Texas Schools Added Students. They Added Administrators Faster.
Twenty-seven years of state data show where Texas K-12 staffing and money grew, and where pay fell behind.
Between 1997–98 and 2024–25, Texas public schools enrolled 1.65 million more students, an increase of 42.5%. The number of teachers grew at roughly the same pace, up 45%. Administrators did not. Central-office administrators rose 131% and campus administrators 109%. Professional support staff, such as counselors, diagnosticians, nurses and instructional coaches, rose 146%. Over the same years, the average teacher's pay, adjusted for inflation, ended slightly lower than where it began.
This article summarizes those trends from TEA's own state reports: the AEIS State Profiles, the Texas Academic Performance Reports (TAPR), Snapshot and the PEIMS Financial Actual Reports. National figures come from the NCES Digest of Education Statistics. Unless a source is named, every figure is a calculation from those reports, and staff counts are full-time equivalents (FTEs).
Staff growth vs. enrollment, 1997–98 to 2024–25
Over these 27 years, Texas added 272,901 staff FTEs (+55.5%), growing faster than enrollment. The growth was not spread evenly across staff groups. Teachers grew 45.2%. Educational aides grew 68.6%. Auxiliary staff (food service, transportation, custodial and clerical) grew 40.8%, slightly slower than enrollment, and their share of all staff fell from 28.2% to 25.5%. The fastest growth came in professional support (33,670 to 82,751 FTEs) and among administrators. Central administrators went from 4,139 to 9,554, and campus administrators from 12,287 to 25,688.
The result shows in the ratios. In 1997–98, Texas had 237 students for every central or campus administrator. By 2024–25 it had 157. Teachers' share of all staff slipped from 51.7% to 48.3%. If every non-teaching group had grown only as fast as enrollment, Texas would have had roughly 57,000 fewer non-teaching FTEs in 2024–25. About 34,800 of those are professional support staff and 11,800 are administrators.
Source: TEA AEIS, Snapshot and TAPR state reports. 2018–19 categories are estimates.
The pattern was not always this way. In the decade after the 1984 reform law HB 72, which capped K–4 classes at 22 students, teachers grew faster than students (+37% vs. +21% from 1986–87 to 1997–98). Campus administrator counts barely changed. Almost all of the shift away from teachers happened after about 2000.
Professional support staff are not "bureaucrats" in the usual sense. Many of them work directly with students, and special-education mandates explain part of their growth. Special-education students went from 8.5% of enrollment in 2014–15 to 15.3% in 2024–25, after a 2017 law (SB 160) ended an enrollment-based indicator that had held districts near 8.5%.
Where the money went
TEA's complete financial actuals begin in 2004–05. From then to 2024–25, inflation-adjusted revenue rose 39%, from $60.7 billion to $84.3 billion in 2024–25 dollars, while membership rose 26%. Real revenue per student therefore rose only about 10%, from $13,839 to $15,255. Real operating spending per student rose 8%.
Source: TEA PEIMS Financial Actual Reports, all funds; CPI-U school-year averages, 2024–25 dollars.
Most of that modest increase paid for more positions outside the classroom. Over the same period, teacher FTEs grew 26%, in line with students, while professional support grew 77%, central administrators 68% and campus administrators 58%. Real spending per student on instruction rose just 2%, against 27% for guidance and counseling and 21% for instructional leadership. Instruction's share of operating spending fell from 57.8% to 54.5%.
Two details complicate a simple "administrative bloat" story. First, the general administration function (the central office) stayed at about $424 per student in real terms, and its share of spending slipped from 3.5% to 3.3%. Many people TEA counts as central administrators, such as curriculum or HR directors, are charged to other functions. Second, security spending rose from 0.7% to 1.8% of the budget after a 2023 law required an armed officer at every campus.
| Key numbers | Start | End | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Students (1997–98 → 2024–25) | 3,891,877 | 5,544,255 | +42.5% |
| Teachers (FTE) | 254,558 | 369,689 | +45.2% |
| Professional support (FTE) | 33,670 | 82,751 | +145.8% |
| Campus administrators (FTE) | 12,287 | 25,688 | +109.1% |
| Central administrators (FTE) | 4,139 | 9,554 | +130.8% |
| Students per administrator | 237 | 157 | −34% |
| Real revenue per student (2004–05 → 2024–25) | $13,839 | $15,255 | +10% |
| Real avg. teacher pay (1997–98 → 2024–25, 2024–25 $) | $65,881 | $63,751 | −3% |
| Teachers' base pay as share of payroll (2004–05 → 2024–25) | 47.5% | 42.0% | −5.5 pts |
Pay fell after inflation
If the money did not go into the classroom, it also did not go into pay. In 2024–25 dollars, average teacher pay went from $65,881 in 1997–98 to $63,751 in 2024–25, a 3% decline. Nominal teacher pay rose 90% over that span, and inflation absorbed all of it. Real pay fell for every group TEA reports: professional support down 5%, campus administrators down 13% and central administrators down 4%.
Source: TEA AEIS, Snapshot and TAPR (regular-duties average actual salaries); CPI-U adjusted.
Most of the drop is recent. Real teacher pay peaked at $70,519 in 2019–20, after the raises required by HB 3 (2019), and then fell 9.6% as inflation outpaced raises. Because headcount grew while average pay fell, every group's real base-pay bill grew more slowly than its headcount. Teachers' base salaries shrank from 47.5% of all district payroll in 2004–05 to 42.0% in 2024–25. Professional support rose from 9.0% to 11.2%. Administrators stayed a small slice, 5.6% to 6.1% for campus and central combined.
Two shocks: the 2011 cuts and the ESSER years
The clearest test of priorities came when funding moved sharply. In 2011 the Legislature cut about $5.4 billion from public education. In 2011–12, real state aid per student fell 11% and real total revenue per student fell 6.3%. Staff fell by 25,299 FTEs (−3.8%) even though enrollment grew by 65,735. Teachers fell 3.2% and aides 7.7%, while administrators fell 2.2%. It was the only real contraction in the series, and teachers and aides took most of it.
The federal pandemic relief funds (ESSER) worked in the opposite direction. Texas received about $19.2 billion. Federal revenue doubled from $7.0 billion in 2019–20 to $14.1 billion in 2021–22. From 2019–20 to 2023–24, enrollment rose 0.7% and teachers 3.2%, while administrators grew 16.5%, professional support 15.2% and aides 12.9%. That was the fastest growth in non-teaching staff in the whole series.
When the relief money ran out in 2024–25, staff fell 11,025 FTEs. Aides (−6,228) and teachers (−5,111) accounted for nearly all of it, while administrators were essentially flat (−83).
How Texas compares nationally
Texas is not an outlier. Nationally, from fall 2000 to fall 2022, enrollment rose 5.1% while administrators rose 43% and all staff 19% (NCES). Texas enrollment rose 35.9% and its administrators 89.1%. Measured against its own fast-growing enrollment, Texas grew staff more slowly than the nation did. US staff grew almost four times as fast as US enrollment, while Texas staff grew a little faster than its enrollment. In fall 2022, Texas had 7.2 students per staff FTE and teachers made up 48.6% of staff. The US figures were 7.3 and 47.5%.
Texas also spends less. Its current spending per pupil fell from 91% of the US level in 1999–2000 to 77% in 2020–21. In 2020–21 Texas spent $160 per pupil on general administration, 57% of the national $279, the widest gap of any function. It spent $647 per pupil on school administration, 79% of the US level.
Caveats and data gaps
- TEA's complete financial actuals start in 2004–05. Earlier reports show only budgeted general funds, so spending trends before then can't be compared directly.
- TEA reports spending by function and object, not by job title. Spending per staff group is therefore approximate, and pay bills can't be computed for aides or auxiliary staff because TEA doesn't publish their average salaries.
- Contracted and shared-services staff are excluded, so outsourcing can lower auxiliary counts without any real change.
- The 2018–19 category counts are estimates. Two one-year oddities, professional support in 2001–02 and a 14.5% jump in campus administrators in 2022–23, are left as published. Flat school-leadership spending that year suggests a coding change rather than a hiring wave.
- No Texas staffing series by category was found before 1986–87, so HB 72's immediate effect can't be measured. NCES and TEA categories don't map exactly.
- Inflation adjustments use CPI-U, a general price index. HB 2 (2025) money starts in 2025–26 and isn't yet in the data.
Conclusion
Over a generation, Texas schools have kept the number of teachers in line with enrollment. At the same time, they grew non-teaching staff much faster: professional support staff, administrators and, until recently, aides. Funding per student rose only modestly after inflation, and the added money went mainly into new positions rather than higher pay, so real salaries fell in every reported role. Funding shocks show a consistent pattern. Cuts fell mostly on teachers and aides, and one-time federal relief went mostly to support and administrative roles. Much of that growth reflects real mandates, such as special education, counseling and school safety. Still, the data raise a fair question for lawmakers and districts about how the next dollar is spent, including the new money under HB 2 (2025).
Sources
- AEIS state reports, 1990–91 to 2011–12 — Texas Education Agency
- TAPR (Texas Academic Performance Reports) — Texas Education Agency
- Snapshot: school district profiles — Texas Education Agency
- CCD State Nonfiscal Survey data files — NCES
- Digest Table 213.10: staff by category, 1949–50 to fall 2022 — NCES
- Digest Table 213.40: staff and teachers by state, fall 2012–2022 — NCES
- Digest Table 203.20: enrollment by state — NCES
- Digest Table 203.10: enrollment, national — NCES
- Back to the Staffing Surge (Scafidi, 2017) — EdChoice
- Texans Need More Education for the Money (2018) — Texas Public Policy Foundation
- A Survey of the Texas Reform Package: House Bill No. 72 — St. Mary's Law Journal
- HB 72 class-size requirement (ED310543) — ERIC
- 79th Legislature, 3rd called session: Summary of Enactments (2006 HB 1) — Texas Legislative Council
- Report examines how budget cuts affected Texas schools — Texas Tribune, Sep 2012
- HB 3 (86R) enrolled bill summary — Texas Legislature
- What happened to my share of the $11.6 billion? (HB 3) — Equity Center
- What You Need to Know About the ESSER Funding Cliff — IDRA
- ARP ESSER III Grant Program — Texas Education Agency
- PEIMS Financial Standard Reports (state actuals, 2004–05 to 2024–25) — Texas Education Agency
- 2024–25 Actual Financial Data, state total — Texas Education Agency
- Financial Accountability System Resource Guide (function codes) — Texas Education Agency
- FASRG Module 6: State Compensatory Education — Texas Education Agency
- CPI-U, not seasonally adjusted (CPIAUCNS) — FRED / BLS
- Digest Table 236.65: current spending per pupil by state — NCES
- Digest Table 236.75: spending per pupil by function and state, 2020–21 — NCES
- Digest Table 235.20: revenue by source and state, 2020–21 — NCES
- SB 7 (73rd Legislature, 1993), enrolled text — Texas Legislature
- HB 3 (86th Legislature, 2019), enrolled text — Texas Legislature
- HB 3 (88th Legislature, 2023), school safety, enrolled text — Texas Legislature
- Property Tax Cuts as Large as Texas (SB 2, 2023) — Texas Comptroller, Dec 2023
- The Property Tax Deal Explained (SB 2, 2023) — Texas House Legislative Study Group, Aug 2023
- Texas' new $8.5B school funding bill explained (HB 2, 2025) — Texas Tribune, Jun 2025
- HB 2 implementation: Teacher and Support Staff Retention Allotments — Texas Education Agency
- HB 2 (89th Legislature, 2025) enrolled bill summary — Texas Legislature
- ESSER Fund Allocation Procedure Overview — Texas Education Agency
- Foundation School Program (FSP) and Property Taxes — Legislative Budget Board, Feb 2025
- Special Education Allotment Advisory Committee recommendations — Texas Education Agency
- SB 160 (85th Legislature, 2017) bill history — Texas Legislature
- Thousands more Texas students receiving special education after cap lifted — Houston Public Media, Nov 2017