An equity score of 74/100 ranks Whiteface Cisd #132 of 1047 districts in Texas (state average 50). Derived live from how evenly resources are distributed across the district's schools.
At $19,416 per pupil, Whiteface Cisd ranks #108 of 1207 Texas districts by per-pupil spending (Texas districts). NCES F-33 finance data.
329
Total Enrollment
1
Schools
$19,416
Per-Pupil Spending
Combined
School Types
District-Level NCES Analysis
Whiteface Cisd operates 1 public schools serving 329 students, placing it among the smallest districts in Texas. The school portfolio breaks down into 1 combined schools, a small enough portfolio that most families will interact with nearly every campus in the district at some point. These enrollment and school figures come from the NCES Common Core of Data (CCD) 2024-25 release, and the district is based in Cochran County.
Per-pupil expenditure runs $19,416 according to the NCES F-33 School District Finance Survey, among the top 121 of 1207 Texas districts by per-pupil spending. See how Texas compares in our national per-pupil spending analysis. The funding mix is 72.0% local, 10.9% state, and 17.1% federal, a local-revenue-heavy mix that leaves the district more exposed to property-tax swings and local ballot measures than state-funded peers. The district's equity score is 74/100, ranked #132 of 1047 in Texas against a state average of 50, notably more even than the typical district in the state for how evenly funding reaches its schools.
Academic infrastructure includes 1 of 1 schools offering Advanced Placement (2 AP courses district-wide), a 298:1 student-counselor ratio, somewhat above the 250:1 ASCA recommendation, and 12.4% chronic absenteeism from the 2021-22 Civil Rights Data Collection. Demographically, the student body averages 56.4% Hispanic or Latino, 39.3% White across the district's schools.
Its largest campus is Whiteface School, enrolling 298 students (100% of the district's total enrollment).
Whiteface School accounts for 90.6% of all Whiteface Cisd student enrollment
That is an overwhelming concentration, leaving the rest of Whiteface Cisd a distant remainder — means Whiteface Cisd-wide averages can mask substantial variation outside the largest entity. Grade band: combined. The share measures enrollment concentration only; it does not establish how the district allocates programs, capital, or staff. Because it contains a majority of the affected population, enrollment-weighted aggregates will sit closer to this entity's reported fields than to those of smaller peers; an unweighted entity count answers a different question.
The reported share clears the 50% majority mark. Title I operates under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA, 2015), but its statutory allocation uses additional LEA-level counts and rules not represented by this average. This percentage is an economic-need context measure; it does not establish a Title I award, show dollars received, or describe how funds are distributed among campuses.
Whiteface Cisd student-counselor ratio is 298:1 — near the typical range (US average ~408) — within the typical range for U.S. public districts
student-counselor ratio is the simplest comparative metric but it does not capture the full picture: the ratio counts FTE counselors against total enrollment, districts that contract intervention or social-emotional staff outside the counselor classification may be under-counted Variation between sub-units within Whiteface Cisd is typically wider than the Whiteface Cisd-aggregate figure suggests.
Whiteface Cisd chronic absenteeism rate is 12.4% — low (typically associated with lower-than-average attendance disruption; districts in this range often have attendance interventions, robust transportation, or smaller catchments that reduce barriers)
chronic absenteeism rate is the simplest comparative metric but it does not capture the full picture: a student is chronically absent if they miss ≥10% of enrolled days for any reason, illness, family obligations, or disengagement Lower values often correlate with smaller scale and population characteristics rather than higher resource budgets per se.