College Park Elementary: High scores, real growth, strong attendance. We looked for a catch — we didn't find one.
College Park posts 61.2% exceeding the standard — versus 21.3% statewide — with climate numbers better than most. That doesn't make it perfect. It makes it worth a visit to find what numbers can't measure.
| Scope | % Exceeded | % Met+ | Growth | Absence | Suspension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This school | 91 | 61% | 83% | +2.6 | 5.1% | 0.1% |
| CA average · Elementary School | 45 | 21% | 43% | -2.9 | 17.9% | 1.6% |
College Park Elementary scores 91 of 100 on SchoolScope's Scope Score — the 99th 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 →
⭐ High Ceiling — Ask what happens for a kid who shows up behind — a high ceiling for the top can sit right next to thin support at the bottom, and the score alone won't show you which.
Most rating sites would stop at “83% proficient” and call it done. College Park deserves a closer read. It sits at the 99th percentile of 5,744 California elementary schools — but the ranking is the least interesting thing on this page.
College Park's low-income kids hit 54.2% 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
Has held the 99th-percentile line every tested year since 2019.
This school hasn't fully recovered from the pandemic: 83% meet the standard today, versus 89% in 2019 — a gap worth asking about on a visit.
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 85% | 84% | 78% | 68% | 73% |
| Grade 4 | 84% | 88% | 87% | 82% | 78% |
| Grade 5 | 91% | 93% | 92% | 95% | 84% |
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 90% | 84% | 78% | 74% | 93% |
| Grade 4 | 93% | 85% | 89% | 86% | 80% |
| Grade 5 | 92% | 93% | 87% | 91% | 88% |
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 19.2pp across grades; the floor rises 10.3pp. The state average rises 4.5pp over the same span. Kids here gain ground the longer they stay — the pattern you want to see. A school visit and conversation with teachers will tell you more than this number.
The 6 things our score weighs
Ask what the school is working on next. Strong numbers tell you where a school is, not where it's going.
- Ask how teachers track each child's growth over the year, not just where the class lands on test day.
- 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 College Park Elementary in San Mateo, 54.2% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 26.5% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. College Park Elementary outperforms its district average for low-income students by 27.7 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (58.3% Math proficient); Asian students (81.7% ELA proficient). Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 24 students tested.
7 of 13 student groups here are too small to report — a privacy protection, not a gap.
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.
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
$285 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), 78% met or exceeded the standard — science is tested in grades 5 and 8 but never enters the Scope Score.
Frequently asked questions
Is College Park Elementary a good elementary school?
What are College Park Elementary's CAASPP test scores?
How does College Park Elementary rank in California?
Is College Park Elementary getting better or worse?
What is the attendance and school culture like at College Park Elementary?
How does College Park Elementary compare to other schools in San Mateo?
How does College Park Elementary serve low-income and underrepresented students?
Your other options
Nearby Elementary Schools
3 within ~3 mi · avg 82
Nearby Middle Schools
3 within ~3 mi · avg 58
Nearby High Schools
3 within ~3 mi · avg 70
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 | 60 | 45% | 28% | 22% | 5% | 73% | +30 |
| Grade 4 | 76 | 53% | 25% | 7% | 16% | 78% | +33 |
| Grade 5 | 67 | 64% | 19% | 13% | 3% | 84% | +36 |
| Math | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 59 | 66% | 27% | 5% | 2% | 93% | +48 |
| Grade 4 | 76 | 64% | 16% | 12% | 8% | 80% | +39 |
| Grade 5 | 68 | 75% | 13% | 7% | 4% | 88% | +53 |
| Science (CAST) | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 5/8/11 | 68 | 46% | 32% | 21% | 1% |
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 | 24 | 54.2% | +28 | +16 |
| Asian | 142 | 81.7% | −1 | +7 |
| Two or More Races | 27 | 81.5% | +11 | +20 |
| School | Dist | Scope | EXC | MET+ | Growth | Susp |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| College Park Elementary ← | — | 91 | 61.2% | 82.7% | +2.6 | 0.1% |
| Central Elementary | 2.2 mi | 87 | 74.3% | 89.7% | −6.6 | 0.9% |
| South Hillsborough | 2.2 mi | 86 | 74.0% | 90.4% | −12.5 | 1.2% |
| Cipriani Elementary | 2.5 mi | 73 | 53.3% | 77.0% | +4.4 | 0.3% |
| California average | — | 45 | 21.3% | 42.7% | −2.9 | 1.6% |
| Year | Scope | Pctile | Rank | Exc | Met+ | Absent | Susp | Growth |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 94 | 99 | #6 | 68.5% | 89.0% | 1.1% | 0.0% | +4.0pp |
| 2022 | 91 | 99 | #4 | 73.8% | 87.9% | 5.2% | 0.0% | +8.5pp |
| 2023 | 97 | 99 | #2 | 67.7% | 85.5% | 6.8% | 0.2% | +11.4pp |
| 2024 | 89 | 99 | #17 | 63.6% | 82.7% | 6.4% | 0.3% | +21.9pp |
| 2025 | 91 | 99 | #15 | 61.2% | 82.7% | 5.1% | 0.1% | +2.6pp |
| Group | 2019 | 2025 | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Female | 0.9% | 4.1% | +3.2pp |
| Male | 0.9% | 4.4% | +3.5pp |
| Asian | 1.0% | 2.4% | +1.4pp |
| Hispanic/Latino | 0.0% | 17.9% | +17.9pp |
| Two or More Races | 0.0% | 6.0% | +6.0pp |
| Students with Disabilities | 0.0% | 5.6% | +5.6pp |
| English Learners | 1.5% | 6.1% | +4.6pp |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | 0.0% | 5.9% | +5.9pp |
| All Students | 0.9% | 4.2% | +3.3pp |
| Filipino | — | 0.0% | — |
| White | — | 16.7% | — |
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