Most Texas schools are doing what the state asks to keep strangers out, but a new safety audit shows troubling weak spots that are hard to ignore. A fresh report from the Texas Education Agency, released May 22, 2026, says campuses largely cleared basic access-control checks, yet a significant minority had problems the state now expects districts to fix.
The statewide review highlights strong overall compliance while calling out familiar weak links: exterior doors, windows, and routine building upkeep. State officials say those recurring issues need timely repairs and closer monitoring, not just more paperwork.
According to the Texas Education Agency, 86.83% of audited campuses had no findings across Phase 1, Phase 2, and the weekly door-log review, which leaves 13.17% with at least one finding. Phase 2, the exterior door checks, generated most of the citations and posted the lowest compliance rate at about 90.10%.
Inspectors were also able to get into buildings without authorization in 2.46% of Phase 1 checks. They most often slipped in through secondary entrances, and when they did get in, the median time to entry was about two minutes.
John Scott, chief of school safety and security at the Texas Education Agency, told ABC13 Houston that the overall picture is still encouraging. “What we found in the report is that schools are doing very well,” he said, describing unannounced inspections that test whether visitors are funneled through a single controlled entry and whether exterior doors stay locked. Inspectors also review how front offices check identification and whether campuses are keeping up with required door-inspection logs.
Where Auditors Say Campuses Slipped
The report points to a cluster of persistent problems that, taken together, can make it easier for someone to get inside. According to the Texas Education Agency, inspectors repeatedly flagged exterior door hardware and maintenance issues, unreinforced exterior windows, uneven threat-assessment training, and lapses in facility upkeep and reporting procedures.
State auditors also found that 55.69% of audited campuses did not operate under a district-level directive requiring classroom doors to remain closed and locked. On top of that, roughly 19.20% of systems were not documenting the twice-yearly maintenance checks that state rules require.
For every finding, TEA instructs districts to submit a corrective action plan and finish repairs within 60 calendar days. In other words, once a problem is identified, the clock starts ticking.
What State Law Lets TEA Do
Texas law does not just ask districts to cooperate; it gives the state some teeth when they do not. Statute requires the Texas Education Agency to publish de-identified results from these audits and gives the commissioner power to step in if a district drags its feet.
Under Texas Education Code §37.1085, the commissioner may appoint a conservator if a district fails to submit to required monitoring, ignores school safety requirements, or does not address audit findings in a timely way.
How Districts Handle Bad News
The annual report does not name names. It is de-identified, which means families cannot tell from the statewide document whether their child’s campus had a problem, a fact noted by ABC13 Houston. Instead, local school boards are the ones who see the detailed results and are required to review audits and post corrective plans.
One example shows how that can play out. In recently approved minutes, Canutillo ISD records an update on a TEA Intruder Detection Audit, noting that findings will be shared with the district School Safety and Security Committee and that a plan of action is in place.
State officials say TEA will ramp up technical assistance and closer monitoring for campuses that show repeat problems. At the Capitol, lawmakers have moved to boost school safety funding and tighten rules to support that work. Districts can tap state tools and guidance to track threat assessments and compliance, and the legislative record documents billions in contingent school safety appropriations in recent budget debates, according to the legislative record.
