Math
39%Grades 3 & 5 · Proficient or Advanced
Public elementary school
Clinton, William Jefferson
The score is middle of the pack. The trajectory isn't.
41% of tested students are Proficient or Advanced in English and 39% in math. Explore the evidence alongside the opportunities your child would use.
SchoolScope archetype
On the Rise
What this means for your family
Ask how many years the improvement has held, not just the latest one — one strong cohort and a real turnaround can look identical in a single year of data.
How archetypes are assigned →Data sources · Methodology · State tests: 2025
Contact
Phone(562) 630-7912
DistrictCompton Unified
PrincipalSusana Miranda
GradesPre-K-8
Enrollment692 students
English
41%Grades 3 & 5 · Proficient or Advanced
Students
692Total enrollment
Chronic absence
5%Students absent 10% or more of school days
What are you trying to decide?
The overall score is a starting point.
Look at subject results, trends and student groups, then consider the opportunities your child would use.
View school performance →Start with your child’s daily experience.
Explore teaching, coursework and student-group results. A schoolwide average cannot predict an individual experience.
Explore student experience →Confirm the enrollment route.
Check the address, grade and enrollment requirements directly with the district or school.
Check attendance and enrollment →Compare the options you can access.
Use comparable evidence alongside entry requirements, cost and location.
Compare nearby schools →Academic performance
What do the results tell us?
2025 results · Grades 3 & 5 · weighted by students tested within each subject.
Proficient or Advanced combines Levels 3 and 4, formerly Standard Met and Standard Exceeded. California changed the names for 2025–26; the cut scores did not. About the labels →
Share at Proficient or Advanced
● Math┄ English
Gaps in the lines mark years without annual results.
Exact annual results
| Year | Math | English |
|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 37% | 40% |
| 2022 | 30% | 41% |
| 2023 | 26% | 33% |
| 2024 | 38% | 38% |
| 2025 | 39% | 41% |
Each year describes that year’s tested students. Changes between years do not follow the same children over time. Cohort-growth evidence, when available, is labeled separately below.
How achievement is distributed
AdvancedStandard Exceeded
14%ProficientStandard Met
25%DevelopingStandard Nearly Met
23%MinimalStandard Not Met
38%AdvancedStandard Exceeded
21%ProficientStandard Met
20%DevelopingStandard Nearly Met
25%MinimalStandard Not Met
34%Achievement-level percentages are not percentiles. “Developing” here is a test achievement level, separate from the SchoolScope performance band with the same name.
Annual results and the full academic record
Is it getting better · CAASPP 2019 to 2025
Climbed from the 56th to the 66th percentile since 2019 — past roughly 500 elementary schools.
Most rating sites would stop at “47% proficient” and call it done. Clinton, William Jefferson deserves a closer read. Four in five of its students qualify for free or reduced lunch (California: 64%) — and reading the numbers without that context misreads the school.
Clinton, William Jefferson's low-income kids hit 57.5% proficiency in ELA — a number the same group reaches at 38.2% statewide. If you're trying to read past zip-code-driven test scores, that's the signal worth weighing.
461 tested · 3 of 3 grades published · cohort of 97 tracked
Clinton, William Jefferson scores 43 of 100 on SchoolScope's Scope Score — the 66th percentile of 5,721 California elementary schools (CDE CAASPP 2025).
The pandemic drop is behind this school: 47% of students meet the standard today, above the 43% who did in 2019.
Percentile among 5,721 elementary schools statewide
ELABlue(Increased Significantly)MathGreen(Increased)
ShowHide the by-grade tables, year by year
ELA — % met or exceeded, by grade
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 38% | 41% | 29% | 33% | 42% |
| Grade 4 | 50% | 42% | 46% | 47% | 56% |
| Grade 5 | 42% | 41% | 38% | 43% | 40% |
| Grade 6 | 57% | 63% | 66% | 72% | 76% |
| Grade 7 | 74% | 85% | 61% | 66% | 78% |
| Grade 8 | 55% | 67% | 75% | 62% | 73% |
Math — % met or exceeded, by grade
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 40% | 39% | 32% | 41% | 47% |
| Grade 4 | 50% | 26% | 44% | 45% | 65% |
| Grade 5 | 35% | 21% | 20% | 35% | 32% |
| Grade 6 | 48% | 49% | 61% | 69% | 52% |
| Grade 7 | 67% | 53% | 45% | 40% | 48% |
| Grade 8 | 43% | 46% | 52% | 41% | 71% |
Where students land · CAASPP 2024–25
Two in five of students here meet the standard. One in five clear it by a lot.
ELA58% met or exceeded
Exceeded 27%Met 31%Nearly Met 21%Not Met 21%
Math51% met or exceeded
Exceeded 23%Met 28%Nearly Met 22%Not Met 26%
Exceeded Met Nearly Met Not Met
California elementary schools · average21% exceeded · 43% met or exceeded
This school against the California average
2019–2025 trend · CDE CAASPP
| Scope | % Exceeded | % Met+ | Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5) | Absence | Suspension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This school | 43 | 23% | 47% | Above avg · p72 | 4.6% | 2.3% |
| CA average · Elementary School | 39 | 21% | 43% | Average · p50 | 17.9% | 1.6% |
This schoolCA avg
Scope4339
% Exceeded23%21%
% Met+47%43%
Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5)Above avg · p72Average · p50
Absence4.6%17.9%
Suspension2.3%1.6%
California’s growth results and student groups
State growth model · CDE growth model 2024–25
Our growth read and California's own model disagree here — the 72nd percentile against the state's 91st.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
California runs its own growth model, following individual children in grades 4 through 8 rather than comparing school-wide averages the way we do — and here the two measures disagree. Ours puts this school around the 72nd percentile of California elementary schools; the state's puts it around the 91st in reading and math together — a better read than ours. We are not going to pretend one of those is the answer. Neither measure sees an individual child's classroom, and a disagreement this size is worth asking the principal about directly.
— pts vs expected is scale-score points above or below what California's model predicted for these same children from their own prior-year scores. It is not a percentage and not a percent of anything. A typical California elementary school lands at +2 in reading, and the middle half of them fall between −5 and +9 — the spread is wide, so read the rank, not the sign. CDE blends two consecutive years into each published figure, so adjacent years share input data and no year-over-year trend can honestly be drawn from them. It covers grades 4-8 only, and it is not part of the Scope Score — we assessed it and left it out: it tracks school demographics roughly three times as strongly as our own growth measure does, and one published year is not enough to test how stable it is.
The returning cohort, two years on
ELA · 2023 · Grade 3
12%
exceeded standard · 29% met or exceeded
ELA · 2025 · Grade 5
23%
exceeded standard · 40% met or exceeded
n = 97
returning cohort
returning cohort
Percent exceeded, ELA only. SchoolScope's scored growth measure uses a different metric — mean scale-score change across ELA and Math; California's own matched-student model is below.
Both measures, each ranked in its own field
Our growth measurereturning cohort, G3→G5SchoolScope growth measure: 72nd percentile among California elementary schools.72nd pctile
State model · readingmatched students, grades 4-8California growth model, reading: +20 scale-score points versus the state's expectation, 95th percentile of 7,519 reported schools.95th pctile · +20 pts
State model · mathmatched students, grades 4-8California growth model, math: +15 scale-score points versus the state's expectation, 86th percentile of 7,518 reported schools.86th pctile · +15 pts
this school| the tick is the middle of the California field
Students & opportunity
Who shares in the school’s results?
Who it works for · CAASPP 2024–25
Low-income students here meet the ELA standard ahead of the same group statewide.
57.5% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard — versus 38.2% for the same group statewide. This comparison does not tell us what caused the difference.
Met or exceeded · reading and math combined
All students at this school: 55% met or exceeded
All StudentsAll Students: this school 55%, district —, state 43%55%
Hispanic/LatinoHispanic/Latino: this school 56%, district 47%, state 32%56% · +1 vs school
Socioeconomically DisadvantagedSocioeconomically Disadvantaged: this school 54%, district 46%, state 32%54% · −1 vs school
FemaleFemale: this school 56%, district 47%, state 44%56% · +2 vs school
MaleMale: this school 53%, district 45%, state 42%53% · −2 vs school
English LearnersEnglish Learners: this school 22%, district 18%, state 11%22% · −33 vs school
Students with DisabilitiesStudents with Disabilities: this school 18%, district 17%, state 15%18% · −36 vs school
Black/African AmericanBlack/African American: too few students to report‹11
WhiteWhite: too few students to report‹11
HomelessHomeless: too few students to report‹11
this school district, same group California, same group
ShowHide Student-group results by grade
Student-group results by grade
Results compare different grade groups in the same year, relative to the lowest tested grade. They do not track the same children over time. Groups with fewer than 10 tested students per grade are not shown.
Low-income student ELA proficiency falls by 4.1pp from grade 3 to grade 5 at this school. District average: -6.6pp.
ShowHide California's growth model by student group
The state's growth model, by student group
California follows these children individually and predicts each one's score from their own prior year. Each row is read against the same group at a typical California elementary school — not against zero, and not against this school's all-students figure, because the state's expectation already differs by group.
Reading
Hispanic or Latino students355 studentsHispanic or Latino students, reading: +20 scale-score points versus expectation, against +1 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 355 students.+20 pts · +19 vs typical
Low-income students345 studentsLow-income students, reading: +18 scale-score points versus expectation, against 0 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 345 students.+18 pts · +18 vs typical
English Learner156 studentsEnglish Learner, reading: +13 scale-score points versus expectation, against −2 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 156 students.+13 pts · +15 vs typical
English Only139 studentsEnglish Only, reading: +26 scale-score points versus expectation, against +3 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 139 students.+26 pts · +23 vs typical
English learners only78 studentsEnglish learners only, reading: −3 scale-score points versus expectation, against −11 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 78 students.−3 pts · +8 vs typical
Math
Hispanic or Latino students353 studentsHispanic or Latino students, math: +14 scale-score points versus expectation, against −1 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 353 students.+14 pts · +15 vs typical
Low-income students343 studentsLow-income students, math: +13 scale-score points versus expectation, against −1 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 343 students.+13 pts · +14 vs typical
English Learner156 studentsEnglish Learner, math: +6 scale-score points versus expectation, against +2 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 156 students.+6 pts · +4 vs typical
English Only137 studentsEnglish Only, math: +19 scale-score points versus expectation, against +1 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 137 students.+19 pts · +18 vs typical
English learners only78 studentsEnglish learners only, math: −10 scale-score points versus expectation, against −2 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 78 students.−10 pts · −8 vs typical
this school typical California elementary school, same group| the centre tick is 0 = as predicted
— 2 more groups are reported here with between 11 and 29 students. We hold those back on purpose: at that size the figure swings about 17 points on its own, and a quarter of such groups land past the state's top or bottom cut point by chance alone. They are listed with their student counts in the data appendix. — A group not listed at all had fewer than 11 students with a growth score, so California published nothing for it here. That is a privacy protection, not a judgment about those students. — Context only. None of this enters the Scope Score.
The daily experience
What is it like to be a student here?
Students per teacher
Student–teacher ratio is a schoolwide staffing measure, not an average class size.
Teacher experience
Average teacher experience in the published staffing record. It does not measure individual teacher effectiveness.
Chronically absent
The share of students absent for at least 10% of their enrolled school days. Attendance reflects both school and out-of-school circumstances.
The people teaching · CDE staffing 2024–25
About 26 students for every teacher here.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
Students per teacher26 · district 25
Teaching staff28 teachers
Avg. experience15.1 years
Fully credentialed97%
First-year teachers7%
PrincipalSusana Miranda
ShowHide what the district pays
Teacher salary schedule$52,034 – $117,259
Principal salary$153,629 – $173,397
Superintendent salary$319,400
Pay is set by the district, not the school.
Attendance & discipline · 2024–25
Kids here show up more, and get suspended more, than the state average.
Chronic absenteeismChronic absenteeism: this school 4.6%, district 12.9%, state 17.9%4.6% · −13.2pp vs state
Suspension rateSuspension rate: this school 2.3%, district —, state 1.6%2.3% · +0.6pp vs state
This schoolDistrictCalifornia
ShowHide attendance by student group and by grade
Chronic absenteeism by grade band
Grades 4–62.2%
Grades 7–80.0%
TK/K9.7%
Resources & neighborhood
What sits behind the school experience?
Explore school spending and the district budget
What gets spent · FY 2024–25
It spends $25,412 per student, more than the California average.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
$1,097 per student arrives as federal Title funding — a measure of concentrated need, not school quality.
The district's current expense of education per student, from CDE's annual SACS filing — the freshest district spending figure the state publishes.
Per-pupil spendingPer-pupil spending: $25,412, CA average $14,491$25,412 · spent at this school
Federal share$1,097 per student
District current expense · FY 2024–25$24,278 per student
This schoolDistrictCalifornia
Where the district's dollars go · FY 2024–25 · CDE SACS
Instruction 61%Instruction support 10%Student services 7%Administration 9%Buildings & maintenance 13%Other 1%
District-level, from the district's own SACS general-ledger filing — school-by-school breakdowns aren't published by the state.
ShowHide the district's spending year by year
district detail, 2016–2020 — the newest published
2020$15,556 per pupil
2019$15,360 per pupil
2018$15,206 per pupil
2017$13,338 per pupil
2016$12,258 per pupil
Source: NCES F-33 · Full district breakdown →
The neighborhood · ACS 2024
Four in five of students here qualify for free or reduced lunch, versus three in five statewide.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
Worth knowing
On the state's science test (CAST), 24% met or exceeded the standard — science is tested in grades 5 and 8 and once in high school, and it never enters the Scope Score.
Hispanic or Latino95.4% · district 80.1% · CA 56.1%
White0.6% · district 0.3% · CA 19.9%
Black3.9% · district 18.0% · CA 4.8%
Other0.1% · district 1.5% · CA 9.0%
Free or reduced lunch88.7% · CA 64%
Median income$73K · CA $85K
Median home value$575K · CA $659K
Bachelor's degree+8% · CA 35%
ZIP population50,659
Median age34 years
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2024) · ZIP-level
Culture & philosophy
What is the school’s approach?
School-stated approach · questions for your visit
Look beyond the brochure
A source-reviewed culture summary is not available for this profile yet. Ask how teaching, student support and family communication work day to day.
Read the school’s own website ↗Family voices
What would you want another family to know about the daily experience here?
Ask a current family: “When your child needs help, how does the school respond?”
Educator voices
What should families understand about teaching, support and the school community?
Ask an educator: “How do you adapt a typical day for children with different needs?”
Compare nearby schools
What are the alternatives?
Compare schools serving the same grade stage. Private schools have no comparable state-test score.
2025 · elementary schools · combined reading and math measures. Percentiles compare schools within their enrollment group.
No nearby schools in this category are listed. The school being viewed stays visible for reference.
| School | Type | Performance band | Advanced | Proficient or Advanced | Distance | Select |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinton, William Jefferson | Public | Solid | 23% | 47% | School being viewed | |
| Foster Elementary | Public | Strong | 36% | 65% | 1.4 mi | |
| Mayo Elementary | Public | Strong | 22% | 45% | 1.8 mi | |
| Kelly Elementary | Public | Solid | 23% | 45% | 1.0 mi |
More nearby public and private options
Your other options
Your other options
Nearby public schools across grade levels, plus private options within 10 miles.
Private schools do not receive a Scope Score or statewide ranking on SchoolScope.
20 private schools within 10 miles
Not scored
What should I check before applying?
- District public
- Confirm the attendance boundary and any permit options.
- Charter
- Check applications, priorities and deadlines with each school.
- Private
- Confirm admission requirements, tuition and financial aid.
Moving & enrollment
Which schools could serve my child?
Check your address with the district
School location and nearby schools do not establish attendance eligibility. Confirm boundaries and permit requirements with Compton Unified.
District information →School website →Schools across the K–12 journey
Elementary · K–5
Middle · 6–8
High school · 9–12
The road from this school ends at Dominguez High, which sent 26 graduates to UC campuses last fall and teaches 22 AP subjects. Those numbers describe past cohorts — a child starting here today would reach Dominguez High around 2035, and 10 years is a long time for a school to hold still, and by the state's 2023 count 54% of Dominguez High's graduates enrolled in college somewhere, UC or not.
26 UC enrollees (fall 2025) · 22 AP subjects taught → full record on Dominguez High's page
Source: UC & College Board
Source: proximity. Schools are grouped by grade stage. Nearby schools are not confirmed feeder links or address assignments. Verify the current path and eligibility with the district.
Plan your next step
What should I do next?
Worth a school visit
Ask what changed — new curriculum, new principal, new program. Momentum has a cause, and a visit will find it.
- Ask what changes between grade 3 and grade 5 here, and who teaches the older kids.
- Ask whether extra support — tutoring, counseling, small groups — reaches kids across income lines, not just the students already ahead.
- Ask whether the tour can step into a working classroom — watch how the teacher handles a student who's stuck.
- Ask to tour while school's in session, and notice how hallways and transitions feel — culture shows up between classes, not just in them.
- Ask how the school communicates with families when a child starts to struggle.
- Ask what a typical day looks like for a new student in the first few weeks.
Questions
Frequently asked questions
Is Clinton, William Jefferson a good elementary school?
Clinton, William Jefferson has a Scope Score of 43 out of 100, placing it in the 66th percentile of California elementary schools and ranked #1,925 statewide. 22.6% of students exceeded the state standard on the 2025 CAASPP assessment, which is near the California average of 21.4%. The Scope Score weights 6 dimensions for elementary schools: exceeded standard (42%), met or exceeded (proficient) (23%), grade 3-to-5 growth (20%), chronic absenteeism (5%), suspension rate (5%), and ELPAC English Learner proficiency (5%). Data source: California Department of Education CAASPP 2025, analyzed by SchoolScope.
What are Clinton, William Jefferson's CAASPP test scores?
On the 2025 CAASPP Smarter Balanced Assessment, 47.1% of students at Clinton, William Jefferson met or exceeded the state standard in ELA and Math combined, and 22.6% exceeded it. The gap between those numbers matters: 24.5% of students are at the proficiency floor, while 22.6% went beyond it. Most rating sites report only the combined "proficient" number. SchoolScope surfaces the exceeded-vs-met split because it shows how many students go beyond the standard rather than only meeting it. 550 student-subject combinations were assessed.
How does Clinton, William Jefferson rank in California?
Clinton, William Jefferson ranks #1,925 among California elementary schools by Scope Score, placing it in the 66th percentile. This ranking is based on a weighted composite of 2025 CAASPP test performance (exceeded and met rates), same-cohort growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5), 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 Clinton, William Jefferson getting better or worse?
SchoolScope follows the same cohort of students across grades rather than comparing two different grades in the same year. At Clinton, William Jefferson that cohort is 2023 G3 → 2025 G5, measured in SBAC scale-score points. Its gain ranks above avg among California elementary schools — roughly the 72nd percentile, ahead of the typical school at this level. Read the ranking, not the raw point gain: scale scores rise with age, so nearly every school posts a positive number and only the relative position tells you anything. Growth is weighted at 20% in the elementary Scope Score because it is the least demographically confounded signal available — it tracks change over time rather than the level students arrived at. See full methodology.
What is the attendance and school culture like at Clinton, William Jefferson?
4.6% of students at Clinton, William Jefferson are chronically absent (missing 10% or more of school days), which is better than the California average of 17.9%. The suspension rate is 2.3%. 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 Clinton, William Jefferson compare to other schools in Compton?
Clinton, William Jefferson scores 43/100 (66th 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. The school serves 692 students. Use the schools in Compton page or the map view to compare all elementary schools nearby.
How does Clinton, William Jefferson serve low-income and underrepresented students?
At Clinton, William Jefferson in Compton, 57.5% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 50.6% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. Clinton, William Jefferson outperforms its district average for low-income students by 6.9 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (50.7% Math proficient); Hispanic students (59.3% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 38.2 percentage points for english learner students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 433 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.
Use the published evidence to prepare questions, then verify fit and access with the school.
Behind the evidence
Inspect the full record
Public sources, visible methods and the underlying school record. Source years and limitations stay attached to the evidence.
How the Scope Score is calculated
On a narrow screen, scroll the table sideways to see the state comparison and weights.
What the score weighs · CAASPP 2024–25
Attendance carries this score. The test levels sit close to the state's.
4.6% chronic absenteeism — versus 17.9% statewide. Attendance is the quietest strong signal a school can post.
The school's returning cohort — mostly, not exactly, the same kids two years on — gained 80 scale-score points across the span. Almost every school gains points, so we rank the gain against every other California school in this level.
| What we weigh | Here | State | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exceeded standard | 22.6% | 21.4% | 42% |
| Met or exceeded | 47.1% | 42.7% | 23% |
| Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5) | Above avg | average | 20% |
| Chronic absenteeism | 4.6% | 17.9% | 5% |
| Suspension rate | 2.3% | 1.6% | 5% |
| EL proficiency (ELPAC) | 9.1% | 18.0% | 5% |
Source CAASPP 2025 · California Department of Education. Measures test performance, attendance, and climate — not arts, community, or your kid. How the score is built
A closer look at the evidence
Clinton, William Jefferson: reading the evidence
Clinton, William Jefferson sits mid-pack on raw proficiency — and it's climbing faster than most schools anywhere near it — and that holds when you follow the school's own returning cohort across grades.
Subject proficiency describes tested students, while graduation describes a graduating cohort. These figures are not successive stages followed by the same students.
Ask how many years the improvement has held, not just the latest one — one strong cohort and a real turnaround can look identical in a single year of data.
Explore the underlying data →Every number: score factors, grades, student groups and downloads
Every number · For the data nerds
Every number on this page
Score factors, grade-level breakdowns, subgroup proficiency, and nearest schools.
Clinton, William Jefferson is ranked #1,925 statewide · #10 of 25 in Compton Unified.
01Score factorsWeighted composite · 2024–25
| Factor | School | State | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exceeded standard | 22.6% | 21.4% | 42% |
| Met or exceeded | 47.1% | 42.7% | 23% |
| Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5) | Above avg | average | 20% |
| Chronic absenteeism | 4.6% | 17.9% | 5% |
| Suspension rate | 2.3% | 1.6% | 5% |
| EL proficiency (ELPAC) | 9.1% | 18.0% | 5% |
- Exceeded standard
- ↑ vs CA 21.4% · index 51 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint
- Met or exceeded
- ↑ vs CA 42.7% · index 53 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint
- Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5)
- ↑ vs CA average · 72nd pctile
- Chronic absenteeism
- ↑ vs CA 17.9% · index 72 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint · ▼ 18.3pp lower vs 2024
- Suspension rate
- ↓ vs CA 1.6% · index 45 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint · ▲ 1.8pp higher vs 2024
- EL proficiency (ELPAC)
- ↓ vs CA 18.0% · index 38 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint
02By grade & subgroupCAASPP 2024–25 · % of tested students
ShowHide table 02 — By grade & subgroup
| ELA | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 85 | 19% | 24% | 29% | 28% | 42% | −1 |
| Grade 4 | 94 | 32% | 24% | 14% | 30% | 56% | +12 |
| Grade 5 | 97 | 23% | 18% | 22% | 38% | 40% | −7 |
| Grade 6 | 66 | 36% | 39% | 20% | 5% | 76% | +30 |
| Grade 7 | 64 | 31% | 47% | 16% | 6% | 78% | +31 |
| Grade 8 | 55 | 20% | 53% | 24% | 4% | 73% | +27 |
| Math | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 85 | 16% | 31% | 25% | 28% | 47% | +2 |
| Grade 4 | 93 | 34% | 30% | 14% | 22% | 65% | +23 |
| Grade 5 | 96 | 11% | 21% | 21% | 47% | 32% | −3 |
| Grade 6 | 64 | 23% | 28% | 22% | 27% | 52% | +17 |
| Grade 7 | 64 | 23% | 25% | 31% | 20% | 48% | +15 |
| Grade 8 | 55 | 36% | 35% | 25% | 4% | 71% | +39 |
We show the grade rows CDE publishes for this school. A missing grade or dash can mean the school does not serve that grade, that we hold no valid result for it, or that the tested group was too small to report. It does not mean zero.
| Science (CAST) | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Schoolwide | 152 | 6% | 18% | 56% | 20% |
CAST is tested in grades 5 and 8, then once in grade 10, 11, or 12. This row is the school's all-student aggregate. Not part of the Scope Score.
| Subgroup · ELA | Tested | MET+ | vs district | vs CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | 433 | 57.5% | +7 | +19 |
| Hispanic/Latino | 442 | 59.3% | +7 | +20 |
| English Learners | 96 | 21.9% | +6 | +11 |
03Nearest elementary schoolssorted by Scope Score · Grade gap = grade 3 vs grade 5, this year, different students; Cohort growth = one school's returning cohort tracked across grades (mostly, not exactly, the same kids), in scale-score points — that's the measurement the Scope Score weights
| School | Dist | Scope | EXC | MET+ | Grade gap | Cohort growth | Susp |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinton, William Jefferson ← | — | 43 | 22.6% | 47.1% | −8.4pp | +80 pts | 2.3% |
| Foster Elementary | 1.4 mi | 70 | 36.2% | 64.8% | +9.3pp | — | 0.1% |
| Mayo Elementary | 1.8 mi | 49 | 22.3% | 44.6% | −4.8pp | — | 0.1% |
| Kelly Elementary | 1 mi | 49 | 23.0% | 45.2% | +0.9pp | — | 1.1% |
| California average | — | 39 | 21.4% | 42.7% | −2.9pp | — | 1.6% |
04More measurescontext · not all part of the Scope Score
ShowHide table 04 — More measures
| Year | Scope | Pctile | Rank | Exc | Met+ | Absent | Susp | Grade gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 39 | 56 | #2415 | 21.1% | 42.6% | 10.8% | 0.1% | -0.8pp |
| 2022 | 32 | 49 | #2887 | 13.7% | 34.9% | 39.6% | 0.1% | -9.0pp |
| 2023 | 33 | 51 | #2799 | 16.2% | 34.9% | 30.2% | 0.1% | -1.9pp |
| 2024 | 38 | 55 | #2589 | 16.4% | 40.8% | 22.9% | 0.5% | +2.0pp |
| 2025 | 43 | 66 | #1925 | 22.6% | 47.1% | 4.6% | 2.3% | -8.4pp |
Grade gap = this year's grade 3 vs grade 5 result, two different sets of students, not a trend for any one child — it is not the measurement the Scope Score's growth dimension uses. See §01 above and /methodology#verdicts for the school's actual scored (cohort) growth.
NO STATEWIDE TESTING 2020–21 (COVID) · SCORE AND PERCENTILE ARE RELATIVE TO EACH YEAR'S FIELD
05Climate by student groupchronic absenteeism · 2019 vs 2025 — the two years CDE publishes at subgroup level
ShowHide table 05 — Climate by student group
| Group | 2019 | 2025 | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Female | 10.6% | 3.5% | -7.1pp |
| Male | 10.9% | 4.4% | -6.5pp |
| Black/African American | 15.4% | 3.3% | -12.1pp |
| Hispanic/Latino | 10.3% | 3.7% | -6.6pp |
| White | 9.1% | — | — |
| Students with Disabilities | 12.5% | 9.5% | -3.0pp |
| English Learners | 11.2% | 2.9% | -8.3pp |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | 11.1% | 4.0% | -7.1pp |
| All Students | 10.8% | 3.9% | -6.9pp |
06California growth model, by student group2025 · scale-score points vs the state's prediction · shown, never scored
ShowHide table 06 — California growth model, by student group
| Group | Reading | n | CDE band | Math | n | CDE band |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All Students | +20 | 366 | Exceptional | +15 | 364 | Accelerated |
| Hispanic or Latino | +20 | 355 | Exceptional | +14 | 353 | Accelerated |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | +18 | 345 | Accelerated | +13 | 343 | Accelerated |
| English Learner | +13 | 156 | Accelerated | +6 | 156 | Accelerated |
| English Only | +26 | 139 | not categorised | +19 | 137 | not categorised |
| English Learners Only | −3 | 78 | not categorised | −10 | 78 | not categorised |
| Recently Reclassified Fluent-English Proficient Only | +28 | 78 | not categorised | +24 | 78 | not categorised |
| Students with Disabilities | −2 | 24 | Average | −1 | 23 | Average |
| Long-Term English Learner (grades 6-8 only) | +3 | 12 | Average | +12 | 12 | Accelerated |
Whole scale-score points above or below what CDE's model predicted for these same children from their own prior-year scores — not a percentage, not a percentile. Statewide a typical school lands near +1 with a spread of about 13 points either side, so read a figure against its group's own typical value, not against zero. Muted rows have fewer than 30 students with a growth score — published by CDE, held back from the narrative sections above because at that size the figure swings about 17 points on its own. “Not categorised” is CDE assigning no band — English Only, Recently Reclassified, and English Learners Only receive a value and no band, for every school in the state. It is not a missing number. Long-Term English Learner counts cover grades 6-8 only (CDE), so that row is not comparable to the All Students row. Most figures blend two consecutive years, so adjacent published years share input data and no trend line can honestly be drawn across them. A group absent from this table had fewer than 11 students with a growth score and was never published. Grades 4-8 only. None of this enters the Scope Score — it is more strongly correlated with school demographics than our own growth measure, and one published year is not enough to test its reliability.
Embed this scorecard
<iframe
src="https://schoolscope.co/embed/school/clinton-william-jefferson-0877"
width="100%" height="210" loading="lazy"
style="border:0;border-radius:12px"
title="Clinton, William Jefferson — SchoolScope scorecard">
</iframe>Free to embed with the credit link. Data updates automatically.
EXC = exceeded standard · MET+ = met or exceeded ("proficient") · Source: CA Dept. of Education · CAASPP 2024–25 · n=5,721 elementary schools · Vintages: climate subgroups 2019+2025 · district finance per its label · ACS 2022 · Data updated 2026-09-18
SchoolScope scores and verdicts are our interpretation of public California Department of Education data — independent analysis, not an official rating. How we analyze · Request a correction