Math
69%Grades 3 & 5 · Proficient or Advanced
Public elementary school
Sequoia Elementary
The score is strong. The trajectory is stronger.
66% of tested students are Proficient or Advanced in English and 69% in math. Explore the evidence alongside the opportunities your child would use.
SchoolScope archetype
Growth Engine
What this means for your family
Ask how the school tracks each kid's growth year to year, and what happens when a kid stalls instead of gaining.
How archetypes are assigned →Data sources · Methodology · State tests: 2025
Contact
Phone(925) 935-5721
DistrictMt. Diablo Unified
PrincipalRebecca Vichiquis
GradesK-5
Enrollment594 students
English
66%Grades 3 & 5 · Proficient or Advanced
Students
594Total enrollment
Chronic absence
3%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 | 61% | 68% |
| 2022 | 60% | 68% |
| 2023 | 67% | 66% |
| 2024 | 72% | 71% |
| 2025 | 69% | 66% |
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
34%ProficientStandard Met
35%DevelopingStandard Nearly Met
26%MinimalStandard Not Met
5%AdvancedStandard Exceeded
34%ProficientStandard Met
32%DevelopingStandard Nearly Met
27%MinimalStandard Not Met
7%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
Has held the 88th-percentile line every tested year since 2019.
Most rating sites would stop at “69% proficient” and call it done. Sequoia deserves a closer read. It sits at the 88th percentile of 5,721 California elementary schools — but the ranking is the least interesting thing on this page.
Sequoia's low-income kids hit 55.9% 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.
295 tested · 3 of 3 grades published · cohort of 97 tracked
Sequoia Elementary scores 62 of 100 on SchoolScope's Scope Score — the 88th percentile of 5,721 California elementary schools (CDE CAASPP 2025).
Proficiency here is back to its pre-pandemic level — 69% meet the standard, about where the school stood in 2019.
Percentile among 5,721 elementary schools statewide
ELAGreen(Maintained)MathGreen(Maintained)
ShowHide the by-grade tables, year by year
ELA — % met or exceeded, by grade
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 74% | 68% | 58% | 73% | 58% |
| Grade 4 | 73% | 71% | 73% | 70% | 73% |
| Grade 5 | 63% | 67% | 75% | 69% | 75% |
Math — % met or exceeded, by grade
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 75% | 68% | 66% | 77% | 74% |
| Grade 4 | 77% | 62% | 72% | 61% | 69% |
| Grade 5 | 48% | 52% | 69% | 68% | 65% |
Where students land · CAASPP 2024–25
Two-thirds of students here meet the standard. One in three clear it by a lot.
ELA68% met or exceeded
Exceeded 36%Met 32%Nearly Met 23%Not Met 8%
Math69% met or exceeded
Exceeded 34%Met 35%Nearly Met 24%Not Met 6%
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 | 62 | 35% | 69% | Strong · p89 | 3.4% | 0.1% |
| CA average · Elementary School | 39 | 21% | 43% | Average · p50 | 17.9% | 1.6% |
This schoolCA avg
Scope6239
% Exceeded35%21%
% Met+69%43%
Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5)Strong · p89Average · p50
Absence3.4%17.9%
Suspension0.1%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 agree — both land near the 78th percentile of elementary schools.
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. The two measures land in the same neighbourhood here — ours puts this school around the 89th percentile of California elementary schools, the state's around the 78th in reading and math together. Two different methods agreeing is the most you can ask of one year of test data.
— 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
30%
exceeded standard · 58% met or exceeded
ELA · 2025 · Grade 5
39%
exceeded standard · 75% 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: 89th percentile among California elementary schools.89th pctile
State model · readingmatched students, grades 4-8California growth model, reading: +9 scale-score points versus the state's expectation, 76th percentile of 7,519 reported schools.76th pctile · +9 pts
State model · mathmatched students, grades 4-8California growth model, math: +12 scale-score points versus the state's expectation, 80th percentile of 7,518 reported schools.80th pctile · +12 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.
55.9% 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: 69% met or exceeded
All StudentsAll Students: this school 69%, district —, state 43%69%
FemaleFemale: this school 72%, district 44%, state 44%72% · +4 vs school
MaleMale: this school 65%, district 43%, state 42%65% · −4 vs school
WhiteWhite: this school 68%, district 60%, state 56%68% · −0 vs school
Socioeconomically DisadvantagedSocioeconomically Disadvantaged: this school 55%, district 27%, state 32%55% · −14 vs school
AsianAsian: this school 68%, district 59%, state 72%68% · −0 vs school
Two or More RacesTwo or More Races: this school 74%, district 54%, state 56%74% · +5 vs school
Hispanic/LatinoHispanic/Latino: this school 62%, district 26%, state 32%62% · −6 vs school
Students with DisabilitiesStudents with Disabilities: this school 50%, district 17%, state 15%50% · −19 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
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 rises by 26.7pp from grade 3 to grade 5 at this school. District average: +3.1pp.
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
English Only157 studentsEnglish Only, reading: +10 scale-score points versus expectation, against +3 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 157 students.+10 pts · +7 vs typical
White85 studentsWhite, reading: +10 scale-score points versus expectation, against +5 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 85 students.+10 pts · +5 vs typical
Low-income students41 studentsLow-income students, reading: 0 scale-score points versus expectation, against 0 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 41 students.0 pts · 0 vs typical
Asian32 studentsAsian, reading: +6 scale-score points versus expectation, against +7 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 32 students.+6 pts · −1 vs typical
Math
English Only157 studentsEnglish Only, math: +12 scale-score points versus expectation, against +1 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 157 students.+12 pts · +11 vs typical
White84 studentsWhite, math: +14 scale-score points versus expectation, against +5 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 84 students.+14 pts · +9 vs typical
Low-income students41 studentsLow-income students, math: +6 scale-score points versus expectation, against −1 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 41 students.+6 pts · +7 vs typical
Asian32 studentsAsian, math: +11 scale-score points versus expectation, against +16 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 32 students.+11 pts · −5 vs typical
this school typical California elementary school, same group| the centre tick is 0 = as predicted
— 6 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 28 students for every teacher here.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
Students per teacher28 · district 24
Teaching staff23 teachers
Avg. experience18.4 years
Fully credentialed100%
First-year teachers4%
PrincipalRebecca Vichiquis
ShowHide what the district pays
Teacher salary schedule$65,422 – $120,624
Principal salary$151,493 – $174,392
Superintendent salary$305,000
Pay is set by the district, not the school.
Attendance & discipline · 2024–25
Kids here show up more, and get suspended less, than the state average.
Chronic absenteeismChronic absenteeism: this school 3.4%, district 20.2%, state 17.9%3.4% · −14.4pp vs state
Suspension rateSuspension rate: this school 0.1%, district —, state 1.6%0.1% · −1.5pp vs state
This schoolDistrictCalifornia
ShowHide attendance by student group and by grade
Chronic absenteeism by grade band
Grades 4–63.0%
TK/K2.0%
Resources & neighborhood
What sits behind the school experience?
Explore school spending and the district budget
What gets spent · FY 2024–25
It spends $166 per student, less than the California average.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
These measure different things: this figure is spending attributed to this campus, while district-wide figures also include central administration, districtwide programs, and the state's pension contributions made on the district's behalf — costs that never get assigned to a single school. The district number runs higher at nearly every school, not just this one.
$117 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: $166, CA average $14,491$166 · spent at this school
Federal share$117 per student
District current expense · FY 2024–25$19,016 per student
This schoolDistrictCalifornia
Where the district's dollars go · FY 2024–25 · CDE SACS
Instruction 62%Instruction support 11%Student services 10%Administration 6%Buildings & maintenance 10%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$11,965 per pupil
2019$12,119 per pupil
2018$13,284 per pupil
2017$12,803 per pupil
2016$12,073 per pupil
Source: NCES F-33 · Full district breakdown →
The neighborhood · ACS 2024
One 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), 63% 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 Latino13.8% · district 42.5% · CA 56.1%
White43.4% · district 27.3% · CA 19.9%
Asian17.7% · district 9.6% · CA 10.2%
Black2.4% · district 3.3% · CA 4.8%
Other22.7% · district 17.3% · CA 9.0%
Free or reduced lunch22.7% · CA 64%
Median income$143K · CA $85K
Median home value$1.08M · CA $659K
Bachelor's degree+55% · CA 35%
ZIP population34,592
Median age42 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sequoia Elementary | Public | Strong | 35% | 69% | School being viewed | |
| Springhill Elementary | Public | Strong | 59% | 84% | 3.1 mi | |
| Buena Vista Elementary | Public | Strong | 51% | 74% | 2.1 mi | |
| Bancroft Elementary | Public | Strong | 34% | 63% | 1.9 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 Mt. Diablo Unified.
District information →School website →Schools across the K–12 journey
Elementary · K–5
Middle · 6–8
High school · 9–12
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 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 Sequoia Elementary a good elementary school?
Sequoia Elementary has a Scope Score of 62 out of 100, placing it in the 88th percentile of California elementary schools and ranked #659 statewide. 35.3% of students exceeded the state standard on the 2025 CAASPP assessment, which is 14.0 percentage points above 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 Sequoia Elementary's CAASPP test scores?
On the 2025 CAASPP Smarter Balanced Assessment, 68.8% of students at Sequoia Elementary met or exceeded the state standard in ELA and Math combined, and 35.3% exceeded it. The gap between those numbers matters: 33.5% of students are at the proficiency floor, while 35.3% 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. 589 student-subject combinations were assessed.
How does Sequoia Elementary rank in California?
Sequoia Elementary ranks #659 among California elementary schools by Scope Score, placing it in the 88th 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 Sequoia Elementary getting better or worse?
SchoolScope follows the same cohort of students across grades rather than comparing two different grades in the same year. At Sequoia Elementary that cohort is 2023 G3 → 2025 G5, measured in SBAC scale-score points. Its gain ranks strong among California elementary schools — roughly the 89th 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 Sequoia Elementary?
3.4% of students at Sequoia Elementary are chronically absent (missing 10% or more of school days), which is better than the California average of 17.9%. The suspension rate is 0.1%, 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 Sequoia Elementary compare to other schools in Pleasant Hill?
Sequoia Elementary scores 62/100 (88th 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 594 students. Use the schools in Pleasant Hill page or the map view to compare all elementary schools nearby.
How does Sequoia Elementary serve low-income and underrepresented students?
At Sequoia Elementary in Pleasant Hill, 55.9% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 31.7% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. Sequoia Elementary outperforms its district average for low-income students by 24.2 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (54.4% Math proficient); White students (69.8% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 11.4 percentage points for low-income students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 68 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 clear the state's too.
3.4% 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 85 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 | 35.3% | 21.4% | 42% |
| Met or exceeded | 68.8% | 42.7% | 23% |
| Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5) | Strong | average | 20% |
| Chronic absenteeism | 3.4% | 17.9% | 5% |
| Suspension rate | 0.1% | 1.6% | 5% |
| EL proficiency (ELPAC) | 30.8% | 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
Sequoia Elementary: reading the evidence
Sequoia pairs 69% proficiency with gains that hold up when the school's returning cohort is tracked two years apart — the rare school that posts both.
Subject proficiency describes tested students, while graduation describes a graduating cohort. These figures are not successive stages followed by the same students.
Ask how the school tracks each kid's growth year to year, and what happens when a kid stalls instead of gaining.
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.
Sequoia Elementary is ranked #659 statewide · #3 of 31 in Mt. Diablo Unified.
01Score factorsWeighted composite · 2024–25
| Factor | School | State | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exceeded standard | 35.3% | 21.4% | 42% |
| Met or exceeded | 68.8% | 42.7% | 23% |
| Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5) | Strong | average | 20% |
| Chronic absenteeism | 3.4% | 17.9% | 5% |
| Suspension rate | 0.1% | 1.6% | 5% |
| EL proficiency (ELPAC) | 30.8% | 18.0% | 5% |
- Exceeded standard
- ↑ vs CA 21.4% · index 64 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint
- Met or exceeded
- ↑ vs CA 42.7% · index 70 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint
- Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5)
- ↑ vs CA average · 89th pctile
- Chronic absenteeism
- ↑ vs CA 17.9% · index 74 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint · ▼ 0.4pp lower vs 2024
- Suspension rate
- ↑ vs CA 1.6% · index 63 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint · → no change vs 2024
- EL proficiency (ELPAC)
- ↑ vs CA 18.0% · index 68 · 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 | 99 | 28% | 29% | 32% | 10% | 58% | +14 |
| Grade 4 | 97 | 41% | 32% | 16% | 10% | 73% | +29 |
| Grade 5 | 99 | 39% | 35% | 21% | 4% | 75% | +27 |
| Math | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 99 | 33% | 40% | 21% | 5% | 74% | +28 |
| Grade 4 | 96 | 35% | 33% | 21% | 10% | 69% | +27 |
| Grade 5 | 99 | 34% | 30% | 31% | 4% | 65% | +30 |
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 | 99 | 25% | 37% | 36% | 1% |
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 | 68 | 55.9% | +24 | +18 |
| White | 129 | 69.8% | +6 | +8 |
| Asian | 49 | 67.3% | +6 | −7 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sequoia Elementary ← | — | 62 | 35.3% | 68.8% | +4.0pp | +85 pts | 0.1% |
| Springhill Elementary | 3.1 mi | 67 | 58.7% | 83.8% | −4.0pp | — | 0.5% |
| Buena Vista Elementary | 2.1 mi | 67 | 51.4% | 73.7% | −1.3pp | — | 0.5% |
| Bancroft Elementary | 1.9 mi | 55 | 33.6% | 62.8% | +5.0pp | — | 0.9% |
| 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 | 60 | 83 | #942 | 36.1% | 68.2% | 2.4% | 0.3% | -19.0pp |
| 2022 | 60 | 84 | #892 | 35.0% | 64.7% | 9.9% | 0.4% | -8.6pp |
| 2023 | 61 | 86 | #825 | 36.2% | 68.8% | 8.1% | 0.3% | +10.0pp |
| 2024 | 62 | 88 | #703 | 35.6% | 69.6% | 3.8% | 0.1% | -6.4pp |
| 2025 | 62 | 88 | #659 | 35.3% | 68.8% | 3.4% | 0.1% | +4.0pp |
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 | 2.2% | 2.5% | +0.3pp |
| Male | 1.6% | 2.9% | +1.3pp |
| Asian | 0.0% | 1.9% | +1.9pp |
| Filipino | 0.0% | 3.6% | +3.6pp |
| Hispanic/Latino | 3.2% | 6.1% | +2.9pp |
| Two or More Races | 0.0% | 3.3% | +3.3pp |
| White | 2.8% | 1.9% | -0.9pp |
| Students with Disabilities | 4.3% | 4.9% | +0.6pp |
| English Learners | 2.0% | 0.0% | -2.0pp |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | 5.8% | 5.9% | +0.1pp |
| All Students | 1.9% | 2.7% | +0.8pp |
| Black/African American | — | 0.0% | — |
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 | +9 | 195 | Accelerated | +12 | 194 | Accelerated |
| English Only | +10 | 157 | not categorised | +12 | 157 | not categorised |
| White | +10 | 85 | Accelerated | +14 | 84 | Accelerated |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | 0 | 41 | Average | +6 | 41 | Accelerated |
| Asian | +6 | 32 | Accelerated | +11 | 32 | Accelerated |
| Hispanic or Latino | +14 | 28 | Accelerated | +14 | 28 | Accelerated |
| Two or More Races | +6 | 27 | Accelerated | +8 | 27 | Accelerated |
| Students with Disabilities | +7 | 25 | Accelerated | +10 | 25 | Accelerated |
| English Learner | −7 | 19 | Moderate | +9 | 18 | Accelerated |
| Recently Reclassified Fluent-English Proficient Only | +1 | 14 | not categorised | +7 | 13 | not categorised |
| Filipino | +9 | 13 | Accelerated | +10 | 13 | 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. 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/sequoia-elementary-4253"
width="100%" height="210" loading="lazy"
style="border:0;border-radius:12px"
title="Sequoia Elementary — 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