+3.3 ptsvs 85.7 average · 190 rated districts serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
62 of 190tied with 15 others
Score vs region
+8.3 ptsvs 80.7 average · 37 rated districts in Region 03: Victoria
Region 03: Victoria placement
4 of 37tied with 4 others
Score vs county
+10.7 ptsvs 78.3 average · 3 rated districts in Victoria County
Score vs similar-size group
+6.0 ptsvs 83 average · 164 similarly sized rated districts
Similar size placement
44 of 164tied with 11 others
Score vs state
+7.3 ptsvs 81.7 average · 1,019 rated Texas districts
Texas placement
166 of 1,019tied with 43 others
B89
At a glance
Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 97 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 85.7 average for 190 rated districts serving a similar economic context.The current score is above the 80.7 average for 37 rated districts in Region 03: Victoria.The current score is above the 78.3 average for 3 rated districts in Victoria County.The current score is above the 83 average for 164 similarly sized rated districts.The current score is above the 81.7 average for 1,019 rated Texas districts.
Evidence worth noticing
Strengths and momentum
STAAR result
Science above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters
Meets
67%vs 61.2% avg · +5.8 pts
Masters
57%vs 30.5% avg · +26.5 pts
Among 189 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
Tied for 1st of 189 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure; 2 districts share that value.
A precomputed strengths set is not available for this pinned entity. The page’s direct numeric comparisons still update to that pin.
Selected positive signals, not a summary of performance. The same rules choose them on every page: only the latest one-year gain, results meaningfully better than the currently selected comparison with broad reporting, and distinctive top-three placements. Demographics, staffing and spending cannot become academic “wins.” The overall rating and the full results below remain the complete picture for this district.
Read the full rating context and placement
Nursery ISD is rated B by TEA, scoring 89 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 85.7 average for 190 rated districts serving a similar economic context. It is down 9 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 62nd of 190 rated districts serving a similar economic context (tied with 15 others).
Nursery ISD is rated B by TEA, scoring 89 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 80.7 average for 37 rated districts in Region 03: Victoria. It is down 9 points since 2021-22.
Nursery ISD is rated B by TEA, scoring 89 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 78.3 average for 3 rated districts in Victoria County. It is down 9 points since 2021-22.
Nursery ISD is rated B by TEA, scoring 89 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 83 average for 164 similarly sized rated districts. It is down 9 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 44th of 164 similarly sized rated districts (tied with 11 others).
Nursery ISD is rated B by TEA, scoring 89 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.7 average for 1,019 rated Texas districts. It is down 9 points since 2021-22.
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 97 that year.
Comparison lines follow the current rated cohort backward through time. The table gives the number in that fixed cohort that reported a score each year; it can be smaller than cohort membership.
Texas builds the overall rating from the better of Student Achievement and School Progress, weighted 70%, plus Closing the Gaps at 30%. School Progress is itself the better of Academic Growth and Relative Performance. The 60, 70, 80 and 90 rules mark the letter-grade thresholds.
Student Achievement92 A+5.4 vs similar economic context · 190 reporting
School Progress89 B+7.5 vs similar economic context · 190 reporting
Closing the Gaps82 B−1.5 vs similar economic context · 190 reporting
Academic Growth83 B+6.7 vs similar economic context · 190 reporting
Relative Performance89 B+8.6 vs similar economic context · 190 reporting
Nursery ISD
Similar economic-disadvantage rate (190 in cohort)
Domain scores
Domain
Score
Grade
Points to next grade
Student Achievement
92
A
—
School Progress
89
B
1
Closing the Gaps
82
B
8
Academic Growth
83
B
7
Relative Performance
89
B
1
Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 8 points below A in that domain — the nearest of the measures that count toward the overall rating.
TEA does not add the domains up. The overall score is the better of Student
Achievement and School Progress at 70%, plus Closing the Gaps at 30%. For this district that better measure is Student Achievement (92), so
School Progress (89) is published above but does not enter the overall
score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 92.
Student outcomes
STAAR performance
All Subjects
Approaches grade level90%+8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 reporting
Meets grade level71%+12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 reporting
Masters grade level43%+18 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
Approaches grade level94%+10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 reporting
Meets grade level74%+11 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 reporting
Masters grade level44%+17 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 reporting
Math3 performance levels
Approaches grade level88%+9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 reporting
Meets grade level70%+18 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 reporting
Masters grade level39%+18 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 reporting
Science3 performance levels
Approaches grade level81%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 189 reporting
Meets grade level67%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 189 reporting
Masters grade level57%+27 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 189 reporting
Approaches grade level
Meets grade level
Masters grade level
Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (190 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.
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
180
Economically disadvantaged
35.8%−1.5 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
6.1%−0.4 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
9.5%−7.5 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
96.2%+0.9 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
9.8%−0.7 pts vs similar economic context
Student demographics
Nursery ISD
African American 0.6%
Hispanic 41.3%
White 56.4%
Two or More Races 1.7%
Selected comparison averageFor districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 reporting for every category shown · 190 in full cohort
African American 4%
Hispanic 28.2%
White 62.2%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 1.6%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3.6%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 03: Victoria · 37 reporting for every category shown · 37 in full cohort
African American 5.1%
Hispanic 50.9%
White 41%
American Indian 0.2%
Asian 0.6%
Two or More Races 2.1%
Selected comparison averageFor Victoria County · 3 reporting for every category shown · 3 in full cohort
African American 2.9%
Hispanic 65.2%
White 29.7%
American Indian 0.1%
Asian 0.3%
Two or More Races 1.7%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized districts · 164 reporting for every category shown · 164 in full cohort
African American 3%
Hispanic 36.8%
White 56.7%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 0.2%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3%
Statewide average1,019 reporting for every category shown · 1,019 Texas districts in full cohort
African American 6.3%
Hispanic 43.1%
White 45.4%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 1.4%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3.3%
Student counts behind the percentages
Context only. These counts are not rankings, comparisons, or judgments about school quality.
Students in this TEA accountability summary
179
Economically disadvantaged students
64
Emergent bilingual students
11
Special education students
17
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 180 students in 2025–26, an increase of 24 (15.4%) from 2024–25.
Latest enrollment
180
2025–26
Change from 2024–25
+24
Increase · +15.4%
Change since 2021–22
+44
Increase · +32.4%
Enrollment in 2025–26
This district
180
Selected comparison
4,710.5
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 rated districts reporting
Student enrollment by school year for Nursery ISD
School year
Students enrolledNursery ISD
Change from previous school year
Average enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22
136
First available year
4,510
2022–23
135
Decrease of 1 (0.7%)
4,631.1
2023–24
137
Increase of 2 (1.5%)
4,685.9
2024–25
156
Increase of 19 (13.9%)
4,724.1
2025–26
180
Increase of 24 (15.4%)
4,710.5
The selected comparison column is the average enrollment among reporting districts in that group. It changes with the comparison control; this district's own counts do not.
These counts show how enrollment changed, not why. Attendance-zone changes, school openings or closures, grade reconfigurations, transfers and population shifts can affect the total.
Students crossing district lines
How many students live in one public-school district and attend in another. These are movement counts, not a measure of family satisfaction or school quality.
Transfers in
66
Live in another district; attend here · 2025–26
Transfers out
78
Live here; attend in another public district or charter · 2025–26
Transfers in minus transfers out
−12
Arithmetic context only
Transfers in · 2025–26
This district
66
Selected comparison
192.3
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 185 rated districts reporting
Transfers out · 2025–26
This district
78
Selected comparison
355.7
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 182 rated districts reporting
Transfers in minus out · 2025–26
This district
−12
Selected comparison
−171
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 177 rated districts reporting
Official transfer totals by school year for Nursery ISD
School year
Transfers inNursery ISD
Transfers outNursery ISD
In minus outNursery ISD
Transfers inselected comparison average
Transfers outselected comparison average
In minus outselected comparison average
2021–22
37
94
−57
173.3
268
−102
2022–23
34
102
−68
170.8
289.6
−124
2023–24
32
108
−76
173.4
307.8
−140
2024–25
59
93
−34
185
338
−161
2025–26
66
78
−12
192.3
355.7
−171
Largest reported origins for transfers in
Victoria ISD 23590261
Top reported flows only. TEA published 1 of 3 counterpart counts and masked 2.
Largest reported destinations for transfers out
Cuero ISD 06290151
Victoria ISD 23590219
Top reported flows only. TEA published 2 of 7 counterpart counts and masked 5.
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
Suppressed
Rate not available
Cumulative year-end enrollment
172
2024–25
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Nursery ISD
School year
Cumulative enrollment
Studentsall discipline
Students% of enrollment
Actionsall discipline
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21
162
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
2021–22
144
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
2022–23
158
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
2023–24
157
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
2024–25
172
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Nursery ISD in 2024–25
Category
Students
Students% of enrollment
Actions
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
In-school suspensions
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
Out-of-school suspensions
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
DAEP placements
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
Mandatory DAEP placements
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
Discretionary DAEP placements
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
JJAEP placements
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
Mandatory JJAEP placements
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
Discretionary JJAEP placements
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
Expulsions
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
Mandatory expulsions
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
Discretionary expulsions
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
Selected comparisons use rates, not raw counts, so differently sized 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
1,528
2024 Census estimate
Children ages 5–17
267
Living inside the boundary
Children ages 5–17 in families in poverty
37
13.9%
School-age child poverty rate
13.9%
37 of 267
Boundary population
This district
1,528
Selected comparison
27,434.5
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 rated districts reporting
School-age population
This district
267
Selected comparison
5,063.6
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 rated districts reporting
School-age population in poverty
This district
37
Selected comparison
425.8
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 rated districts reporting
School-age child poverty rate
This district
13.9%
Selected comparison
11.0%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 rated districts reporting
+2.9 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
6.9
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 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
1
Browse all 1 schoolsName, type, rating, score and enrollment
The selected txschools.net comparison changes with the page-wide control. TEA's own peer group and statewide reference stay visible as separately published, fixed TEA references.
Nursery ISD
TEA peer group
Texas average
Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Spending per student · 2025
This district
$21,029
Selected comparison
$23,857
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 rated districts reporting
−$2,828 vs similar economic context
This district spends $4,900 less per student than TEA's peer group, and $2,057 more per student than the state average.
View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
Year
Nursery ISD
TEA peer group
Texas average
Selected comparison average
Reportingselected comparison
2018
$11,886
$14,290
$13,054
$14,470
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 rated districts reporting
2019
$12,991
$14,384
$13,108
$14,719
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 rated districts reporting
2020
$12,598
$16,581
$14,058
$15,642
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 rated districts reporting
2021
$14,698
$17,863
$14,797
$16,156
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 rated districts reporting
2022
$23,255
$19,817
$15,708
$17,727
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 rated districts reporting
2023
$16,924
$21,827
$16,792
$18,767
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 rated districts reporting
2024
$16,935
$23,517
$18,125
$21,845
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 rated districts reporting
2025
$21,029
$25,929
$18,972
$23,857
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 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
$64,796−$892 vs similar economic context
Teachers
19−303.8 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
9.5−3.1 vs similar economic context
Teaching experience
Nursery ISD
1 to 5 years 14.9%
6 to 10 years 26.6%
11 to 20 years 42.6%
21 to 30 years 16%
Selected comparison averageFor districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 reporting for every category shown · 190 in full cohort
Beginning 4.7%
1 to 5 years 20.7%
6 to 10 years 18.2%
11 to 20 years 32.3%
21 to 30 years 19%
Over 30 years 5%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 03: Victoria · 37 reporting for every category shown · 37 in full cohort
Beginning 7.4%
1 to 5 years 22.8%
6 to 10 years 14.7%
11 to 20 years 30.3%
21 to 30 years 18.1%
Over 30 years 6.7%
Selected comparison averageFor Victoria County · 3 reporting for every category shown · 3 in full cohort
Beginning 6.8%
1 to 5 years 19.7%
6 to 10 years 19.5%
11 to 20 years 36.9%
21 to 30 years 12.7%
Over 30 years 4.4%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized districts · 164 reporting for every category shown · 164 in full cohort
Beginning 8.1%
1 to 5 years 23.1%
6 to 10 years 15.6%
11 to 20 years 28.1%
21 to 30 years 18%
Over 30 years 7.2%
Statewide average1,019 reporting for every category shown · 1,019 Texas districts in full cohort
Beginning 6.4%
1 to 5 years 23.9%
6 to 10 years 17.7%
11 to 20 years 28.7%
21 to 30 years 17.7%
Over 30 years 5.5%
Teacher turnover over time
TEA reported a 8.3% teacher turnover rate in 2024–25.
Teacher turnover rate · 2024–25
This district
8.3%
Selected comparison
17.9%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 190 rated districts reporting
−9.6 pts vs similar economic context
District teacher turnover rate by school year for Nursery ISD
School year
Teacher turnover rateNursery ISD
Average turnover rateselected comparison
2020–21
40.7%
13.9%
2021–22
14.3%
17.7%
2022–23
30.8%
18.8%
2023–24
25.0%
18.6%
2024–25
8.3%
17.9%
TEA defines this district rate as the share of teacher full-time equivalents from the prior fall who are not employed as teachers in the district in the current fall. That can include leaving the district or remaining in a different role; it is not a campus-level measure. The comparison average changes with the selected group; this district's reported rate does not.
Out of 84 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
5 measures
1of 189
Science — Masters
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 189 that report this measure · tied with 1
1of 37
All Subjects — Masters
Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure
1of 37
Reading — Approaches
Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure
1of 37
Reading — Masters
Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure
1of 37
Math — Masters
Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure
#2–3 rankings
Second- and third-place results
6 measures
2of 37
Student Achievement
Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure · tied with 1
2of 37
All Subjects — Approaches
Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure
2of 37
All Subjects — Meets
Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure
2of 37
Reading — Meets
Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure
3of 37
Math — Approaches
Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure
3of 37
Math — Meets
Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure
#4–10 rankings
Fourth- through tenth-place results
5 measures
4of 37
School Progress
Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure · tied with 1
4of 37
Relative Performance
Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure · tied with 1
6of 37
Attendance
Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure · tied with 1
7of 37
Academic Growth
Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure · tied with 1
8of 37
Science — Meets
Region 03: Victoria · 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.