Three scores.
One set of student records.

Yes. A student is CCMR if they meet any one of the 11 TEA indicators, and meeting the TSI standard in both math and English language arts is one of them. No second indicator is required. But TSI alone is not a Bonus Outcome. A Bonus Outcome needs the assessment result plus a completed pathway — an industry-based certification, a military enlistment, or an associate degree. That single distinction is the most common point of confusion we see in district data.

Differential weighting applies beginning with the Class of 2030. Those students enter ninth grade in fall 2026, which is why the change is worth modeling now rather than in 2030. The rules re-price indicators rather than remove them. A district keeps the same students and the same records, but the reported rate is computed from point values instead of a single pass-or-fail credit. Districts that lean on low-weight indicators will see the largest movement.

Indicator definitions and funding amounts come from TEA rules and Texas Education Code 48.110 as amended by House Bill 2 in 2025. District CCMR rates and the direct TSI split — TSI in both subjects overall versus TSI in both excluding College Prep — come from TEA CCMR Calculation Reports. CCMRI combines that split with TEA's other published pathway marginals for its 2031 simulations. STAAR is an academic cross-check, never an input. Bonus-Outcome dollars come from TEA CCMR Outcomes-Bonus finals for 2021 through 2024. The simulations are CCMRI modeling, not TEA-issued projections, and we label them that way everywhere they appear.

No. The TEA CCMR Tracker is the official state record and your district should keep using it. It reports what the state has already recorded. It does not tell a counselor in October which student is one exam away from an indicator, it does not project your rate under 2031 differential weighting, and it does not manage the day-to-day work of getting a student across the line. CCMRI is the working layer on top of that record, not a substitute for it.

Yes. Our calculation methodology is published, and the inputs are public: TAPR district CCMR rates, PEIMS enrollment and economically disadvantaged counts, and TEA CCMR Outcomes-Bonus finals. A district can recompute our figures from its own public data before signing anything. Where a figure is modeled rather than measured, and the 2031 projections are the main case, we label it as a simulation next to the number rather than in a footnote.

They answer different questions and are routinely mixed up. The CCMR accountability rate is the share of graduates meeting any one of the 11 indicators, commonly around 70 percent. The Bonus-Outcome rate is the smaller share of graduates who meet the narrower assessment-plus-pathway test. The capture rate is the share of the district's theoretical maximum bonus dollars actually received. Treating these as interchangeable can overstate available funding by two to three times, so CCMRI reports them separately.

Because districts do not hold reliable post-graduation enrollment data at the time decisions have to be made. Clearinghouse enrollment records arrive well after the student has left, so counting them would mean forecasting a pathway a counselor cannot act on. CCMRI leaves that pathway out of its Bonus-Outcome classification on purpose. The effect is conservative: our Confirmed count may understate what a district ultimately receives rather than overstate it.