 17.8% | 578 | 52.45 | 13.9% | 34.6 |
| 2023–24 | 1,038 | 142 | 13.7% | 401 | 38.63 | 13.5% | 33.3 |
| 2024–25 | 1,005 | 134 | 13.3% | 405 | 40.30 | 12.8% | 31.3 |
See 2024–25 discipline categories
| Category | Students | Students% of enrollment | Actions | Actionsper 100 students | Studentsselected comparison average % | Actionsselected comparison average per 100 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All discipline | 134 | 13.3% | 405 | 40.30 | 12.8% | 31.3 |
| In-school suspensions | 106 | 10.6% | 209 | 20.80 | 10.5% | 20.9 |
| Out-of-school suspensions | 67 | 6.7% | 133 | 13.23 | 5.2% | 8.6 |
| DAEP placements | 38 | 3.8% | 62 | 6.17 | 3.2% | 4 |
| Mandatory DAEP placements | 21 | 2.1% | 26 | 2.59 | 1.8% | 2.1 |
| Discretionary DAEP placements | 24 | 2.4% | 36 | 3.58 | 1.8% | 2.1 |
| JJAEP placements | Not reported | — | Not reported | — | — | — |
| Mandatory JJAEP placements | Not reported | — | Not reported | — | — | — |
| Discretionary JJAEP placements | Not reported | — | Not reported | — | — | — |
| Expulsions | Suppressed | — | Suppressed | — | — | — |
| Mandatory expulsions | Not reported | — | Not reported | — | — | — |
| Discretionary expulsions | Suppressed | — | Suppressed | — | — | — |
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
- 4,583
2024 Census estimate
- Children ages 5–17
- 983
Living inside the boundary
- Children ages 5–17 in families in poverty
- 308
31.3%
- School-age child poverty rate
- 31.3%
308 of 983
Boundary population
- This district
- 4,583
- Selected comparison
- 49,074
School-age population
- This district
- 983
- Selected comparison
- 8,914.3
School-age population in poverty
- This district
- 308
- Selected comparison
- 2,160.5
School-age child poverty rate
- This district
- 31.3%
- Selected comparison
- 23.9%
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.
3 schools in this district
Number of schools in the district
- This district
- 3
- Selected comparison
- 12.1
The selected comparison is a neutral average district size. This district's school count and school-type mix remain its own facts.
- Elementary
- 1
- High School
- 1
- Middle / Jr. High
- 1
Browse all 3 schoolsName, type, rating, score and enrollment
| School | Type | Rating | Score | Students |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hebbronville HS | High School | B | 85 | 290 |
| Hebbronville Elem | Elementary | B | 80 | 414 |
| Hebbronville JH | Middle / Jr. High | D | 69 | 226 |
Spending per student
The selected txschools.net comparison changes with the page-wide control. TEA's own peer group and statewide reference stay visible as separately published, fixed TEA references.
- Jim Hogg County ISD
- TEA peer group
- Texas average
- Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Spending per student · 2025
- This district
- $19,388
- Selected comparison
- $22,950
This district spends $2,087 less per student than TEA's peer group, and $416 more per student than the state average.
View yearly spending figures
| Year | Jim Hogg County ISD | TEA peer group | Texas average | Selected comparison average | Reportingselected comparison |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | $16,131 | $13,246 | $13,054 | $14,463 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 215 rated districts reporting |
| 2019 | $21,332 | $12,865 | $13,108 | $14,551 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 215 rated districts reporting |
| 2020 | $18,042 | $13,729 | $14,058 | $15,852 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 215 rated districts reporting |
| 2021 | $14,639 | $14,629 | $14,797 | $17,276 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 215 rated districts reporting |
| 2022 | $18,805 | $15,859 | $15,708 | $19,538 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 215 rated districts reporting |
| 2023 | $18,499 | $17,414 | $16,792 | $22,026 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 215 rated districts reporting |
| 2024 | $21,062 | $19,654 | $18,125 | $21,976 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 215 rated districts reporting |
| 2025 | $19,388 | $21,475 | $18,972 | $22,950 | average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 215 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
- $69,571+$4,921 vs similar economic context
- Teachers
- 78−416.8 vs similar economic context
- Students per staff member
- 11.9−2.1 vs similar economic context
Teaching experience
Jim Hogg County ISD
- Beginning 1.3%
- 1 to 5 years 20.7%
- 6 to 10 years 17.1%
- 11 to 20 years 25.5%
- 21 to 30 years 23.2%
- Over 30 years 12.2%
Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 215 reporting for every category shown · 215 in full cohort
- Beginning 7.3%
- 1 to 5 years 27.6%
- 6 to 10 years 17.7%
- 11 to 20 years 25.6%
- 21 to 30 years 16.1%
- Over 30 years 5.6%
Selected comparison average For Region 01: Edinburg · 37 reporting for every category shown · 37 in full cohort
- Beginning 4.1%
- 1 to 5 years 22.3%
- 6 to 10 years 18.1%
- 11 to 20 years 31.4%
- 21 to 30 years 18.9%
- Over 30 years 5.3%
Selected comparison average For similarly sized districts · 275 reporting for every category shown · 275 in full cohort
- Beginning 5.9%
- 1 to 5 years 22.4%
- 6 to 10 years 17.3%
- 11 to 20 years 29%
- 21 to 30 years 19%
- Over 30 years 6.1%
Statewide average 1,019 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 14.5% teacher turnover rate in 2024–25.
Teacher turnover rate · 2024–25
- This district
- 14.5%
- Selected comparison
- 23.2%
| School year | Teacher turnover rateJim Hogg County ISD | Average turnover rateselected comparison |
|---|---|---|
| 2020–21 | 11.4% | 18.8% |
| 2021–22 | 6.3% | 21.9% |
| 2022–23 | 19.3% | 26.1% |
| 2023–24 | 15.7% | 23.6% |
| 2024–25 | 14.5% | 23.2% |
TEA defines this district rate as the share of teacher full-time equivalents from the prior fall who are not employed as teachers in the district in the current fall. That can include leaving the district or remaining in a different role; it is not a campus-level measure. The comparison average changes with the selected group; this district's reported rate does not.
Source: TEA Texas Academic Performance Reports, fetched 24 August 2026.
Where this district ranks best
Out of 160 rankings computed across every published metric and every available comparison group, these are all the measures that meet this site’s distinctive-placement threshold. The list does not change when you change Compare against. Each measure appears once, using its strongest placement. Press Copy for a citable sentence.
#1 rankings
First-place results
2 measures
-
1of 37
Earned college credit for a dual credit course
Region 01: Edinburg · of the 37 that report this measure
-
1of 37
Earned a level I or level II certificate
Region 01: Edinburg · of the 37 that report this measure
#4–10 rankings
Fourth- through tenth-place results
3 measures
-
6of 37
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student
Region 01: Edinburg · of the 37 that report this measure
-
9of 37
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces
Region 01: Edinburg · of the 37 that report this measure
-
10of 37
Four-Year Graduation Rate
Region 01: Edinburg (standard accountability only) · of the 37 that report this measure
These are selected high placements, not a summary. Every figure above this section is the full picture, including where this district ranks poorly. Each measure appears once here, using its strongest qualifying placement across all available comparison groups. Very large ties are left out because they do not distinguish this district; any tie that does appear is labeled. Every ranking this site publishes, including the ones no district would put in a press release.
Where this comes from
The Texas Education Agency publishes the underlying accountability reports and data downloads. Ratings, outcomes, demographics, staffing and finance on this page come from TEA data available through txschools.gov, fetched 15 August 2026. TEA’s Reports and Data Portal links the official bulk files. Enrollment history comes from TEA's PEIMS Student Program and Special Populations reports, fetched 24 August 2026. The student-count context comes from TEA’s bulk accountability summary, fetched 29 August 2026; TEA’s masking definitions explain withheld values. The dated notice, staffing, discipline, transfer, community and postsecondary sections cite their separate TEA, Census or THECB publication in place. Every archived source carries checksums so each number stays traceable to the bytes the public agency served.