Fewer than half of Texas students met state grade-level requirements in all subjects for 2022-23, and many national education rankings placed Texas 29th.
Yet, Texas spends one-third of its budget on education, even though its constitution states, “[I]t shall be the duty of the Legislature of the State to establish and make suitable provision for the support and maintenance of an efficient system of public free schools.”
But what is “efficient”?
According to the required “Efficiency Audit,” a school district’s board of trustees must do an “investigation of the operations of a school district to examine fiscal management, efficiency, and resource utilization” before any voter-approval tax rate election to raise property taxes.
Most districts use the Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas (FIRST) to assess efficiency.
FIRST’s criteria are complex and require a key to understand. Still, it might explain why 14 of the 15 highest-paid superintendents in Texas in 2023-24 received an “A = Superior Achievement” for efficiency, with some earning perfect scores despite Texas Academic Performance Reports (TAPR) flagging three districts as “Needs Assistance” and one as “Needs Intervention.”
That’s because state law only requires high attendance, and FIRST bases “efficiency” around financial management and average daily attendance (ADA), or “the sum of Attendance Counts ÷ Days of Instruction.”
Notably, all 13 school districts did well in attendance, with none scoring below 92 percent.
Additionally, student-to-teacher ratios, a FIRST criterion, didn’t show any real difference between successful and unsuccessful districts. Average ratios for both were 15:1.
Conversely, TAPR measures student test scores, graduation rates, workforce readiness, staff-to-student ratios, and other important academic statistics, including attendance.
The combined key data showed that only 36 percent to 68 percent of students in ten districts met grade requirements, yet roughly 93 percent graduated. Two districts reported about 65 percent of students were “College, Career, or Military Ready,” meaning one-third of graduates were left unprepared.
The three districts with “good” academic performances—70 percent-plus for “All Grades, All Subjects (Meets Grade or Above)”—had superintendents managing 23 or fewer schools, resulting in higher funding per student ($19.28-$61.79) and school ($18,886-$53,023).
Conversely, superintendents of the other 12 districts had four to five times more students and schools, resulting in fewer funds per student ($2.06-$12.93) and school ($1,386.86-$10,960.56).
Until Texas lawmakers redefine “efficiency” from being based on attendance (like FIRST) to using STAAR Performance Rates (like TAPR), school boards will continue justifying higher property taxes despite poor student performance.
This is a commentary published with the author’s permission. If you wish to submit a commentary to Texas Scorecard, please submit your article to submission@texasscorecard.com.