Independent Texas school research. TEA data, clearly explained. Not affiliated with the state agencyTEA.

txschools.netSchool data with context

Geographic public school district

Little Cypress-Mauriceville CISD

Orange County · Region 05: Beaumont · 3,347 students

Official district websiteEnrollment, registration and eligibility

Current score
77/1002025-26
Change
+6 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
−4.2 ptsvs 81.2 average · 408 rated districts serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
292 of 408tied with 15 others
C77

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving up; under the rules in force back then it scored 81 in 2021-22. The current score is below the 81.2 average for 408 rated districts serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

Current strength

Five-Year Graduation Rate above the similar-context average

98.7% +2.4 pts vs 96.3%

  • 98.7% is 2.4 percentage points above the 96.3% average among 389 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure (standard accountability only).
See the full measure

Current strength

Six-Year Graduation Rate above the similar-context average

97.7% +1.5 pts vs 96.2%

  • 97.7% is 1.5 percentage points above the 96.2% average among 388 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure (standard accountability only).
See the full measure

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

Little Cypress-Mauriceville CISD is rated C by TEA, scoring 77 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 81.2 average for 408 rated districts serving a similar economic context. It is up 6 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 292nd of 408 rated districts serving a similar economic context (tied with 15 others).

Put the numbers in context

Compare with

Jump to a section
  1. Overview
  2. Official improvement and transfer notices
  3. 5 years of ratings
  4. Where the score comes from
  5. Student outcomes
  6. After high school: the following fall
  7. Who this district serves
  8. Student counts behind the percentages
  9. Enrollment over time
  10. Students crossing district lines
  11. Discipline and removal from class
  12. Community around the district
  13. 6 schools in this district
  14. Spending per student
  15. Teachers
  16. Where this district ranks best
  17. Where this comes from

Official improvement and transfer notices

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
33.3%
Selected comparison
21.4%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 rated districts reporting

+11.9 pts vs similar economic context

Share of campuses on the PEG list

This district
0.0%
Selected comparison
2.6%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 rated districts reporting

−2.6 pts vs similar economic context
See the campuses and official reasons
Official improvement and Public Education Grant notices for campuses in Little Cypress-Mauriceville CISD
CampusNoticeOfficial status or reason
Little Cypress JHTSITargeted Support and Improvement · English Learners, Special Education
Mauriceville ElemCSIComprehensive Support and Improvement · CSI Low Performance

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.

Sources: TEA's 2026 Schools Identified for Improvement and Public Education Grant program, fetched 24 August 2026. A PEG listing makes a student assigned to that campus eligible to request a transfer; it does not guarantee acceptance, available space or transportation.

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
90807060 Similar economic-disadvantage rateTexas averageLittle Cypress-Mauriceville CISD 7170677677 2021-222022-232023-242024-252025-26

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.

View the yearly scores and comparisons
Rating history with comparisons
YearRatingScoreSelected comparisonSimilar economic-disadvantage rateStateTexas average
2025-26C7781.2 408 reporting81.7 1,019 reporting
2024-25C7680.1 408 reporting80.3 1,019 reporting
2023-24D6778.5 408 reporting78.7 1,017 reporting
2022-23C7079.0 408 reporting79.2 1,018 reporting
2021-22C7179.9 407 reporting80.6 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.

  • Student Achievement77 C−4.2 vs similar economic context · 408 reporting
  • School Progress77 C−4.2 vs similar economic context · 408 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps76 C−2.7 vs similar economic context · 407 reporting
  • Academic Growth71 C−0.6 vs similar economic context · 408 reporting
  • Relative Performance77 C−3.7 vs similar economic context · 408 reporting
  • Little Cypress-Mauriceville CISD
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (408 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement77C3
School Progress77C3
Closing the Gaps76C4
Academic Growth71C9
Relative Performance77C3

Closest to moving up: Student Achievement, 3 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%.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level71%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 reporting
  • Meets grade level44%−5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 reporting
  • Masters grade level16%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level75%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 reporting
  • Meets grade level51%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 reporting
  • Masters grade level19%±0 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level63%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 reporting
  • Meets grade level35%−7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 reporting
  • Masters grade level11%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level76%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 406 reporting
  • Meets grade level48%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 406 reporting
  • Masters grade level19%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 406 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level78%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 399 reporting
  • Meets grade level46%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 399 reporting
  • Masters grade level17%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 399 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (408 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
95.8%−0.3 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 393 rated districts reporting
Five-Year
98.7%+2.4 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 389 rated districts reporting
Six-Year
97.7%+1.5 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 388 rated districts reporting
Dropout Rate
0.4%±0.0 pts vs similar economic context average for districts 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
98.0%+8.7 pts vs similar economic context
CCMR criteria
CriterionThis district% of graduatesAveragesimilar economic contextDifferencepercentage pointsReportingselected comparison
Total credit for CCMR criteria98.0%89.3%+8.7 average for districts 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 course79.3%56.8%+22.5 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA27.7%25.9%+1.8 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)6.6%5.4%+1.2 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Earned college credit for a dual credit course49.3%34.7%+14.6 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Earned an industry-based certification33.8%42.7%−8.9 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Earned a level I or level II certificate4.7%1.6%+3.1 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Earned an associate degree0.0%3.3%−3.3 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit0.0%2.9%−2.9 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness7.0%3.1%+3.9 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student13.6%8.7%+4.9 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces3.3%3.7%−0.4 average for districts 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 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
224

Class of 2023–24

Enrolled in Texas public higher education
111

49.6% of graduates

Not found in Texas public higher-ed records
111

49.6% of graduates

Not trackable
2

Fall 2024

Graduates in the report

This district
224
Selected comparison
342.9

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 291 rated districts reporting

Enrolled in Texas public higher education

This district
111
Selected comparison
150.7

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 291 rated districts reporting

Texas-public enrollment rate

This district
49.6%
Selected comparison
45.0%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 291 rated districts reporting

+4.6 pts vs similar economic context

Not-found rate

This district
49.6%
Selected comparison
51.8%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 291 rated districts reporting

−2.2 pts vs similar economic context

Not-trackable rate

This district
0.9%
Selected comparison
3.2%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 291 rated districts reporting

−2.3 pts vs similar economic context

Most common named Texas public destinations

  1. LAMAR STATE COLL-ORANGE (023582)38
  2. LAMAR UNIVERSITY (003581)32
  3. TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY (003632)7

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
3,347
Economically disadvantaged
59.7%−0.1 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
4.8%−5.7 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
20.5%+1.9 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
93.9%−0.7 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
19.0%+4.3 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Little Cypress-Mauriceville CISD

African American: 8.2%Hispanic: 15.1%White: 70.7%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 1.5%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 4.1%
  • African American 8.2%
  • Hispanic 15.1%
  • White 70.7%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 1.5%
  • Pacific Islander 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 4.1%

Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 reporting for every category shown · 408 in full cohort

African American: 5.5%Hispanic: 39.8%White: 49.7%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 0.9%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 3.7%
  • African American 5.5%
  • Hispanic 39.8%
  • White 49.7%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 0.9%
  • Pacific Islander 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 3.7%

Student counts behind the percentages

Context only. These counts are not rankings, comparisons, or judgments about school quality.

Students in this TEA accountability summary
3,342
Economically disadvantaged students
1,995
Emergent bilingual students
161
Special education students
685

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 3,347 students in 2025–26, an increase of 27 (0.8%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
3,347

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
+27

Increase · +0.8%

Change since 2021–22
+114

Increase · +3.5%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This district
3,347
Selected comparison
3,489.3

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 rated districts reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Little Cypress-Mauriceville CISD
School yearStudents enrolledLittle Cypress-Mauriceville CISDChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 3,233 First available year 3,507.6
2022–23 3,340 Increase of 107 (3.3%) 3,553.3
2023–24 3,241 Decrease of 99 (3.0%) 3,536.1
2024–25 3,320 Increase of 79 (2.4%) 3,537.6
2025–26 3,347 Increase of 27 (0.8%) 3,489.3

The selected comparison column is the average enrollment among reporting districts in that group. It changes with the comparison control; this district's own counts do not.

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
197

Live in another district; attend here · 2025–26

Transfers out
206

Live here; attend in another public district or charter · 2025–26

Transfers in minus transfers out
−9

Arithmetic context only

Transfers in · 2025–26

This district
197
Selected comparison
169.7

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 388 rated districts reporting

Transfers out · 2025–26

This district
206
Selected comparison
454.2

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 384 rated districts reporting

Transfers in minus out · 2025–26

This district
−9
Selected comparison
−299

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 368 rated districts reporting

Official transfer totals by school year for Little Cypress-Mauriceville CISD
School yearTransfers inLittle Cypress-Mauriceville CISDTransfers outLittle Cypress-Mauriceville CISDIn minus outLittle Cypress-Mauriceville CISDTransfers inselected comparison averageTransfers outselected comparison averageIn minus outselected comparison average
2021–22 116 203 −87 146.7 356.5 −222
2022–23 162 184 −22 160.9 385.7 −237
2023–24 188 203 −15 154.4 410.7 −268
2024–25 193 245 −52 163.3 444 −292
2025–26 197 206 −9 169.7 454.2 −299

Largest reported origins for transfers in

  1. West Orange-Cove CISD 181906120
  2. Orangefield ISD 18190519
  3. Bridge City ISD 18190117
  4. Vidor ISD 18190715
  5. Deweyville ISD 17690311

Top reported flows only. TEA published 5 of 10 counterpart counts and masked 5.

Largest reported destinations for transfers out

  1. Vidor ISD 18190746
  2. Deweyville ISD 17690340
  3. West Orange-Cove CISD 18190635
  4. Orangefield ISD 18190523
  5. Hallsville ISD 10290414

Top reported flows only. TEA published 6 of 18 counterpart counts and masked 12.

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
740

20.8% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
2,290

64.31 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
3,561

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This district
20.8%
Selected comparison
11.0%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 357 rated districts reporting

+9.8 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This district
64.31
Selected comparison
23.8

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 369 rated districts reporting

+40.5 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Little Cypress-Mauriceville CISD
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 3,497 531 15.2% 1,344 38.43 8.5% 16.7
2021–22 3,486 696 20.0% 2,168 62.19 11.1% 23.7
2022–23 3,558 737 20.7% 2,342 65.82 11.4% 25.4
2023–24 3,523 699 19.8% 1,871 53.11 11.3% 25.1
2024–25 3,561 740 20.8% 2,290 64.31 11.0% 23.8
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Little Cypress-Mauriceville CISD in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 740 20.8% 2,290 64.31 11.0% 23.8
In-school suspensions 650 18.3% 1,775 49.85 9.6% 18.1
Out-of-school suspensions 215 6.0% 317 8.90 3.4% 5.2
DAEP placements 139 3.9% 195 5.48 2.6% 3.1
Mandatory DAEP placements 102 2.9% 138 3.88 1.7% 2
Discretionary DAEP placements 47 1.3% 57 1.60 1.4% 1.6
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 Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
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
19,107

2024 Census estimate

Children ages 5–17
3,759

Living inside the boundary

Children ages 5–17 in families in poverty
469

12.5%

School-age child poverty rate
12.5%

469 of 3,759

Boundary population

This district
19,107
Selected comparison
21,727.6

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 rated districts reporting

School-age population

This district
3,759
Selected comparison
3,906

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 rated districts reporting

School-age population in poverty

This district
469
Selected comparison
620.4

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 rated districts reporting

School-age child poverty rate

This district
12.5%
Selected comparison
17.7%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 rated districts reporting

−5.2 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.

6 schools in this district

Number of schools in the district

This district
6
Selected comparison
5.9

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 rated districts reporting

The selected comparison is a neutral average district size. This district's school count and school-type mix remain its own facts.

Elementary
3
Middle / Jr. High
2
High School
1
Browse all 6 schoolsName, type, rating, score and enrollment
Schools in this district
SchoolTypeRatingScoreStudents
Lit Cypr-Mrceville HSHigh SchoolA91996
Mauriceville MSMiddle / Jr. HighB80267
Little Cypress ElemElementaryC77519
Little Cypress JHMiddle / Jr. HighC74539
Little Cypress IntElementaryD64525
Mauriceville ElemElementaryD61501

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.

$11k$18k$25k20182020202220242025
  • Little Cypress-Mauriceville CISD
  • TEA peer group
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This district
$14,838
Selected comparison
$23,823

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 rated districts reporting

−$8,985 vs similar economic context

This district spends $4,652 less per student than TEA's peer group, and $4,134 less per student than the state average.

View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
YearLittle Cypress-Mauriceville CISDTEA peer groupTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$18,781$12,629$13,054$14,425 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 rated districts reporting
2019$12,673$12,702$13,108$14,583 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 rated districts reporting
2020$13,444$13,696$14,058$15,734 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 rated districts reporting
2021$12,349$14,225$14,797$16,537 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 rated districts reporting
2022$13,840$15,710$15,708$18,274 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 rated districts reporting
2023$14,852$16,917$16,792$20,109 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 rated districts reporting
2024$14,707$18,225$18,125$22,210 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 rated districts reporting
2025$14,838$19,490$18,972$23,823 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 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
$60,455−$3,748 vs similar economic context
Teachers
253+9.9 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
13.2+1.2 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Little Cypress-Mauriceville CISD

Beginning: 6.5%1 to 5 years: 31.6%6 to 10 years: 21.1%11 to 20 years: 21.4%21 to 30 years: 15.8%Over 30 years: 3.6%
  • Beginning 6.5%
  • 1 to 5 years 31.6%
  • 6 to 10 years 21.1%
  • 11 to 20 years 21.4%
  • 21 to 30 years 15.8%
  • Over 30 years 3.6%

Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 reporting for every category shown · 408 in full cohort

Beginning: 6.7%1 to 5 years: 24.1%6 to 10 years: 17.4%11 to 20 years: 28.2%21 to 30 years: 17.7%Over 30 years: 5.9%
  • Beginning 6.7%
  • 1 to 5 years 24.1%
  • 6 to 10 years 17.4%
  • 11 to 20 years 28.2%
  • 21 to 30 years 17.7%
  • Over 30 years 5.9%

Teacher turnover over time

TEA reported a 17.0% teacher turnover rate in 2024–25.

Teacher turnover rate · 2024–25

This district
17.0%
Selected comparison
21.7%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 408 rated districts reporting

−4.7 pts vs similar economic context
District teacher turnover rate by school year for Little Cypress-Mauriceville CISD
School yearTeacher turnover rateLittle Cypress-Mauriceville CISDAverage turnover rateselected comparison
2020–2110.8%16.5%
2021–2216.8%20.5%
2022–2319.6%24.0%
2023–2420.2%21.7%
2024–2517.0%21.7%

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.

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

6 measures

  • 4of 35

    Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student

    Region 05: Beaumont · of the 35 that report this measure

  • 5of 35

    College, career or military ready

    Region 05: Beaumont · of the 35 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 6of 35

    Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness

    Region 05: Beaumont · of the 35 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 7of 35

    Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course

    Region 05: Beaumont · of the 35 that report this measure

  • 7of 35

    Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)

    Region 05: Beaumont · of the 35 that report this measure

  • 10of 36

    Social Studies — Approaches

    Region 05: Beaumont · of the 36 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.

Download this district as CSV · JSON · the whole dataset