ExploreMapCompareBlogSign in
Design 39 Campus · San Diego

Design 39 Campus: High scores, healthy climate, strong attendance. We looked for a catch — we didn't find one.

Design 39 Campus posts 55.2% 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.

17050 Del Sur Ridge Road, 92127 (opens in new tab)·Poway Unified·San Diego·Grades TK-8·1,216 students·7% low-income·2024–25 CAASPP·(858) 676-6639·Website
2019–2025 trend · CDE CAASPP
This schoolCA avg
Scope8345
% Exceeded55%21%
% Met+83%43%
Growth-0.8-2.9
Absence5.6%17.9%
Suspension0.5%1.6%
Scope Score
83
⭐ High Ceiling · Strong
ranked #96 statewide · #2 of 26 in Poway Unified

Design 39 Campus scores 83 of 100 on SchoolScope's Scope Score — the 98th 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. Design 39 Campus deserves a closer read. It sits at the 98th percentile of 5,744 California elementary schools — but the ranking is the least interesting thing on this page.

Design 39 Campus's low-income kids hit 67.4% 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

Percentile among 5,744 elementary schools statewide

Has held the 98th-percentile line every tested year since 2019.

CA Dashboard
ELAGreen(Maintained)MathGreen(Increased Significantly)

The pandemic drop is behind this school: 83% of students meet the standard today, above the 74% who did in 2019.

ELA — % met or exceeded, by grade
Grade20192022202320242025
Grade 372%70%65%70%79%
Grade 473%82%77%87%89%
Grade 581%82%83%84%85%
Grade 681%88%76%86%82%
Grade 795%86%89%81%91%
Grade 887%84%83%87%85%
Math — % met or exceeded, by grade
Grade20192022202320242025
Grade 368%79%79%76%84%
Grade 476%80%79%87%83%
Grade 574%77%78%80%76%
Grade 663%72%68%72%73%
Grade 776%68%79%72%84%
Grade 880%68%78%79%77%

The story this school is actually telling

The school, grade by grade

ELA · CAASPP 2024–25

Different students, same year — each bar is one grade's proficiency mix.

48%
31%
21%
Grade 3 · 79% proficient
68%
21%
11%
Grade 4 · 89% proficient
47%
38%
15%
Grade 5 · 85% proficient

The honest read: the share exceeding holds steady across grades; the floor rises 5.9pp. The state average rises 4.5pp over the same span. A school visit and conversation with teachers will tell you more than this number.

67.4%
Low-income · ELA · met standard

Design 39 Campus's most underrated number

67.4% 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.

Design 39 Campus low-income: 67.4%State low-income: 38.2%

The 6 things our score weighs

Exceeded standard
55.2%
State 21.3%
33.9pp above state avg
Growth (G3→G5)
-0.8pp
State -2.9pp
Scores decline across grades
Met or exceeded
82.7%
State 42.7%
40.0pp above state avg
Chronic absenteeism
5.6%
State 17.9%
12.4pp below state avg
Suspension rate
0.5%
State 1.6%
1.1pp below state avg
EL proficiency (ELPAC)
52.5%
State 18.0%
34.5pp above 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.

  • 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 Design 39 Campus in San Diego, 67.4% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 50.8% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. Design 39 Campus outperforms its district average for low-income students by 16.7 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (55.8% Math proficient); Asian students (95.3% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 40.3 percentage points for disabilities students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 43 students tested.

All students at this school: 82% met or exceeded
All StudentsAll Students: this school 82%, district —, state 43%82%
MaleMale: this school 82%, district 70%, state 42%82% · −1 vs school
FemaleFemale: this school 83%, district 70%, state 44%83% · +1 vs school
AsianAsian: this school 94%, district 87%, state 72%94% · +12 vs school
WhiteWhite: this school 74%, district 68%, state 56%74% · −8 vs school
Two or More RacesTwo or More Races: this school 80%, district 71%, state 56%80% · −2 vs school
Students with DisabilitiesStudents with Disabilities: this school 47%, district 34%, state 15%47% · −35 vs school
Hispanic/LatinoHispanic/Latino: this school 65%, district 50%, state 32%65% · −17 vs school
Socioeconomically DisadvantagedSocioeconomically Disadvantaged: this school 62%, district 46%, state 32%62% · −21 vs school

5 of 14 student groups here are too small to report — a privacy protection, not a gap.

this school district, same group California, same group
Subgroup growth by grade

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

Chronic absenteeismChronic absenteeism: this school 5.6%, district 9.7%, state 17.9%5.6% · −12.4pp vs state
Suspension rateSuspension rate: this school 0.5%, district —, state 1.6%0.5% · −1.1pp vs state
Chronic absenteeism by grade band
Grades 4–65.1%
Grades 7–86.2%
TK/K3.5%

Where the path goes

The path below follows attendance boundaries — scores shown for each next step.

K-12 Feeder Path

Feeder patterns derived from NCES attendance boundary data. Boundaries are approximate and may have changed — verify with your school district for current assignments.

The people teaching here

Context — never part of the Scope Score
Student : teacherStudent to teacher ratio: this school 24:1, district 23:124:1
Teaching staff56 teachers
Avg. experience10.2 years
Fully credentialed93%
First-year teachers5%
Intern / emergency permit2.0%
Salary Schedule
Teacher salary schedule$58,959 – $127,725
Principal salary$160,698 – $181,289
Superintendent salary$362,500

Pay is set by the district, not the school.

What gets spent here

Per-pupil spendingPer-pupil spending: $15,498, CA average $14,815$15,498 · spent at this school
Federal share$248 per student

$248 per student arrives as federal Title funding — a measure of concentrated need, not school quality.

District current expense · FY 2024–25$15,880 per student

The district's current expense of education per student, from CDE's annual SACS filing — the freshest district spending figure the state publishes.

Where the district's dollars go · FY 2024–25 · CDE SACS
Instruction65%
Instruction support12%
Student services8%
Administration5%
Buildings & maintenance9%
Other1%

District-level, from the district's own SACS general-ledger filing — school-by-school breakdowns aren't published by the state.

district detail, 2016–2020 — the newest published
2020$12,246 per pupil
2019$11,959 per pupil
2018$12,266 per pupil
2017$11,181 per pupil
2016$10,952 per pupil

Source: NCES F-33 · Full district breakdown →

The neighborhood it serves

Asian42.3%
District 25.5% · CA 10.2%
White29.4%
District 37.6% · CA 19.9%
Other17.5%
District 17.8% · CA 9.0%
Hispanic9.7%
District 17.4% · CA 56.1%
Black1.1%
District 1.6% · CA 4.8%
Low IncomeFree/reduced lunch eligible 6.9% (57pp below CA avg)
Neighborhood — American Community Survey
Median income$196K · CA $85K
Median home value$1.23M · CA $659K
Bachelor's degree+73% · CA 35%
ZIP population50,555
Median age39 years

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2024) · ZIP-level

Worth Knowing

At 1,216 students, this school is well above the typical California elementary school (≈480).

Transitional kindergarten is offered here — confirmed by actual Census Day enrollment, not just the listed grade span.

On the state's science test (CAST), 76% met or exceeded the standard — science is tested in grades 5 and 8 but never enters the Scope Score.

Frequently asked questions

Is Design 39 Campus a good elementary school?

Design 39 Campus has a Scope Score of 83 out of 100, placing it in the 98th percentile of California elementary schools and ranked #96 statewide. 55.2% of students exceeded the state standard on the 2025 CAASPP assessment, which is 33.9 percentage points above the California average of 21.3%. The Scope Score weights 6 dimensions for elementary schools: exceeded standard (38%), grade 3-to-5 growth (27%), met or exceeded (proficient) (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 Design 39 Campus's CAASPP test scores?

On the 2025 CAASPP Smarter Balanced Assessment, 82.7% of students at Design 39 Campus met or exceeded the state standard in ELA and Math combined, and 55.2% exceeded it. The gap between those numbers matters: 27.5% of students are at the proficiency floor, while 55.2% 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. 824 student-subject combinations were assessed.

How does Design 39 Campus rank in California?

Design 39 Campus ranks #96 among California elementary schools by Scope Score, placing it in the 98th 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 Design 39 Campus getting better or worse?

Based on 2025 CAASPP data, proficiency at Design 39 Campus decreases by 0.8 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 Design 39 Campus?

5.6% of students at Design 39 Campus are chronically absent (missing 10% or more of school days), which is better than the California average of 17.9%. The suspension rate is 0.5%, 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 Design 39 Campus compare to other schools in San Diego?

Design 39 Campus scores 83/100 (98th 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 1,216 students. Use the schools in San Diego page or the map view to compare all elementary schools nearby.

How does Design 39 Campus serve low-income and underrepresented students?

At Design 39 Campus in San Diego, 67.4% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 50.8% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. Design 39 Campus outperforms its district average for low-income students by 16.7 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (55.8% Math proficient); Asian students (95.3% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 40.3 percentage points for disabilities students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 43 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.

Your other options

Private alternatives nearby

Private schools within ~10 miles. These schools do not participate in state testing and cannot be scored or ranked.


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 · 38%
55.2%
↑ vs CA 21.3% · 83th pctile
Growth (G3→G5) · 27%
-0.8pp
↑ vs CA -2.9pp · 68th pctile
Met or exceeded · 20%
82.7%
↑ vs CA 42.7% · 81th pctile
Chronic absenteeism · 5%
5.6%
↑ vs CA 17.9% · 70th pctile
Suspension rate · 5%
0.5%
↑ vs CA 1.6% · 59th pctile
EL proficiency (ELPAC) · 5%
52.5%
↑ vs CA 18.0% · 99th pctile
02By grade & subgroupCAASPP 2024–25 · % of tested students
ELATestedEXCMETNEARNOTMET++/CA
Grade 312448%31%17%4%79%+36
Grade 413568%21%8%3%89%+44
Grade 515347%38%12%3%85%+37
Grade 614048%34%14%4%82%+36
Grade 711954%37%8%1%91%+43
Grade 812347%38%11%4%85%+39
MathTestedEXCMETNEARNOTMET++/CA
Grade 312452%31%15%2%84%+38
Grade 413656%27%13%4%83%+41
Grade 515259%17%16%7%76%+41
Grade 614051%21%21%6%73%+38
Grade 711966%18%12%4%84%+50
Grade 812361%16%14%9%77%+45
Science (CAST)TestedEXCMETNEARNOT
Grade 5/8/1127841%35%24%0%

CAST is tested in grades 5, 8, and once in high school — not annually. Not part of the Scope Score.

Subgroup · ELATestedMET+vs districtvs CA
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged4367.4%+17+29
Asian32295.3%+8+21
White25176.9%+4+15
03Peer comparison · nearest elementary schoolssorted by Scope Score
SchoolDistScopeEXCMET+GrowthSusp
Design 39 Campus ←8355.2%82.7%−0.80.5%
Willow Grove Elementary2.6 mi8356.8%81.4%+3.70.7%
Stone Ranch Elementary1.1 mi8256.5%79.3%+8.70.7%
Rolling Hills Elementary2.8 mi8258.4%78.3%+13.41.5%
California average4521.3%42.7%−2.91.6%
04More measurescontext · not all part of the Scope Score
YearScopePctileRankExcMet+AbsentSuspGrowth
20197292#42945.6%74.1%14.4%1.9%+7.7pp
20227496#20949.4%78.3%16.2%1.1%+4.8pp
20237796#22249.4%76.9%14.6%2.4%+8.9pp
20248198#11452.1%80.7%7.5%1.4%+9.2pp
20258398#9655.2%82.7%5.6%0.5%-0.8pp
NO STATEWIDE TESTING 2020–21 (COVID) · SCORE AND PERCENTILE ARE RELATIVE TO EACH YEAR'S FIELD
What we can't show
  • — Scored here as an elementary school — other grade spans appear in the data appendix.
05Climate by student groupchronic absenteeism · 2019 vs 2025 — the two years CDE publishes at subgroup level
Group20192025Δ
Female14.2%4.2%-10.0pp
Male14.6%5.9%-8.7pp
Asian13.9%2.9%-11.0pp
Black/African American9.1%0.0%-9.1pp
Filipino8.3%
White14.7%1.5%-13.2pp
Hispanic/Latino15.2%6.8%-8.4pp
Two or More Races11.6%4.8%-6.8pp
Students with Disabilities32.0%10.4%-21.6pp
English Learners18.8%10.2%-8.6pp
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged23.5%6.1%-17.4pp
All Students14.4%5.1%-9.3pp
EXC = exceeded standard · MET+ = met or exceeded ("proficient") · Source: CA Dept. of Education · CAASPP 2024–25 · n=5,744 elementary schools · Vintages: climate subgroups 2019+2025 · district finance per its label · ACS 2022 · Data updated 2026-07-03methodology · data updates · CSV · report issue

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