Elizabeth Ustach Middle: The score is strong. The trajectory is stronger.
Elizabeth Ustach pairs 45% proficiency with gains that hold up when the same students are tracked two years apart — the rare school that posts both.
| Scope | % Exceeded | % Met+ | Growth (2023 G6 → 2025 G8) | Absence | Suspension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This school | 50 | 22% | 45% | Strong · p92 | 11.8% | 5.8% |
| CA average · Middle School | 38 | 17% | 39% | Average · p50 | 18.5% | 3.7% |
Elizabeth Ustach Middle scores 50 of 100 on SchoolScope's Scope Score — the 78th percentile of 2,238 California middle schools (CDE CAASPP 2025).
Measures test performance, attendance, and climate — not arts, community, or your kid. How we score →
🚀 Growth Engine — Ask how the school tracks each kid's growth year to year, and what happens when a kid stalls instead of gaining.
Most rating sites would stop at “45% proficient” and call it done. Elizabeth Ustach deserves a closer read. The school sits in Modesto, where more than half of students qualify for free or reduced lunch — and reading the numbers without that context misreads the school.
The headline number: +9.9pp separates this year's grade 6 from its grade 8. The state average rises 0.1pp over the same span. Following the same students from 2023 G6 → 2025 G8 points the same way.
The seven-year arc
Has held the 78th-percentile line every tested year since 2019.
This school hasn't fully recovered from the pandemic: 45% meet the standard today, versus 59% in 2019 — a gap worth asking about on a visit.
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 6 | 56% | 55% | 42% | 54% | 45% |
| Grade 7 | 65% | 61% | 53% | 49% | 48% |
| Grade 8 | 59% | 48% | 51% | 49% | 46% |
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 6 | 45% | 41% | 38% | 38% | 34% |
| Grade 7 | 63% | 49% | 49% | 45% | 44% |
| Grade 8 | 65% | 46% | 47% | 51% | 52% |
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 falls 3.4pp across grades; the floor rises 1.6pp. The state average rises 0.1pp over the same span. A school visit and conversation with teachers will tell you more than this number.
The 6 things our score weighs
California's own answer to the same question
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 its two subjects part company here. It puts this school around the 13th percentile of California middle schools in reading and the 86th in math; ours, which blends the subjects, lands around the 92nd. A gap that size between math and reading in one building is worth asking about directly — one year of data can't tell you whether it is the teaching, the cohort, or noise.
— 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 middle school lands at −1 in reading, and the middle half of them fall between −8 and +6 — 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.
Ask what changed — new curriculum, new principal, new program. Momentum has a cause, and a visit will find it.
- 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 Elizabeth Ustach Middle in Modesto, 40.6% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 36.8% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. Elizabeth Ustach Middle outperforms its district average for low-income students by 3.7 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (36.7% Math proficient); Hispanic students (35.6% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 44.0 percentage points for english learner students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 600 students tested.
6 of 17 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.
Low-income student ELA proficiency rises by 0.6pp from grade 6 to grade 8 at this school. District average: +1.5pp.
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 middle school — not against zero, and not against this school's all-students figure, because the state's expectation already differs by group.
— 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.
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
$421 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), 37% 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.
Frequently asked questions
Is Elizabeth Ustach Middle a good middle school?
What are Elizabeth Ustach Middle's CAASPP test scores?
How does Elizabeth Ustach Middle rank in California?
Is Elizabeth Ustach Middle getting better or worse?
What is the attendance and school culture like at Elizabeth Ustach Middle?
How does Elizabeth Ustach Middle compare to other schools in Modesto?
How does Elizabeth Ustach Middle serve low-income and underrepresented students?
Your other options
Nearby Middle Schools
2 within ~3 mi · avg 32
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 nearest schools.
| ELA | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 6 | 296 | 21% | 24% | 27% | 28% | 45% | −2 |
| Grade 7 | 335 | 18% | 30% | 27% | 25% | 48% | +0 |
| Grade 8 | 355 | 17% | 29% | 24% | 30% | 46% | −0 |
| Math | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 6 | 297 | 20% | 14% | 30% | 36% | 34% | −1 |
| Grade 7 | 335 | 24% | 20% | 27% | 29% | 44% | +10 |
| Grade 8 | 355 | 34% | 18% | 20% | 28% | 52% | +20 |
We show the grade rows CDE publishes for this school. A missing grade or dash can mean the school does not serve that grade, no valid result was published, or the tested group was too small to report. It does not mean zero.
| Science (CAST) | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Schoolwide | 355 | 17% | 20% | 48% | 15% |
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 | 600 | 40.6% | +4 | +2 |
| Hispanic/Latino | 487 | 35.6% | +1 | −3 |
| White | 248 | 54.4% | +3 | −7 |
| School | Dist | Scope | EXC | MET+ | Grade gap | Cohort growth | Susp |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elizabeth Ustach Middle ← | — | 50 | 22.3% | 44.8% | +9.9pp | +63 pts | 5.8% |
| Daniel J. Savage Middle | 1.2 mi | 34 | 17.6% | 42.8% | −3.7pp | — | 6.5% |
| Somerset Middle | 1.8 mi | 31 | 12.4% | 33.4% | +4.5pp | — | 10.9% |
| California average | — | 38 | 16.8% | 39.3% | +1.5pp | — | 3.7% |
| Year | Scope | Pctile | Rank | Exc | Met+ | Absent | Susp | Grade gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 53 | 80 | #405 | 28.1% | 58.9% | 8.9% | 6.8% | +11.6pp |
| 2022 | 46 | 76 | #525 | 22.5% | 49.9% | 29.1% | 7.4% | -0.8pp |
| 2023 | 44 | 73 | #579 | 20.9% | 46.6% | 17.3% | 7.8% | +9.4pp |
| 2024 | 48 | 76 | #530 | 21.1% | 47.4% | 13.3% | 6.7% | +4.1pp |
| 2025 | 50 | 78 | #489 | 22.3% | 44.8% | 11.8% | 5.8% | +9.9pp |
| Group | 2019 | 2025 | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Female | 9.4% | 13.1% | +3.7pp |
| Male | 8.4% | 10.3% | +1.9pp |
| Asian | 4.4% | 7.3% | +2.9pp |
| Black/African American | 17.2% | 10.0% | -7.2pp |
| Filipino | 0.0% | 8.0% | +8.0pp |
| White | 1.6% | 2.4% | +0.8pp |
| Hispanic/Latino | 10.9% | 15.3% | +4.4pp |
| Pacific Islander | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.0pp |
| Two or More Races | 0.0% | 4.3% | +4.3pp |
| Students with Disabilities | 17.7% | 22.6% | +4.9pp |
| English Learners | 15.9% | 16.9% | +1.0pp |
| Foster Youth | 44.4% | — | — |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | 12.8% | 12.7% | -0.1pp |
| All Students | 8.9% | 11.7% | +2.8pp |
| Group | Reading | n | CDE band | Math | n | CDE band |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All Students | −12 | 943 | Moderate | +15 | 944 | Accelerated |
| English Only | −12 | 648 | not categorised | +14 | 648 | not categorised |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | −14 | 576 | Moderate | +15 | 577 | Accelerated |
| Hispanic or Latino | −15 | 470 | Moderate | +10 | 471 | Accelerated |
| White | −13 | 237 | Moderate | +16 | 237 | Accelerated |
| English Learner | −16 | 185 | Moderate | +15 | 186 | Accelerated |
| Recently Reclassified Fluent-English Proficient Only | −2 | 107 | not categorised | +26 | 107 | not categorised |
| Students with Disabilities | −31 | 106 | Minimal | +16 | 106 | Accelerated |
| Asian | +2 | 98 | Average | +36 | 98 | Exceptional |
| English Learners Only | −27 | 78 | not categorised | +2 | 79 | not categorised |
| Long-Term English Learner (grades 6-8 only) | −27 | 69 | Minimal | +18 | 70 | Accelerated |
| Two or More Races | −3 | 42 | Average | +17 | 42 | Accelerated |
| Filipino | +2 | 39 | Average | +42 | 39 | Exceptional |
| Black or African American | −7 | 16 | Moderate | +30 | 16 | Exceptional |
| Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander | −13 | 13 | Moderate | +20 | 13 | Exceptional |
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.
<iframe
src="https://schoolscope.co/embed/school/elizabeth-ustach-middle-1017"
width="100%" height="210" loading="lazy"
style="border:0;border-radius:12px"
title="Elizabeth Ustach Middle — SchoolScope scorecard">
</iframe>Free to embed with the credit link. Data updates automatically.
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