Texas Districts Outsourcing Struggling Schools to Avoid State Takeovers

Independent school districts are spending millions to partner with third-party operators in an effort to improve accountability scores and avoid state intervention.

Published on Feb. 19, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

Texas school districts are increasingly turning to "1882 turnaround partnerships" to outsource the operations of their failing campuses to third-party providers like the Colorado-based nonprofit Third Future Schools. In exchange for paying millions to these providers, districts can receive a two-year reprieve from state intervention and additional public education funds. However, questions remain about the long-term impact on student outcomes once the contracts end and the turnaround partners leave.

Why it matters

This trend highlights the growing pressure on Texas districts to improve accountability scores and avoid state takeovers, even if it means ceding local control and sending public education dollars to private entities. Critics argue these partnerships favor charter-like companies and further erode district-level public education, while proponents say it's a necessary step to avoid the even worse outcome of a state takeover.

The details

Under the 1882 turnaround partnerships, districts pay third-party providers like Third Future Schools an average of $375,000 per month to take over operations at struggling campuses. The providers bring in their own staff, implement their own curriculum, and extend the school day and year. While some districts have seen initial test score improvements, there are concerns about whether the gains are sustainable once the contracts end.

  • In 2025, the Wichita Falls ISD board unanimously voted to approve a three-year contract with Third Future Schools to take over Hirschi Middle School.
  • In 2023, Beaumont ISD hired Third Future to run two failing campuses, but ended the contract the following year over funding disagreements.

The players

Third Future Schools

A Colorado-based nonprofit that has become the largest provider of 1882 turnaround partnerships in Texas, running multiple campuses on behalf of struggling districts.

Mike Miles

The controversial former superintendent of Dallas ISD who founded Third Future Schools after resigning in 2015, and continues to consult for the organization while also serving as the state-appointed head of Houston ISD.

Wichita Falls ISD

A Texas school district that has contracted with Third Future Schools to take over operations at Hirschi Middle School and two additional elementary schools, in an effort to improve accountability scores and avoid state intervention.

Zeph Capo

The President of the Texas American Federation of Teachers, who argues that the 1882 turnaround program favors charter-like companies and further erodes district-level public education.

Michael Hinojosa

The former superintendent of Dallas ISD who now works as an education consultant, and questions whether the 1882 partnerships truly turn around schools or just temporarily inflate test scores.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“If you can't beat them, you need to join them in some type of way.”

— Donny Lee, Superintendent, Wichita Falls ISD (wfaa.com)

“What price do we pay for better test scores that frankly mean little to nothing? The means are not justified regardless of what the ends are. It's a big problem.”

— Zeph Capo, President, Texas American Federation of Teachers (wfaa.com)

“Short-term gain for long-term pain — that's not a good formula for anybody.”

— Michael Hinojosa, Former Superintendent, Dallas ISD (wfaa.com)

What’s next

The Wichita Falls ISD plans a tapered approach to gradually phase back in district control of the campuses managed by Third Future Schools at the conclusion of the three-year partnership.

The takeaway

The rise of 1882 turnaround partnerships highlights the difficult choices facing Texas districts as they struggle to improve accountability scores and avoid state takeovers, even if it means ceding local control and sending public education dollars to private entities. The long-term impact on student outcomes remains to be seen.