Texas State Entry for Professional Learning Providers
Help Texas address math backsliding in elementary school. This brief helps your organization decide whether Texas is the right market and how to enter with a clear strategy.
Roadmap for State Entry
Texas offers a rare opportunity to improve student outcomes at meaningful scale. As the second-largest education system in the country, success in this market can translate into impact for a large and influential student population. But scale in Texas is not simple. The market is shaped by assertive state policies, funding incentives, regional actors, and varied local conditions.
This brief explains the political, policy, and funding factors that shape instructional priorities and purchasing in Texas. It does not include district-by-district details. Instead, it gives you the state background you need to do that next layer of work: narrowing a list of districts and building an outreach plan that matches how decisions are made in Texas.
Why Texas Is an Assertive Environment
▾A state's role in shaping its educational agenda is typically defined by three areas: politics, policy, and funding. In states with assertive oversight, success depends on aligning to state priorities, because those signals shape what districts are allowed, encouraged, or funded to do.
Regarding instructional materials and professional learning, Texas is one of the most assertive states in the country. TEA sets the direction, and the state doesn't just recommend priorities — it pays for them in specific ways.
Providers face two foundational choices: Bluebonnet or not (TEA's state-created curriculum is expanding rapidly), and SAPL or not (most grant-funded PD dollars must be spent with State Approved Provider List organizations).
Bluebonnet Adoption: Reshaping the Texas Curriculum Market
▾Bluebonnet Learning K-5 and Secondary Mathematics is a full-subject, Tier-1 math program for grades K-8 and Algebra I, built from Eureka Math TEKS Edition by Great Minds. The state subsidizes up to $60/student plus $243M in implementation grants.
What 2025 Purchasing Data Shows
EdWeek Market Brief's analysis of Texas purchasing data shows the scale of the shift in one year:
- 1.1M+ Bluebonnet math student copies purchased for K-8 and Algebra I, enough to serve roughly 1 in 4 Texas students in grades K-9.
- 330K+ Bluebonnet ELA K-5 copies ordered, about 14% of the elementary ELA market in those grades.
- Rapid disruption of a market where new curriculum typically takes years to gain traction, with publishers now rethinking how they compete in Texas.
Share of Texas school systems purchasing Bluebonnet math products in 2025:
Of 1,207 total school systems. Districts can purchase multiple products, so shares are independent and do not sum to 100%.
(644 systems)
(590 systems)
(460 systems)
(363 systems)
Source: EdWeek Market Brief analysis of Texas purchasing data, 2025.
Expansion Ahead
The Bluebonnet catalog is still growing. The SBOE approved 19 new state-developed products in the 2025 adoption cycle, including Geometry, Algebra II, Spanish Math K-6, and Spanish Language Arts and Reading K-5. For 2026, TEA plans to submit Bluebonnet materials for advanced math in grades 6 and 7. Future cycles could add K-5 integrated content (reading, math, science, and social studies), ELA for grades 6-8, and pre-K programs in English and Spanish.
Where Adoption Is Uneven
The strongest uptake is in small and rural districts. Only about 1/3 of districts with 25K+ students have adopted. San Antonio ISD (44K students, 18 schools on the state watchlist) remains undecided. TEA champions Bluebonnet as free and TEKS-aligned; critics argue its content privileges Christianity in public schools. The SBOE approved ~4,200 corrections in February 2026 addressing errors, copyright concerns, and religious content. The controversy has also slowed momentum in other states (Florida and Alabama) that were looking to copy the model.
When working in Texas, it is safe to assume that districts are either implementing Bluebonnet, trying to adapt it, or defending a decision not to use it.
How Materials Adoption Works in Texas
▾The IMRA process (HB 1605, 2023) governs how Texas reviews instructional materials under a single SBOE-governed process. Reviews happen every 8–10 years. Districts can purchase SBOE-approved, IMRA-approved, or non-adopted materials at any time using their Instructional Materials and Technology Allotment (IMTA).
New for SY 2026-27: HB 100 prohibits districts from using SBOE-rejected materials. 35 materials were proposed for rejection in IMRA Cycle 2025. This centralizes content authority at the state level.
Five Essentials for State Entry
1. Make a decision around Bluebonnet and align your district strategy accordingly.
▾TEA's state-developed curriculum is expanding rapidly. Review TEA's guidelines and honestly assess where your offerings already meet expectations, what you would need to adapt, and whether that adaptation is worth pursuing. This decision shapes nearly everything else.
2. Decide whether to pursue State Approved Provider List status.
▾SAPL status determines whether districts can use grant dollars to purchase your services. Many state-funded PD opportunities (LASO, LIFT) are restricted to TEA-approved providers. Approval status is a significant barrier to entry and a meaningful competitive moat once achieved.
3. Align to what districts are actually buying.
▾Materials adoption is driven by strong financial incentives. IMRA and SBOE reviews strongly influence what districts choose. Providers gain traction when they support the materials districts are adopting and can clearly explain how their work improves student outcomes with those materials.
4. Approach ESC engagement strategically, not as a default.
▾Texas's 20 ESCs support 1,200+ districts. Many ESCs see third-party organizations as competitors. ESC quality and capacity vary widely.
5. Time entry to grants, approvals, and local budget windows.
▾LASO Grant Cycles: Gateway for most state-funded PL. Understanding when districts apply and when funds release shapes when outreach converts to contracts.
IMRA Review Cycles: Materials reviewed every 8–10 years. New adoption decisions create openings for implementation support.
SAPL Application Timelines: TEA is notoriously opaque. Build in significant lead time. Missing a cycle can mean waiting another year.
Biennial Budget Rhythm: Align outreach to when districts are making funding decisions, not after commitments have been made.
Should Your Organization Enter or Scale in Texas?
Walk through five strategic questions. Each choice reveals tailored guidance.
Will you align with Bluebonnet?
Will you pursue SAPL status?
How will you engage ESCs?
What is your district targeting strategy?
How will you position your offerings?
Student Outcomes & Demographics
Texas shows a familiar and urgent pattern: stronger performance in early grades that does not hold through middle school. Texas ranks 7th nationally for Grade 4 math on the 2024 NAEP but falls to 32nd by Grade 8. In reading, Texas performs below the national average at both grade levels.
Student Demographics
Texas's demographic profile creates specific demand for culturally responsive instruction, bilingual PD, and differentiated materials. Orange markers show the national average for comparison.
Key Outcome Metrics
▾| Metric | Value | Trend | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4th Grade Math (NAEP) | 43% | ↑ | Ranked 7th Nationally (2024) |
| 8th Grade Math (NAEP) | 24% | ↓ | Declined From 32%; Below National Avg |
| 4th Grade Reading (NAEP) | 28% | → | Below National Avg of 31% |
| 8th Grade Reading (NAEP) | 25% | ↓ | Ranked 37th Nationally (2024) |
| STAAR Pass Rate (Reading) | 47% | ↑ | Meets Grade Level, Post-Reform Baseline |
| HS Graduation Rate | 90.7% | ↑ | Above National Avg (4-Year Cohort) |
| AP Exam Pass Rate | 51% | ↑ | Top 10 Nationally (Score of 3+) |
| Annual Dropout Rate | 5.8% | → |
Graduation Rates by Subgroup
▾| Group | Rate | Note |
|---|---|---|
| All Students | 90.7% | 4-year cohort (Class of 2024) |
| White | 94.4% | |
| Hispanic | 89.3% | |
| African American | 86.9% | |
| Asian | 97.1% | |
| Economically Disadvantaged | 88.2% | |
| Special Education | 80.9% | Significant gap |
| Emergent Bilingual (Grades 9-12) | 85.1% | Significant gap |
2024 NAEP Performance Data
▾Texas vs. national proficiency rates. Charts show percentage at or above proficient.
Policy Landscape
Texas's policy environment is unusually active. The 89th Legislature significantly expanded state-level control over curriculum and materials decisions. The 90th Legislature convenes January 2027.
High-Priority Policies
Replaces STAAR with BOY/MOY/EOY assessments starting SY 2027-28 (pilot SY 2026-27). Only EOY counts for A-F accountability. District mock assessments prohibited. Assessment authority shifts from SBOE to TEA. Cost: ~$55M+ through 2027.
First comprehensive statewide math adoption since 2014. Covers Math K-12, ELAR K-6, SLAR K-5, Phonics K-3. Districts purchase in 2026, implement SY 2026-27. Creates near-term PD demand aligned to newly adopted curriculum.
HB 3 (2019) mandated Science of Reading. Texas Reading Academies require all K-3 teachers to complete 60 hours of training. Creates ongoing PL demand.
Mandates Math Academies for K-3 math teachers, principals, coaches, and interventionists. Pilot SY 2026-27. All covered educators must complete by SY 2030-31. Increases Early Education Allotment.
Active Policies
~700 districts adopted in 2025 (over half of Texas's 1,207 school systems). 1.1M+ math student copies and 330K+ ELA K-5 copies ordered. State subsidizes up to $60/student + $243M in grants. Catalog expanding to Geometry, Algebra II, Spanish Math, Spanish ELAR, and more through 2026.
LIFT: $235K–$1.5M/year per district; 70% must be used with a single approved provider. LASO Cycle 4: ~$500M; per-LEA awards $200K–$1.6M.
Requires 15–30 hours of tutoring per subject for students not passing STAAR in grades 3, 5, and 8 (max 4 students per group). Creates sustained demand for targeted supplemental instruction.
~400 campuses flagged under PEG for SY 2026-27 for chronic low performance. Houston ISD under TEA management through 2027. High-urgency, high-funded entry points for PD providers.
Education Savings Accounts created in 2023. Implementation ongoing. Creates risk and opportunity for PL providers targeting private/charter sectors.
Shifts library material authority to school boards. Creates parent-driven removal process. Bans "profane" and "indecent" content per FCC standards. Effective September 2025.
PD Mandates (Reading Academies & Math Academies)
▾| Mandate | Who | Requirements | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|
| Texas Reading Academies (HB 3, 2019) | All K-3 teachers (including special ed) and principals | 60 hours of structured literacy training aligned to Science of Reading | Ongoing; first-year educators must enroll during first year |
| Texas Math Academies (HB 2, 2025) | K-3 math teachers, principals, assistant principals, math coaches, interventionists | Mandatory math PD training | Pilot SY 2026-27; all covered educators by SY 2030-31 |
Both mandates require state-approved providers, creating a significant and sustained market for professional learning organizations with TEA approval status.
Recent Legislation (89th Legislature)
▾| Bill | Title | Status | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| HB 100 | Rejected Materials Ban | Enacted | Prohibits districts from using SBOE-rejected instructional materials. Takes effect SY 2026-27. |
| HB 2 | Math Academies Mandate | Enacted | Mandates Math Academies for K-3 educators by SY 2030-31. Increases Early Education Allotment. |
| HB 27 | Financial Literacy Grad Req. | Enacted | Requires at least one-half credit in personal financial literacy for graduation. |
| SB 24 | Social Studies TEKS | Enacted | Requires SBOE to adopt TEKS for grades 4-12 covering communist regimes and ideologies. |
| SB 13 | Library Material Restrictions | Enacted | Shifts library material authority to school boards. Creates parent-driven removal process. |
| HB 824 | Civics Instruction | Enacted | Adds civics instruction to required government curriculum for high school students. |
Key Leaders
▾| Name | Title | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Greg Abbott | Governor (R) | Sets education agenda; strong advocate for school choice and reading |
| Dan Patrick | Lt. Governor (R) | Controls Senate agenda; key ESA and reading legislation champion |
| Mike Morath | TEA Commissioner | Drives accountability and curriculum standards. Has significantly expanded Commissioner authority under HB 8. Former tech entrepreneur; GWU BBA; former Dallas ISD trustee. |
| Aaron Kinsey | SBOE Chair (R) | State Board of Education (15 elected members, 4-year terms). Oversees curriculum standards (TEKS) and manages Permanent School Fund. |
Funding Landscape
Texas per-pupil spending is ~$4,000 behind the national average ($10,200 vs. ~$14,300), making grant-funded programs disproportionately important as entry points. Districts rarely rely on a single funding source. They braid Title II, Comp Ed, local, and philanthropic dollars to sustain multi-year implementation.
Key Funding Streams
Procurement Calendar
Texas operates on a two-year (biennial) budget cycle. Align outreach to when districts are making funding decisions.
Key Philanthropy & Intermediaries
▾National: Gates Foundation (via Commit Partnership), Carnegie Corporation, Wallace Foundation
State: Charles Butt Foundation, Houston Endowment, Texas 2036, Raise Your Hand Texas (RYHT)
Regional Intermediaries: Commit Partnership (Dallas), Good Reason Houston, E3 Alliance (Austin), Holdsworth Center
Advocacy / Research: TASA, ATPE, IDRA, UT Dana Center, UT Meadows Center, Texans Care for Children
Watershed-Advisors.com