School Profile · Temecula
Citrus Springs Charter: No single number tells this school's story. Here's the honest picture.
Citrus Springs Charter posts 40% meeting the standard and 19.0% exceeding it, against 43% and 21.3% statewide. The gaps and the bright spots below are the real read.
27740 Jefferson Avenue, 92705 (opens in new tab)·Orange County Department of Education·Temecula·Grades K-12·Charter·2024–25 CAASPP·(951) 252-8800·Website
Charter school — publicly funded, independently operated, open enrollment via lottery. Learn more
Scope Score
45
🤝 Culture First · Developing
ranked #2,225 statewide · #7 of 14 in Orange County Department of Education
Citrus Springs Charter scores 45 of 100 on SchoolScope's Scope Score — the 61st percentile of 5,744 California elementary schools (CDE CAASPP 2025).
Measures test performance, attendance, and climate — not arts, community, or your kid. How we score →
Most rating sites would stop at “40% proficient” and call it done. Citrus Springs Charter deserves a closer read. It sits at the 61st percentile of 5,744 California elementary schools — but the ranking is the least interesting thing on this page.
The headline number: 7.0% chronic absenteeism — versus 17.9% statewide. Attendance is the quietest strong signal a school can post.
As a charter, Citrus Springs Charter enrolls by application, not address — the score reads the same, the enrollment path doesn't.
The story this school is actually telling
The school, grade by grade
ELA · CAASPP 2024–25Different students, same year — each bar is one grade's proficiency mix.
31%
20%
49%
Grade 3 · 51% proficient
21%
15%
64%
Grade 4 · 36% proficient
24%
38%
38%
Grade 5 · 62% proficient
The honest read: the share exceeding falls 6.5pp across grades; the floor rises 11.0pp. The state average rises 4.5pp over the same span. A school visit and conversation with teachers will tell you more than this number.
The 5 things our score weighs
Exceeded standard
19.0%
State 21.3%
2.3pp below state avg
Met or exceeded
40.5%
State 42.7%
2.2pp below state avg
Growth (G3→G5)
-2.5pp
State -2.9pp
Scores decline across grades
Chronic absenteeism
7.0%
State 17.9%
10.9pp below state avg
Suspension rate
0.4%
State 1.6%
1.3pp below state avg
Worth a school visit
Ask what the school is working on next. Strong numbers tell you where a school is, not where it's going.
Where the path goes
The path below follows attendance boundaries — scores shown for each next step.
Estimated K-12 Path
Estimated K-12 path based on district and proximity. Actual attendance zones may differ. Contact your school district for official feeder information.
Planning ahead? 5 licensed preschools near this school →
Your other options
Nearby Elementary Schools
3 within ~3 mi · avg 54
Ysabel Barnett Elementary
Temecula Valley Unified · 2.1 mi
Solid
56/100
Daniel N. Buchanan Elementary
Murrieta Valley Unified · 2.6 mi
Solid
53/100
Temecula International Academy
Riverside County Office of Education · 3 mi
Solid
53/100
Nearby Middle Schools
2 within ~3 mi · avg 45
James L. Day Middle
Temecula Valley Unified · 1.3 mi
Solid
53/100
Margarita Middle
Temecula Valley Unified · 1.8 mi
Developing
36/100
Private alternatives nearby
Private schools within ~10 miles. These schools do not participate in state testing and cannot be scored or ranked.
The community around it
Community Profile
Context — not part of the Scope ScoreStudent demographics
Hispanic65.8%
White18.7%
Asian4.0%
Black3.6%
Other8.0%
GenderFemale 50.5%Male 49.5%
Resources & Access
Transitional Kindergarten
TK status unconfirmed
No TK enrollment is on file with the state for this school — that isn't the same as “no TK.” Confirm directly with the district.
Per-Pupil Spending
$70,768
CA avg: $14,815 · District avg · NCES F-33
Teacher Salary Range
$52,803 – $136,867
District schedule · CA median ~$98K
At Citrus Springs Charter in Temecula, 37.6% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 14.5% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. Citrus Springs Charter outperforms its district average for low-income students by 23.1 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (24.6% Math proficient); Hispanic students (40.9% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 10.9 percentage points for low-income students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 141 students tested.
Equity Gaps
ELA · Low-Income−10.9pp
39.1% vs 50.0% overall · n=141
3 more gaps by subject
ELA Exceeded · Hispanic−8.0pp
15.7% vs 23.7% overall · n=149
Math · Hispanic−9.8pp
22.6% vs 32.4% overall · n=150
Math Exceeded · Low-Income−5.3pp
11.8% vs 17.0% overall · n=142
Subgroups with fewer than 15 students are excluded for privacy. Gaps of less than 3 percentage points are not shown.
Subgroup Proficiency
Low-Income142 tested
ELA 37.6%·Math 24.6%· +23.1pp vs district
Hispanic150 tested
ELA 40.9%·Math 22.7%· +26.8pp vs district
Weighted average across tested grades. Subgroups with fewer than 15 students excluded. Data: CDE CAASPP 2024-25.
Subgroup Growth by Grade
Change in proficiency from lowest tested grade. Shows which groups are gaining ground.
Low-income student ELA proficiency rises by 17.5pp from grade 3 to grade 5 at this school.
Subgroups with fewer than 10 tested students per grade are not shown.
Funding Breakdown
Neighborhood Context
Median Income
$129K
$44K above CA median
Median Home Value
$1.20M
$544K above CA median
Bachelor's+
47%
12pp above CA avg
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2024) · ZIP-level
Whole Child
Teacher experience, college/career readiness, and more. Context only — never part of the Scope Score.
Teacher Experience
12.5 years avg experience
62 teachers · 3% second-year
Teacher Credentials
88% fully credentialed
Source: CDE SARC, 2024-25
Community Profile provides context about who attends this school and the resources available. These factors are never part of the Scope Score. Learn why →
For the data nerdsEvery number on this page
Score factors, grade-level breakdowns, subgroup proficiency, and peer comparisons.
For the data nerds
Every number on this page
Score factors, grade-level breakdowns, subgroup proficiency, and peer comparisons.
01Score factorsWeighted composite · 2024–25
Exceeded standard · 43%
19.0%
↓ vs CA 21.3% · 48th pctile
Met or exceeded · 22%
40.5%
↓ vs CA 42.7% · 48th pctile
Growth (G3→G5) · 15%
-2.5pp
↑ vs CA -2.9pp · 53th pctile
Chronic absenteeism · 10%
7.0%
↑ vs CA 17.9% · 68th pctile
Suspension rate · 5%
0.4%
↑ vs CA 1.6% · 61th pctile
02By grade & subgroupCAASPP 2024–25 · % of tested students
| ELA | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 49 | 31% | 20% | 22% | 27% | 51% | +8 |
| Grade 4 | 47 | 21% | 15% | 32% | 32% | 36% | −9 |
| Grade 5 | 29 | 24% | 38% | 21% | 17% | 62% | +14 |
| Grade 6 | 38 | 13% | 37% | 26% | 24% | 50% | +3 |
| Grade 7 | 32 | 19% | 28% | 28% | 25% | 47% | −1 |
| Grade 8 | 29 | 34% | 21% | 17% | 28% | 55% | +9 |
| Grade 11 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Math | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 49 | 16% | 20% | 27% | 37% | 37% | −9 |
| Grade 4 | 47 | 15% | 21% | 26% | 38% | 36% | −5 |
| Grade 5 | 29 | 7% | 14% | 52% | 28% | 21% | −15 |
| Grade 6 | 38 | 16% | 13% | 21% | 50% | 29% | −6 |
| Grade 7 | 32 | 22% | 13% | 22% | 44% | 34% | +0 |
| Grade 8 | 30 | 27% | 10% | 23% | 40% | 37% | +4 |
| Grade 11 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Science (CAST) | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 5/8/11 | 66 | 17% | 18% | 52% | 14% |
CAST is tested in grades 5, 8, and once in high school — not annually. Not part of the Scope Score.
| Subgroup · ELA | Tested | MET+ | vs district | vs CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | 141 | 37.6% | +23 | −1 |
| Hispanic/Latino | 149 | 40.9% | +27 | +2 |
03Peer comparison · nearest elementary schoolssorted by Scope Score
| School | Dist | Scope | EXC | MET+ | Growth | Susp |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Citrus Springs Charter ← | — | 45 | 19.0% | 40.5% | −2.5 | 0.4% |
| Ysabel Barnett Elementary | 2.1 mi | 56 | 33.0% | 61.7% | −3.0 | 2.3% |
| Daniel N. Buchanan Elementary | 2.6 mi | 53 | 26.0% | 54.0% | +5.0 | 2.2% |
| Temecula International Academy | 3 mi | 53 | 28.6% | 59.2% | +22.3 | 0.2% |
| California average | — | 43 | 21.3% | 42.7% | −2.9 | 1.6% |
04More measurescontext · not all part of the Scope Score
Scope Score history
2019 · 2022 · 2023 · 2024 · 2025 · no testing 2020–21 (COVID) · rank #1494 → #1763 → #2453 → #3155 → #2225
What we can't show
- — Scored here as an elementary school — other grade spans appear in the data appendix.
Source: CA Dept. of Education · CAASPP 2024–25 · n=5,744 elementary schools · Data updated 2026-07-03methodology · data updates · CSV · report issue
Frequently asked questions
Is Citrus Springs Charter a good elementary school?
Citrus Springs Charter has a Scope Score of 45 out of 100, placing it in the 61st percentile of California elementary schools and ranked #2,225 statewide. 19.0% of students exceeded the state standard on the 2025 CAASPP assessment, which is 2.3 percentage points below the California average of 21.3%. The Scope Score weights six dimensions for elementary schools: exceeded standard (43%), met or exceeded (22%), grade 3-to-5 growth (15%), chronic absenteeism (10%), ELPAC English Learner proficiency (5%), and suspension rate (5%). Data source: California Department of Education CAASPP 2025, analyzed by SchoolScope.
What are Citrus Springs Charter's CAASPP test scores?
On the 2025 CAASPP Smarter Balanced Assessment, 40.5% of students at Citrus Springs Charter met or exceeded the state standard in ELA and Math combined, and 19.0% exceeded it. The gap between those numbers matters: 21.4% of students are at the proficiency floor, while 19.0% pushed past it. Most rating sites report only the combined "proficient" number. SchoolScope surfaces the exceeded-vs-met split because it reveals whether a school's curriculum challenges students beyond minimum proficiency or paces toward it. 250 student-subject combinations were assessed.
How does Citrus Springs Charter rank in California?
Citrus Springs Charter ranks #2,225 among California elementary schools by Scope Score, placing it in the 61st percentile. This ranking is based on a weighted composite of 2025 CAASPP test performance (exceeded and met rates), grade-level growth (Grade 3 to grade 5 growth), chronic absenteeism, and suspension rate. Unlike single-number ratings, the Scope Score shows what drives the ranking so parents can decide what matters most to their family. See full methodology.
Is Citrus Springs Charter getting better or worse?
Based on 2025 CAASPP data, proficiency at Citrus Springs Charter decreases by 2.5 percentage points from Grade 3 to grade 5 growth. This downward pattern doesn't necessarily mean the school is failing — it can reflect cohort differences, demographic shifts, or curriculum changes. A campus visit and conversation with teachers can reveal what the numbers can't. Growth trajectory is weighted at 15% in the elementary Scope Score because it measures what the school does, not just who walks in the door.
What is the attendance and school culture like at Citrus Springs Charter?
7.0% of students at Citrus Springs Charter are chronically absent (missing 10% or more of school days), which is better than the California average of 17.9%. The suspension rate is 0.4%, indicating a low-discipline-incident environment. SchoolScope includes these culture metrics in the Scope Score because they reflect day-to-day school experience in ways test scores alone cannot.
How does Citrus Springs Charter compare to other schools in Temecula?
Citrus Springs Charter scores 45/100 (61st percentile) among California elementary schools. To compare with nearby schools, SchoolScope shows the same metrics side by side: exceeded rate, proficiency, growth trajectory, and school culture indicators. Use the schools in Temecula page or the map view to compare all elementary schools nearby.
How does Citrus Springs Charter serve low-income and underrepresented students?
At Citrus Springs Charter in Temecula, 37.6% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 14.5% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. Citrus Springs Charter outperforms its district average for low-income students by 23.1 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (24.6% Math proficient); Hispanic students (40.9% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 10.9 percentage points for low-income students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 141 students tested. SchoolScope shows disaggregated test scores by demographic subgroup so you can see how a school performs for your child's specific group — not just the school-wide average. Subgroup data is context, not part of the Scope Score: we don't penalize schools for who they serve. See our equity approach.