Methodology

Transparent, Consistent, Data-Driven

Every grade on this site comes from public data, applied the same way to every district. Here's exactly how we do it — nothing hidden, nothing proprietary.

The Framework

Three dimensions. One overall grade.

Each school board receives a grade on three dimensions — Academics, Finances, and Community — combined into an overall letter grade. Weights reflect what matters most: academic outcomes are the core mission of a school board, so they carry the most weight.

Academics — STAAR performance vs. peers 50%
Finances — debt and spending efficiency 25%
Community — campaign finance independence 25%

Overall scores map to letter grades: 90–100 = A · 80–89 = B · 70–79 = C · 60–69 = D · below 60 = F


A

Academics

50% of Overall Grade

A board's primary job is student outcomes. The Academic grade measures whether students are performing relative to their peers — districts with similar size, demographics, and economic conditions — not against a statewide average that ignores context.

What We Measure

STAAR Math and Reading scores at the "Meets Grade Level" threshold — the standard that best predicts long-term academic success. Both subjects weighted equally.

Peer Comparison

Each district is compared against a custom peer group — districts of similar size, demographics, and economic disadvantage rate. A district is not penalized for serving a harder population.

Score Weighting

Current performance accounts for 40% of the Academic score. The 5-year trend accounts for 60% — because a rising district shows the board's decisions are working.

COVID Adjustment

The 2020–2021 school year is excluded from trend calculations due to extraordinary pandemic disruption. Trend is calculated across the remaining years in the window.

Score Calculation

Performance Score = percentile rank among peers (0–100)
Trend Score = change in peer percentile rank over 5 years, scaled 0–100
Academic Score = (Performance × 0.40) + (Trend × 0.60)

Data source: Texas Education Agency (TEA) PEIMS data and STAAR accountability reports. Updated annually following TEA release.

F

Finances

25% of Overall Grade

School boards control budgets worth billions of dollars. The Finance grade examines whether a board is managing community resources responsibly — measured by how much debt they've taken on per student and how efficiently they're spending.

Debt per Student (70%)

Total outstanding bond debt divided by enrollment. Compared against peers — a district at the 70th debt percentile scores around 30 on this component. Lower is better.

Spending Efficiency (30%)

3-year average ratio of instructional spending to total operating expenditure, compared to peers. A district spending more of each dollar in the classroom scores higher.

The $20,000 Cap

Any district carrying more than $20,000 in bond debt per student is capped at a maximum Finance grade of D — regardless of peer rank. Extreme debt is disqualifying.

Why Debt Matters

Excessive bond debt consumes future operating budgets through debt service payments, crowding out spending on teachers, classrooms, and programs for decades.

Absolute Cap Rule: The $20,000/student debt cap applies universally. SAISD carries ~$26,900 per student — above the cap — which limits their Finance grade to D regardless of peer comparison.
Data sources: Texas Bond Review Board (debt), CAFR annual financial reports (spending), TEA enrollment data.

C

Community

25% of Overall Grade · The Independence Score

Who are board members actually accountable to — the community that elected them, or the large donors who funded their campaigns? The Independence Score answers this using publicly filed campaign finance reports, measuring what share of each trustee's funding came from small community donors vs. large institutional interests.

A

Score 1 — Highly Independent (Grade A) More than 50% of campaign dollars came from donors giving $100 or less. Electoral viability depended primarily on broad community support.

C

Score 2 — Mildly Independent (Grade C) More than 50% of campaign dollars came from donors giving $500 or less — not dominated by large institutional funding.

F

Score 3 — Not Independent (Grade F) More than 50% of campaign dollars came from donors giving $1,000 or more. The campaign was primarily funded by large donors — PACs, corporations, or wealthy individuals.

The board-level Community grade is the aggregate of individual trustee scores. Trustees who ran unopposed and raised no contributions are noted as N/A. The methodology does not assess the policy positions of any donor — only the financial dependence structure of the campaign.

Data source: Texas Ethics Commission campaign finance reports (Form C/OH). Public record.

Grade Scale

How scores become letter grades

GradeScore RangeWhat It Means
A
90 – 100Performing well above peer average. Strong outcomes, responsible finances, or broad community accountability.
B
80 – 89Above average performance. Solid outcomes with room to improve in one or more areas.
C
70 – 79Average — performing near the peer median. Neither notably strong nor a cause for urgent concern.
D
60 – 69Below average. Meaningful underperformance that warrants community attention.
F
Below 60Significantly below peer average, or a disqualifying condition (debt cap, large-donor dominance) applies.

Data Sources

Every grade traces back to public records.

Texas Education Agency

STAAR results, PEIMS enrollment and demographic data, and accountability reports used for the Academic grade.

tea.texas.gov ↗

TX Bond Review Board

Outstanding bond debt by district, used to calculate debt per student and the $20k absolute cap.

brb.texas.gov ↗

TX Ethics Commission

Candidate and officeholder campaign finance reports (Form C/OH), used to calculate each trustee's Independence Score.

ethics.state.tx.us ↗

FAQ

Common questions

Letter grades are immediately legible to every parent, voter, and community member. They invite comparison and create accountability in a way that raw data tables do not. Every letter grade on this site is traceable to specific data points documented in our methodology.
The primary purpose of a school board is student learning. Financial stewardship and community accountability matter — but they exist in service of academic outcomes. Weighting Academics at half the grade reflects this hierarchy without ignoring the other dimensions.
No. The Independence Score measures financial dependence structure — not intent, not votes, not outcomes. A trustee can receive an F and govern with complete integrity. The score tells the community who funded the campaign so voters can draw their own conclusions. We do not impute motives from data.
Academic grades are updated annually following TEA's release of STAAR results (typically late summer). Finance grades are updated when new CAFR reports and Bond Review Board data are published. Community grades are updated after each election cycle as new campaign finance reports are filed.
All grades are derived from public records using documented methodology. If a district believes a data point is incorrect, we welcome outreach and will review any claimed error. We will correct factual mistakes promptly and document any changes. We will not change a grade because a board disagrees with the methodology.
No. Grade the Board is an independent civic transparency organization. We apply the same methodology to every district regardless of political affiliation. A board that serves students well, manages finances responsibly, and is accountable to the community will earn a good grade.
Campaign finance is the most objective, publicly verifiable measure of who a trustee is financially accountable to. Voter turnout, public meeting attendance, and other engagement metrics matter — but they are harder to compare across districts consistently. We may add additional community metrics in future versions.