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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Geographic public school district

Loop ISD

Gaines County · Region 17: Lubbock · 143 students

Official district websiteEnrollment, registration and eligibility

Current score
96/1002025-26
Change
+3 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
+14.6 ptsvs 81.4 average · 407 rated districts serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
1 of 407tied with 2 others
A96

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving up; under the rules in force back then it scored 91 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 81.4 average for 407 rated districts serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

Recent movement

Overall score rose 10 points

86 to 96 2024-25 to 2025-26

  • 96 is 14.6 points above the 81.4 average among 407 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
  • Tied for 1st of 407 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure; 3 districts share that value.
See the full measure

Recent domain gain

School Progress rose 12 points

84 to 96 2024-25 to 2025-26

  • 96 is 14.6 points above the 81.4 average among 407 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
  • Tied for 1st of 407 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure; 5 districts share that value.
See the full measure

Current strength

Relative Performance above the similar-context average

96 +15.1 pts vs 80.9

  • 96 is 15.1 points above the 80.9 average among 407 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
  • Tied for 1st of 407 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure; 5 districts share that value.
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

Loop ISD is rated A by TEA, scoring 96 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.4 average for 407 rated districts serving a similar economic context. It is up 3 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 1st of 407 rated districts serving a similar economic context (tied with 2 others).

Put the numbers in context

Compare with

Jump to a section
  1. Overview
  2. 5 years of ratings
  3. Where the score comes from
  4. Student outcomes
  5. Who this district serves
  6. Student counts behind the percentages
  7. Enrollment over time
  8. Students crossing district lines
  9. Discipline and removal from class
  10. Community around the district
  11. 1 schools in this district
  12. Spending per student
  13. Teachers
  14. Where this district ranks best
  15. 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
908070 Similar economic-disadvantage rateTexas averageLoop ISD 9391918696 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 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
Rating history with comparisons
YearRatingScoreSelected comparisonSimilar economic-disadvantage rateStateTexas average
2025-26A9681.4 407 reporting81.7 1,019 reporting
2024-25B8680.5 407 reporting80.3 1,019 reporting
2023-24A9178.7 407 reporting78.7 1,017 reporting
2022-23A9179.3 407 reporting79.2 1,018 reporting
2021-22A9380.2 406 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 Achievement95 A+13.5 vs similar economic context · 407 reporting
  • School Progress96 A+14.6 vs similar economic context · 407 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps95 A+16.0 vs similar economic context · 406 reporting
  • Academic Growth75 C+3.3 vs similar economic context · 407 reporting
  • Relative Performance96 A+15.1 vs similar economic context · 407 reporting
  • Loop ISD
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (407 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement95A—
School Progress96A—
Closing the Gaps95A—
Academic Growth75C5
Relative Performance96A—

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 (96), so Student Achievement (95) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 96.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level87%+11 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting
  • Meets grade level64%+15 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting
  • Masters grade level24%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level92%+14 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting
  • Meets grade level69%+15 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting
  • Masters grade level24%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level79%+7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting
  • Meets grade level51%+9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting
  • Masters grade level17%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level97%+18 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 405 reporting
  • Meets grade level72%+20 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 405 reporting
  • Masters grade level34%+12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 405 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level86%+10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 399 reporting
  • Meets grade level81%+33 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 399 reporting
  • Masters grade level38%+17 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 399 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
100.0%+3.9 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 395 rated districts reporting
Six-Year
100.0%+3.7 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 390 rated districts reporting
Dropout Rate
0.0%−0.4 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 397 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
100.0%+10.9 pts vs similar economic context
CCMR criteria
CriterionThis district% of graduatesAveragesimilar economic contextDifferencepercentage pointsReportingselected comparison
Total credit for CCMR criteria100.0%89.1%+10.9 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 394 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course100.0%56.1%+43.9 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 396 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA10.0%26.2%−16.2 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 396 rated districts reporting
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)0.0%5.4%−5.4 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 396 rated districts reporting
Earned college credit for a dual credit course20.0%35.1%−15.1 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 396 rated districts reporting
Earned an industry-based certification0.0%42.5%−42.5 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 396 rated districts reporting
Earned a level I or level II certificate0.0%1.7%−1.7 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 396 rated districts reporting
Earned an associate degree0.0%3.3%−3.3 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 396 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 · 396 rated districts reporting
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness0.0%3.1%−3.1 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 396 rated districts reporting
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student10.0%8.6%+1.4 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 396 rated districts reporting
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces0.0%3.8%−3.8 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 396 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.

Who this district serves

Placed after the results deliberately: this is context for reading them, not an explanation of them.

Students
143
Economically disadvantaged
58.7%−0.2 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
10.5%+0.3 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
7.7%−10.8 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
92.4%−2.2 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
29.7%+15.2 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Loop ISD

Hispanic: 22.4%White: 75.5%Two or More Races: 2.1%
  • Hispanic 22.4%
  • White 75.5%
  • Two or More Races 2.1%

Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting for every category shown · 407 in full cohort

African American: 5.4%Hispanic: 39.3%White: 50.2%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 0.9%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 3.7%
  • African American 5.4%
  • Hispanic 39.3%
  • White 50.2%
  • 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
143
Economically disadvantaged students
84
Emergent bilingual students
15
Special education students
11

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 143 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 7 (4.7%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
143

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
−7

Decrease · −4.7%

Change since 2021–22
−8

Decrease · −5.3%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This district
143
Selected comparison
3,477.7

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Loop ISD
School yearStudents enrolledLoop ISDChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 151 First available year 3,454.6
2022–23 157 Increase of 6 (4.0%) 3,503.1
2023–24 143 Decrease of 14 (8.9%) 3,499.1
2024–25 150 Increase of 7 (4.9%) 3,512.3
2025–26 143 Decrease of 7 (4.7%) 3,477.7

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
93

Live in another district; attend here · 2025–26

Transfers out
17

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

Transfers in minus transfers out
+76

Arithmetic context only

Transfers in · 2025–26

This district
93
Selected comparison
213.6

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

Transfers out · 2025–26

This district
17
Selected comparison
436.5

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 382 rated districts reporting

Transfers in minus out · 2025–26

This district
+76
Selected comparison
−233

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 367 rated districts reporting

Official transfer totals by school year for Loop ISD
School yearTransfers inLoop ISDTransfers outLoop ISDIn minus outLoop ISDTransfers inselected comparison averageTransfers outselected comparison averageIn minus outselected comparison average
2021–22 85 13 +72 178.7 340.9 −170
2022–23 86 12 +74 192.5 369.5 −187
2023–24 90 19 +71 185.9 393.2 −216
2024–25 90 18 +72 201.5 425.1 −230
2025–26 93 17 +76 213.6 436.5 −233

Largest reported origins for transfers in

  1. Seminole ISD 08390374
  2. Seagraves ISD 08390116

Top reported flows only. TEA published 2 of 5 counterpart counts and masked 3.

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
Suppressed

Rate not available

Disciplinary actions
15

9.43 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
159

2024–25

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This district
9.43
Selected comparison
23.3

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 371 rated districts reporting

−13.9 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Loop ISD
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 152 Suppressed — 10 6.58 — 16.6
2021–22 160 12 7.5% 17 10.63 10.9% 23.3
2022–23 158 12 7.6% 18 11.39 11.3% 24.8
2023–24 150 14 9.3% 16 10.67 11.2% 24.7
2024–25 159 Suppressed — 15 9.43 — 23.3
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Loop ISD in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline Suppressed — 15 9.43 — 23.3
In-school suspensions Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
Out-of-school suspensions Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
DAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
Mandatory DAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
Discretionary DAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
JJAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Mandatory JJAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Discretionary JJAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Expulsions Not reported — Not reported — — —
Mandatory expulsions Not reported — Not reported — — —
Discretionary expulsions Not reported — Not reported — — —

Selected comparisons use rates, not raw counts, so differently sized 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
402

2024 Census estimate

Children ages 5–17
96

Living inside the boundary

Children ages 5–17 in families in poverty
24

25.0%

School-age child poverty rate
25.0%

24 of 96

Boundary population

This district
402
Selected comparison
21,169.4

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting

School-age population

This district
96
Selected comparison
3,811.6

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting

School-age population in poverty

This district
24
Selected comparison
573.7

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting

School-age child poverty rate

This district
25.0%
Selected comparison
17.5%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting

+7.5 pts vs similar economic context

Population averages provide neutral scale context and can differ sharply across a region, county or the state. The poverty-rate comparison is the like-for-like percentage; none of these Census measures is treated as school performance.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2024 Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates, fetched 24 August 2026. These are modeled estimates for residents inside the geographic district, not the students enrolled by the district. A family's poverty status is context, never a school-quality measure.

1 schools in this district

Number of schools in the district

This district
1
Selected comparison
5.8

average for districts 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.

K-12
1
Browse all 1 schoolsName, type, rating, score and enrollment
Schools in this district
SchoolTypeRatingScoreStudents
Loop SchoolK-12A96143

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.

$12k$23k$35k20182020202220242025
  • Loop ISD
  • TEA peer group
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This district
$26,129
Selected comparison
$23,732

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting

+$2,397 vs similar economic context

This district spends $4,968 less per student than TEA's peer group, and $7,157 more per student than the state average.

View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
YearLoop ISDTEA peer groupTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$19,456$14,290$13,054$14,386 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
2019$22,593$21,900$13,108$14,562 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
2020$19,391$16,581$14,058$15,715 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
2021$21,983$22,787$14,797$16,531 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
2022$22,337$28,874$15,708$18,215 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
2023$22,868$21,827$16,792$20,019 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
2024$29,769$33,004$18,125$22,203 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting
2025$26,129$31,097$18,972$23,732 average for districts 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
$71,215+$6,993 vs similar economic context
Teachers
18−220.2 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
7.9−4.2 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Loop ISD

Beginning: 5.5%1 to 5 years: 25.3%6 to 10 years: 4.9%11 to 20 years: 35.7%21 to 30 years: 20.9%Over 30 years: 7.7%
  • Beginning 5.5%
  • 1 to 5 years 25.3%
  • 6 to 10 years 4.9%
  • 11 to 20 years 35.7%
  • 21 to 30 years 20.9%
  • Over 30 years 7.7%

Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 reporting for every category shown · 407 in full cohort

Beginning: 6.7%1 to 5 years: 23.9%6 to 10 years: 17.5%11 to 20 years: 28.3%21 to 30 years: 17.7%Over 30 years: 6%
  • Beginning 6.7%
  • 1 to 5 years 23.9%
  • 6 to 10 years 17.5%
  • 11 to 20 years 28.3%
  • 21 to 30 years 17.7%
  • Over 30 years 6%

Teacher turnover over time

TEA reported a 5.5% teacher turnover rate in 2024–25.

Teacher turnover rate · 2024–25

This district
5.5%
Selected comparison
21.7%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 407 rated districts reporting

−16.2 pts vs similar economic context
District teacher turnover rate by school year for Loop ISD
School yearTeacher turnover rateLoop ISDAverage turnover rateselected comparison
2020–2114.6%16.5%
2021–2228.5%20.3%
2022–2319.3%23.9%
2023–2426.5%21.5%
2024–255.5%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 156 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

4 measures

  • 1of 1,019

    Relative Performance

    Texas average · of the 1,019 that report this measure · tied with 4 · full ranking

  • 1of 407

    Overall score

    Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 407 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 1of 407

    School Progress

    Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 407 that report this measure · tied with 4

  • 1of 57

    Social Studies — Meets

    Region 17: Lubbock · of the 57 that report this measure

#2–3 rankings

Second- and third-place results

3 measures

  • 2of 57

    Science — Approaches

    Region 17: Lubbock · of the 57 that report this measure

  • 2of 57

    Science — Meets

    Region 17: Lubbock · of the 57 that report this measure

  • 3of 57

    Social Studies — Masters

    Region 17: Lubbock · of the 57 that report this measure

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

7 measures

  • 4of 406

    Closing the Gaps

    Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 406 that report this measure · tied with 4

  • 4of 58

    Student Achievement

    Region 17: Lubbock · of the 58 that report this measure

  • 5of 58

    Reading — Approaches

    Region 17: Lubbock · of the 58 that report this measure

  • 7of 58

    All Subjects — Approaches

    Region 17: Lubbock · of the 58 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 7of 58

    Reading — Meets

    Region 17: Lubbock · of the 58 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 7of 57

    Science — Masters

    Region 17: Lubbock · of the 57 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 9of 57

    Social Studies — Approaches

    Region 17: Lubbock · of the 57 that report this measure · tied with 1

Other top-5% rankings

High placements in larger reporting groups

1 measure

  • 20of 407

    All Subjects — Meets

    Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 407 that report this measure · tied with 5

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