Math
12%Grades 3 & 5 · Proficient or Advanced
Charter elementary school
TEAM Charter
The scores are below where anyone wants them. Here's what they don't tell you.
23% of tested students are Proficient or Advanced in English and 12% in math. Explore the evidence alongside the opportunities your child would use.
SchoolScope archetype
Building Momentum
What this means for your family
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.
How archetypes are assigned →Data sources · Methodology · State tests: 2025
Contact
English
23%Grades 3 & 5 · Proficient or Advanced
Students
—Total enrollment
Chronic absence
33%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 |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 12% | 21% |
| 2023 | 5% | 18% |
| 2024 | 9% | 17% |
| 2025 | 12% | 23% |
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
3%ProficientStandard Met
8%DevelopingStandard Nearly Met
26%MinimalStandard Not Met
63%AdvancedStandard Exceeded
8%ProficientStandard Met
14%DevelopingStandard Nearly Met
19%MinimalStandard Not Met
58%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 2022 to 2025
Has stayed near the 14th percentile since 2022.
Most rating sites would stop at “16% proficient” and call it done. TEAM Charter deserves a closer read. It sits at the 14th percentile of 5,721 California elementary schools — but the ranking is the least interesting thing on this page.
Test scores are one lens, and at this school they're a rough one right now. The sections below show the fuller picture — including the parts that are working.
As a charter, TEAM Charter enrolls by application rather than address. That changes how you get in, but it doesn't change the score.
237 tested · 3 of 3 grades published · cohort of 74 tracked
TEAM Charter scores 22 of 100 on SchoolScope's Scope Score — the 14th percentile of 5,721 California elementary schools (CDE CAASPP 2025).
Percentile among 5,721 elementary schools statewide
ELAYellow(Increased)MathYellow(Increased)
ShowHide the by-grade tables, year by year
ELA — % met or exceeded, by grade
| Grade | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 23% | 17% | 21% | 25% |
| Grade 4 | 22% | 20% | 23% | 18% |
| Grade 5 | 19% | 19% | 13% | 20% |
Math — % met or exceeded, by grade
| Grade | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 12% | 5% | 13% | 17% |
| Grade 4 | 10% | 8% | 14% | 9% |
| Grade 5 | 11% | 4% | 4% | 5% |
Where students land · CAASPP 2024–25
One in ten of students here meet the standard. 6% clear it by a lot.
ELA21% met or exceeded
Exceeded 9%Met 12%Nearly Met 22%Not Met 57%
Math11% met or exceeded
Exceeded 2%Met 8%Nearly Met 28%Not Met 62%
Exceeded Met Nearly Met Not Met
California elementary schools · average21% exceeded · 43% met or exceeded
This school against the California average
2022–2025 trend · CDE CAASPP
| Scope | % Exceeded | % Met+ | Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5) | Absence | Suspension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This school | 22 | 6% | 16% | Average · p55 | 32.6% | 0.5% |
| CA average · Elementary School | 39 | 21% | 43% | Average · p50 | 17.9% | 1.6% |
This schoolCA avg
Scope2239
% Exceeded6%21%
% Met+16%43%
Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5)Average · p55Average · p50
Absence32.6%17.9%
Suspension0.5%1.6%
California’s growth results and student groups
State growth model · CDE growth model 2024–25
California's own growth model splits here — the 38th percentile in reading against the 15th in math, among 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 — and its two subjects part company here. It puts this school around the 38th percentile of California elementary schools in reading and the 15th in math; ours, which blends the subjects, lands around the 55th. A gap that size between reading and math 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 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
4%
exceeded standard · 17% met or exceeded
ELA · 2025 · Grade 5
7%
exceeded standard · 20% met or exceeded
n = 74
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: 55th percentile among California elementary schools.55th pctile
State model · readingmatched students, grades 4-8California growth model, reading: −2 scale-score points versus the state's expectation, 38th percentile of 7,519 reported schools.38th pctile · −2 pts
State model · mathmatched students, grades 4-8California growth model, math: −13 scale-score points versus the state's expectation, 15th percentile of 7,518 reported schools.15th pctile · −13 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 behind the same group statewide.
At TEAM Charter in Stockton, 21.7% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 4.3% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. TEAM Charter outperforms its district average for low-income students by 17.4 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (10.8% Math proficient); Hispanic students (21.3% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 18.1 percentage points for english learner students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 203 students tested.
Low-income students here trail the state average for their group by 17 points in ELA — worth asking how the school is closing that gap.
Met or exceeded · reading and math combined
All students at this school: 16% met or exceeded
All StudentsAll Students: this school 16%, district —, state 43%16%
Socioeconomically DisadvantagedSocioeconomically Disadvantaged: this school 16%, district 3%, state 32%16% · +0 vs school
Hispanic/LatinoHispanic/Latino: this school 16%, district 4%, state 32%16% · +0 vs school
FemaleFemale: this school 16%, district 5%, state 44%16% · −0 vs school
MaleMale: this school 16%, district 4%, state 42%16% · +0 vs school
English LearnersEnglish Learners: this school 4%, district 2%, state 11%4% · −11 vs school
Black/African AmericanBlack/African American: this school 12%, district 3%, state 26%12% · −4 vs school
Students with DisabilitiesStudents with Disabilities: this school 7%, district 6%, state 15%7% · −9 vs school
8 of 16 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 falls by 6.0pp from grade 3 to grade 5 at this school.
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
Low-income students128 studentsLow-income students, reading: −3 scale-score points versus expectation, against 0 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 128 students.−3 pts · −3 vs typical
Hispanic or Latino students101 studentsHispanic or Latino students, reading: −1 scale-score points versus expectation, against +1 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 101 students.−1 pts · −2 vs typical
English Only90 studentsEnglish Only, reading: −1 scale-score points versus expectation, against +3 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 90 students.−1 pts · −4 vs typical
English Learner48 studentsEnglish Learner, reading: −5 scale-score points versus expectation, against −2 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 48 students.−5 pts · −3 vs typical
English learners only33 studentsEnglish learners only, reading: −12 scale-score points versus expectation, against −11 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 33 students.−12 pts · −1 vs typical
Math
Low-income students128 studentsLow-income students, math: −15 scale-score points versus expectation, against −1 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 128 students.−15 pts · −14 vs typical
Hispanic or Latino students101 studentsHispanic or Latino students, math: −12 scale-score points versus expectation, against −1 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 101 students.−12 pts · −11 vs typical
English Only90 studentsEnglish Only, math: −16 scale-score points versus expectation, against +1 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 90 students.−16 pts · −17 vs typical
English Learner48 studentsEnglish Learner, math: −5 scale-score points versus expectation, against +2 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 48 students.−5 pts · −7 vs typical
English learners only33 studentsEnglish learners only, math: −7 scale-score points versus expectation, against −2 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 33 students.−7 pts · −5 vs typical
this school typical California elementary school, same group| the centre tick is 0 = as predicted
— 3 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
The people teaching here
Context — never part of the Scope Score
Teaching staff24 teachers
Avg. experience4.9 years
Fully credentialed50%
First-year teachers13%
Intern / emergency permit35.6%
PrincipalAngela Phillips
ShowHide what the district pays
Teacher salary schedule$59,453 – $115,556
Principal salaryUp to $140,148
Superintendent salary$308,256
Pay is set by the district, not the school.
Attendance & discipline · 2024–25
Showing up, and staying in class
Chronic absenteeismChronic absenteeism: this school 32.6%, district 32.6%, state 17.9%32.6% · +14.7pp vs state
Suspension rateSuspension rate: this school 0.5%, district —, state 1.6%0.5% · −1.1pp vs state
This schoolDistrictCalifornia
Resources & neighborhood
What sits behind the school experience?
Explore school spending and the district budget
What gets spent · FY 2019–20
Its district spends $94,301 per student, more than the California average.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
Per-pupil spendingPer-pupil spending: $94,301, CA average $14,491$94,301 · district average
District averageCalifornia
Where the district's dollars go · FY 2024–25 · CDE SACS
Instruction 31%Instruction support 33%Student services 8%Administration 17%Buildings & maintenance 5%Other 6%
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$94,301 per pupil
2019$37,950 per pupil
2018$37,439 per pupil
2017$29,081 per pupil
2016$28,440 per pupil
The neighborhood · ACS 2024
The neighborhood it serves
Context — never part of the Scope Score
Worth knowing
Transitional kindergarten is offered here — confirmed by actual Census Day enrollment, not just the listed grade span.
On the state's science test (CAST), 7% 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 Latino70.7% · district 62.7% · CA 56.1%
White2.0% · district 11.3% · CA 19.9%
Asian0.6% · district 7.3% · CA 10.2%
Black20.2% · district 10.5% · CA 4.8%
Other6.7% · district 8.3% · CA 9.0%
Median income$31K · CA $85K
Median home value$377K · CA $659K
Bachelor's degree+16% · CA 35%
ZIP population7,066
Median age35 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TEAM Charter | Charter | Needs Support | 6% | 16% | School being viewed | |
| John McCandless Charter | Charter | Solid | 30% | 57% | 3.0 mi | |
| August Elementary | Public | Developing | 11% | 25% | 2.4 mi | |
| Aspire Port City Academy | Charter | Developing | 7% | 32% | 1.5 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.
8 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 enrollment with this charter school
Ask the school about applications, priorities and deadlines for your child’s grade.
School website →Schools across the K–12 journey
Elementary · K–5
Middle · 6–8
High school · 9–12
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.
Charter enrollment details
Plan your next step
What should I do next?
Worth a school visit
Ask what changed in the last two years, and what the school is asking families for. Growth shows up in these numbers a year or two after it shows up in classrooms.
- Ask how the school follows up when a student starts missing days — chronic absence often starts outside the classroom, not inside it.
- Ask what changes between grade 3 and grade 5 here, and who teaches the older kids.
- 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 TEAM Charter a good elementary school?
TEAM Charter has a Scope Score of 22 out of 100, placing it in the 14th percentile of California elementary schools and ranked #4,916 statewide. 5.7% of students exceeded the state standard on the 2025 CAASPP assessment, which is 15.7 percentage points below 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 TEAM Charter's CAASPP test scores?
On the 2025 CAASPP Smarter Balanced Assessment, 15.8% of students at TEAM Charter met or exceeded the state standard in ELA and Math combined, and 5.7% exceeded it. The gap between those numbers matters: 10.1% of students are at the proficiency floor, while 5.7% 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. 474 student-subject combinations were assessed.
How does TEAM Charter rank in California?
TEAM Charter ranks #4,916 among California elementary schools by Scope Score, placing it in the 14th 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 TEAM Charter getting better or worse?
SchoolScope follows the same cohort of students across grades rather than comparing two different grades in the same year. At TEAM Charter that cohort is 2023 G3 → 2025 G5, measured in SBAC scale-score points. Its gain ranks average among California elementary schools — roughly the 55th 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 TEAM Charter?
32.6% of students at TEAM Charter are chronically absent (missing 10% or more of school days), compared to 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 TEAM Charter compare to other schools in Stockton?
TEAM Charter scores 22/100 (14th 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. Use the schools in Stockton page or the map view to compare all elementary schools nearby.
How does TEAM Charter serve low-income and underrepresented students?
At TEAM Charter in Stockton, 21.7% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 4.3% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. TEAM Charter outperforms its district average for low-income students by 17.4 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (10.8% Math proficient); Hispanic students (21.3% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 18.1 percentage points for english learner students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 203 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.
A low score doesn't tell the whole story. Read: Your School Scored Low — Here's What That Actually Means
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
The 5 things our score weighs
The school's returning cohort — mostly, not exactly, the same kids two years on — gained 76 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 | 5.7% | 21.4% | 42% |
| Met or exceeded | 15.8% | 42.7% | 23% |
| Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5) | Average | average | 20% |
| Chronic absenteeism | 32.6% | 17.9% | 5% |
| Suspension rate | 0.5% | 1.6% | 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
TEAM Charter: reading the evidence
TEAM Charter posts low test scores — and suspensions run below the state rate (0.5% vs 1.6%). If this is your zoned school, the numbers below are where to start a conversation, not where to end one.
Subject proficiency describes tested students, while graduation describes a graduating cohort. These figures are not successive stages followed by the same students.
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.
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.
TEAM Charter is ranked #4,916 statewide.
01Score factorsWeighted composite · 2024–25
| Factor | School | State | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exceeded standard | 5.7% | 21.4% | 42% |
| Met or exceeded | 15.8% | 42.7% | 23% |
| Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5) | Average | average | 20% |
| Chronic absenteeism | 32.6% | 17.9% | 5% |
| Suspension rate | 0.5% | 1.6% | 5% |
- Exceeded standard
- ↓ vs CA 21.4% · index 35 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint
- Met or exceeded
- ↓ vs CA 42.7% · index 29 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint
- Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5)
- ↑ vs CA average · 55th pctile
- Chronic absenteeism
- ↓ vs CA 17.9% · index 26 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint · ▲ 1.4pp higher vs 2024
- Suspension rate
- ↑ vs CA 1.6% · index 60 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint · ▼ 0.5pp lower vs 2024
02By grade & subgroupCAASPP 2024–25 · % of tested students
ShowHide table 02 — By grade & subgroup
| ELA | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 81 | 10% | 15% | 21% | 54% | 25% | −18 |
| Grade 4 | 82 | 11% | 7% | 27% | 55% | 18% | −26 |
| Grade 5 | 74 | 7% | 14% | 18% | 62% | 20% | −27 |
| Math | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 81 | 5% | 12% | 26% | 57% | 17% | −28 |
| Grade 4 | 82 | 0% | 9% | 32% | 60% | 9% | −33 |
| Grade 5 | 74 | 1% | 4% | 26% | 69% | 5% | −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 | 74 | 0% | 7% | 50% | 43% |
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 | 203 | 21.7% | +17 | −17 |
| Hispanic/Latino | 169 | 21.3% | +16 | −18 |
| English Learners | 69 | 2.9% | +1 | −8 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TEAM Charter ← | — | 22 | 5.7% | 15.8% | −8.1pp | +76 pts | 0.5% |
| John McCandless Charter | 3 mi | 41 | 30.3% | 56.6% | −17.9pp | — | 3.2% |
| August Elementary | 2.4 mi | 30 | 11.2% | 25.3% | +6.3pp | — | 0.6% |
| Aspire Port City Academy | 1.5 mi | 29 | 7.0% | 31.6% | +6.6pp | — | 0.5% |
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 18 | 11 | #5062 | 4.5% | 16.2% | 49.4% | 0.5% | -2.9pp |
| 2023 | 14 | 3 | #5498 | 2.9% | 12.3% | 42.4% | 2.5% | +0.8pp |
| 2024 | 14 | 2 | #5591 | 3.0% | 14.8% | 31.1% | 0.9% | -8.2pp |
| 2025 | 22 | 14 | #4916 | 5.7% | 15.8% | 32.6% | 0.5% | -8.1pp |
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.
What we can't show
- — Low-income students here trail the state average for their group by 17 points in ELA — worth asking how the school is closing that gap.
05California growth model, by student group2025 · scale-score points vs the state's prediction · shown, never scored
ShowHide table 05 — California growth model, by student group
| Group | Reading | n | CDE band | Math | n | CDE band |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All Students | −2 | 144 | Average | −13 | 144 | Moderate |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | −3 | 128 | Average | −15 | 128 | Moderate |
| Hispanic or Latino | −1 | 101 | Average | −12 | 101 | Moderate |
| English Only | −1 | 90 | not categorised | −16 | 90 | not categorised |
| English Learner | −5 | 48 | Average | −5 | 48 | Average |
| English Learners Only | −12 | 33 | not categorised | −7 | 33 | not categorised |
| Students with Disabilities | −11 | 27 | Moderate | −7 | 27 | Moderate |
| Black or African American | −9 | 26 | Moderate | −11 | 26 | Moderate |
| Recently Reclassified Fluent-English Proficient Only | +7 | 15 | not categorised | −2 | 15 | not categorised |
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/team-charter-4958"
width="100%" height="210" loading="lazy"
style="border:0;border-radius:12px"
title="TEAM Charter — 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