What’s Changing in 2025?
The A–F Accountability System continues to evolve, but 2025 will mostly be a year of consistency. While the structure and methodology remain the same as in 2024, TEA is implementing previously adopted changes that may impact how certain indicators are counted. In this post, we break down what you need to know about accountability in 2025.
A Year of Ratings Stability
The TEA has confirmed that the 2025 A–F Accountability Manual maintains the same domain structure, cut scores, and scaling methodology as 2024. That means:
- no changes to how domain scores are calculated,
- no shifts in cut points for A–F ratings, and
- no redesign of indicators or weighting.
This allows districts and campuses to plan confidently, using the same metrics and performance expectations as last year.
Program of Study Requirements for CCMR
The most significant change already adopted and now in effect for 2025 is the phase-in of the Program of Study requirement for College, Career, and Military Readiness (CCMR) credit tied to industry-based certifications (IBCs).
To earn CCMR credit for an IBC in 2025, a student must do both of the following:
- earn the IBC
- earn credit for at least one Level 2 course in the CTE program of study aligned with that certification
This applies to the Class of 2024 graduates. Districts should ensure that students earning IBCs are also on track in their CTE programs of study to receive credit for accountability.
CSI, TSI, and ATS Identification Rules Continue
There are no changes to the methodology for identifying campuses for federal interventions, such as:
- Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI)
- Targeted Support and Improvement (TSI)
- Additional Targeted Support (ATS)
The Closing the Gaps domain continues to be used to determine these identifications. The “3 x 3” rule remains in place for TSI (same three missed indicators over three consecutive years).
For ATS, there’s an important clarification: if a campus is identified for ATS due to a specific student group missing the same indicators across multiple years, those years count toward CSI identification. That means ATS status can escalate to CSI if subgroup performance issues persist. Districts should closely monitor campuses identified for ATS, especially monitoring whether the same student group is missing the same indicators across multiple years. These patterns can escalate to CSI identification.
Conclusion
Even though there aren’t any big shifts for 2025 ratings and how they are calculated, it’s still important to keep an eye on the details, especially when it comes to CCMR and the program of study requirements. With the rules holding steady, now’s a good time to clean up processes, check on student data, and ensure campuses are prepared for things like ATS tracking or IBC alignment.
Need help tracking your accountability indicators or planning for CCMR shifts? The Education Service Center Region 13 Accountability Team offers tools, professional development, and personalized guidance to support your campus or district. Subscribe to our Accountability Weekly newsletter to stay current with all updates and resources. Visit our website for additional information. For more articles related to accountability, visit our blog.
Melinda Marquez is the Director of Accountability, Assessment, and Leadership Systems here at ESC Region 13.
Add comment