Clinton, William Jefferson: This school runs ahead of the state average. The bar itself is the harder conversation.
Clinton, William Jefferson posts 47% meeting the standard against 43% statewide — ahead of most, with real headroom above the bar.
| Scope | % Exceeded | % Met+ | Growth | Absence | Suspension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This school | 49 | 23% | 47% | -8.4 | 4.6% | 2.3% |
| CA average · Elementary School | 45 | 21% | 43% | -2.9 | 17.9% | 1.6% |
Clinton, William Jefferson scores 49 of 100 on SchoolScope's Scope Score — the 66th 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 →
🌱 Building Momentum — This label means the data doesn't clearly sort the school one way or the other — ask what the school is proud of, and what it's working on.
Most rating sites would stop at “47% proficient” and call it done. Clinton, William Jefferson deserves a closer read. The school sits in Compton, where four in five students qualify for free or reduced lunch — 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.
The seven-year arc
Climbed from the 57th to the 66th percentile since 2019 — past roughly 400 elementary schools.
The pandemic drop is behind this school: 47% of students meet the standard today, above the 43% who did in 2019.
| 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% |
| 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% |
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.
The honest read: the share exceeding rises 3.9pp across grades; the floor slips 2.1pp. The state average rises 4.5pp over the same span. A school visit and conversation with teachers will tell you more than this number.
Clinton, William Jefferson's most underrated number
57.5% of low-income students met the ELA standard — versus 38.2% for the same group statewide. That's the strongest kind of signal a school can post: it holds across income lines.
The 6 things our score weighs
Ask how the school challenges kids who clear the standard early. The gap between meeting and exceeding is where pacing shows.
- 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.
How every group of students does here
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.
Change in proficiency from the lowest tested grade — which groups gain ground the longer they stay. 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.
Showing up, and staying in class
Where the path goes
The path below follows attendance boundaries — scores shown for each next step.
Estimated path based on proximity within the same district. Contact your school district for official feeder information.
The people teaching here
Pay is set by the district, not the school.
What gets spent here
$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.
District-level, from the district's own SACS general-ledger filing — school-by-school breakdowns aren't published by the state.
Source: NCES F-33 · Full district breakdown →
The neighborhood it serves
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2024) · ZIP-level
On the state's science test (CAST), 24% met or exceeded the standard — science is tested in grades 5 and 8 but never enters the Scope Score.
Frequently asked questions
Is Clinton, William Jefferson a good elementary school?
What are Clinton, William Jefferson's CAASPP test scores?
How does Clinton, William Jefferson rank in California?
Is Clinton, William Jefferson getting better or worse?
What is the attendance and school culture like at Clinton, William Jefferson?
How does Clinton, William Jefferson compare to other schools in Compton?
How does Clinton, William Jefferson serve low-income and underrepresented students?
Your other options
Nearby Elementary Schools
3 within ~3 mi · avg 63
Private alternatives nearby
Private schools within ~10 miles. These schools do not participate in state testing and cannot be scored or ranked.
Every number on this page
Score factors, grade-level breakdowns, subgroup proficiency, and peer comparisons.
| 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% | −8 |
| Grade 6 | 66 | 36% | 39% | 20% | 5% | 76% | +29 |
| Grade 7 | 64 | 31% | 47% | 16% | 6% | 78% | +30 |
| 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% | +1 |
| 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% | +14 |
| Grade 8 | 55 | 36% | 35% | 25% | 4% | 71% | +39 |
| Science (CAST) | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 5/8/11 | 152 | 6% | 18% | 56% | 20% |
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 | 433 | 57.5% | +7 | +19 |
| Hispanic/Latino | 442 | 59.3% | +7 | +20 |
| English Learners | 96 | 21.9% | +6 | +11 |
| School | Dist | Scope | EXC | MET+ | Growth | Susp |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinton, William Jefferson ← | — | 49 | 22.6% | 47.1% | −8.4 | 2.3% |
| Foster Elementary | 1.4 mi | 79 | 36.2% | 64.8% | +9.3 | 0.1% |
| Mayo Elementary | 1.8 mi | 57 | 22.3% | 44.6% | −4.8 | 0.1% |
| Kelly Elementary | 1 mi | 55 | 23.0% | 45.2% | +0.9 | 1.1% |
| California average | — | 45 | 21.3% | 42.7% | −2.9 | 1.6% |
| Year | Scope | Pctile | Rank | Exc | Met+ | Absent | Susp | Growth |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 45 | 57 | #2342 | 21.1% | 42.6% | 10.8% | 0.0% | -0.8pp |
| 2022 | 32 | 41 | #3403 | 13.7% | 34.9% | 39.9% | 0.0% | -9.0pp |
| 2023 | 41 | 54 | #2646 | 16.2% | 34.9% | 30.4% | 0.0% | -1.9pp |
| 2024 | 43 | 54 | #2626 | 16.4% | 40.8% | 22.9% | 0.5% | +2.0pp |
| 2025 | 49 | 66 | #1967 | 22.6% | 47.1% | 4.6% | 2.3% | -8.4pp |
| 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 |
| Filipino | 8.3% | — | — |
| Hispanic/Latino | 10.3% | 3.7% | -6.6pp |
| 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 |
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