Math
25%Grades 6 & 8 · Proficient or Advanced
Public middle school
William Jefferson Clinton Middle
No single number tells this school's story. Here's the honest picture.
23% of tested students are Proficient or Advanced in English and 25% 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
Phone(323) 235-7200
DistrictLos Angeles Unified
PrincipalBrendan Wagner
Grades6-8
Enrollment622 students
English
23%Grades 6 & 8 · Proficient or Advanced
Students
622Total enrollment
Chronic absence
32%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 6 & 8 · 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 | 17% | 27% |
| 2022 | 15% | 26% |
| 2023 | 17% | 20% |
| 2024 | 27% | 29% |
| 2025 | 25% | 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
9%ProficientStandard Met
15%DevelopingStandard Nearly Met
24%MinimalStandard Not Met
51%AdvancedStandard Exceeded
6%ProficientStandard Met
17%DevelopingStandard Nearly Met
27%MinimalStandard Not Met
50%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
Climbed from the 10th to the 32nd percentile since 2019 — past roughly 300 middle schools.
Most rating sites would stop at “25% proficient” and call it done. William Jefferson Clinton deserves a closer read. Nearly all of its students qualify for free or reduced lunch (California: 64%) — and reading the numbers without that context misreads the school.
589 tested · 3 of 3 grades published · cohort of 197 tracked
William Jefferson Clinton Middle scores 28 of 100 on SchoolScope's Scope Score — the 32nd percentile of 2,177 California middle schools (CDE CAASPP 2025).
The pandemic drop is behind this school: 25% of students meet the standard today, above the 19% who did in 2019.
Percentile among 2,177 middle schools statewide
ELAOrange(Maintained)MathOrange(Maintained)
ShowHide the by-grade tables, year by year
ELA — % met or exceeded, by grade
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 6 | 28% | 24% | 20% | 30% | 21% |
| Grade 7 | 16% | 30% | 25% | 20% | 27% |
| Grade 8 | 26% | 27% | 20% | 28% | 25% |
Math — % met or exceeded, by grade
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 6 | 18% | 14% | 19% | 23% | 23% |
| Grade 7 | 9% | 18% | 20% | 21% | 28% |
| Grade 8 | 16% | 15% | 15% | 30% | 26% |
Where students land · CAASPP 2024–25
One in four of students here meet the standard. 8% clear it by a lot.
ELA25% met or exceeded
Exceeded 6%Met 19%Nearly Met 24%Not Met 51%
Math26% met or exceeded
Exceeded 10%Met 16%Nearly Met 24%Not Met 50%
Exceeded Met Nearly Met Not Met
California middle schools · average17% exceeded · 40% met or exceeded
This school against the California average
2019–2025 trend · CDE CAASPP
| Scope | % Exceeded | % Met+ | Growth (2023 G6 → 2025 G8) | Absence | Suspension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This school | 28 | 8% | 25% | Average · p51 | 32.3% | 2.4% |
| CA average · Middle School | 39 | 17% | 40% | Average · p50 | 18.1% | 3.6% |
This schoolCA avg
Scope2839
% Exceeded8%17%
% Met+25%40%
Growth (2023 G6 → 2025 G8)Average · p51Average · p50
Absence32.3%18.1%
Suspension2.4%3.6%
California’s growth results and student groups
State growth model · CDE growth model 2024–25
California's own growth model splits here — the 9th percentile in reading against the 82nd in math, among middle 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 9th percentile of California middle schools in reading and the 82nd in math; ours, which blends the subjects, lands around the 51st. 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.
The returning cohort, two years on
ELA · 2023 · Grade 6
5%
exceeded standard · 20% met or exceeded
ELA · 2025 · Grade 8
6%
exceeded standard · 25% met or exceeded
n = 197
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, G6→G8SchoolScope growth measure: 51st percentile among California middle schools.51st pctile
State model · readingmatched students, grades 4-8California growth model, reading: −15 scale-score points versus the state's expectation, 9th percentile of 7,519 reported schools.9th pctile · −15 pts
State model · mathmatched students, grades 4-8California growth model, math: +13 scale-score points versus the state's expectation, 82nd percentile of 7,518 reported schools.82nd 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 William Jefferson Clinton Middle in Los Angeles, 24.7% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 40.9% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. William Jefferson Clinton Middle trails its district average for low-income students by 16.2 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (26.2% Math proficient); Hispanic students (25.3% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 23.8 percentage points for english learner students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 574 students tested.
Low-income students here trail the state average for their group by 13 points in ELA — worth asking how the school is closing that gap.
Met or exceeded · reading and math combined
All students at this school: 25% met or exceeded
All StudentsAll Students: this school 25%, district —, state 40%25%
Socioeconomically DisadvantagedSocioeconomically Disadvantaged: this school 25%, district 36%, state 32%25% · +0 vs school
Hispanic/LatinoHispanic/Latino: this school 26%, district 36%, state 32%26% · +1 vs school
MaleMale: this school 25%, district 41%, state 42%25% · −1 vs school
FemaleFemale: this school 26%, district 42%, state 44%26% · +1 vs school
English LearnersEnglish Learners: this school 3%, district 9%, state 11%3% · −23 vs school
Students with DisabilitiesStudents with Disabilities: this school 6%, district 14%, state 15%6% · −19 vs school
6 of 13 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 2.9pp from grade 6 to grade 8 at this school. District average: -0.3pp.
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 middle 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 students535 studentsLow-income students, reading: −14 scale-score points versus expectation, against −3 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 535 students.−14 pts · −11 vs typical
Hispanic or Latino students517 studentsHispanic or Latino students, reading: −15 scale-score points versus expectation, against −2 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 517 students.−15 pts · −13 vs typical
English Learner275 studentsEnglish Learner, reading: −20 scale-score points versus expectation, against −5 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 275 students.−20 pts · −15 vs typical
Recently reclassified185 studentsRecently reclassified, reading: −16 scale-score points versus expectation, against +2 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 185 students.−16 pts · −18 vs typical
English Only143 studentsEnglish Only, reading: −8 scale-score points versus expectation, against 0 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 143 students.−8 pts · −8 vs typical
Math
Low-income students527 studentsLow-income students, math: +13 scale-score points versus expectation, against −5 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 527 students.+13 pts · +18 vs typical
Hispanic or Latino students510 studentsHispanic or Latino students, math: +13 scale-score points versus expectation, against −6 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 510 students.+13 pts · +19 vs typical
English Learner272 studentsEnglish Learner, math: +12 scale-score points versus expectation, against −3 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 272 students.+12 pts · +15 vs typical
Recently reclassified183 studentsRecently reclassified, math: +16 scale-score points versus expectation, against −1 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 183 students.+16 pts · +17 vs typical
English Only139 studentsEnglish Only, math: +12 scale-score points versus expectation, against −3 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 139 students.+12 pts · +15 vs typical
this school typical California middle school, same group| the centre tick is 0 = as predicted
— 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.
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 17 students for every teacher here.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
Students per teacher17 · district 20
Teaching staff37 teachers
Avg. experience13.6 years
Fully credentialed84%
First-year teachers8%
Intern / emergency permit8.8%
PrincipalBrendan Wagner
ShowHide what the district pays
Teacher salary schedule$60,420 – $122,706
Principal salary$154,576 – $170,030
Superintendent salary$440,000
Pay is set by the district, not the school.
Attendance & discipline · 2024–25
Kids here miss more school, and get suspended less, than the state average.
32.3% of students miss a month or more of school, versus 18.1% statewide. High absence often tracks community stress — worth asking about on a tour.
Chronic absenteeismChronic absenteeism: this school 32.3%, district 22.8%, state 18.1%32.3% · +14.2pp vs state
Suspension rateSuspension rate: this school 2.4%, district —, state 3.6%2.4% · −1.2pp vs state
This schoolDistrictCalifornia
ShowHide attendance by student group and by grade
Chronic absenteeism by grade band
Grades 4–633.2%
Grades 7–832.3%
Resources & neighborhood
What sits behind the school experience?
Explore school spending and the district budget
What gets spent · FY 2024–25
It spends $27,585 per student, more than the California average.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
$2,684 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: $27,585, CA average $14,491$27,585 · spent at this school
Federal share$2,684 per student
District current expense · FY 2024–25$29,292 per student
This schoolDistrictCalifornia
Where the district's dollars go · FY 2024–25 · CDE SACS
Instruction 52%Instruction support 16%Student services 12%Administration 7%Buildings & maintenance 10%Other 2%
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$18,180 per pupil
2019$16,355 per pupil
2018$15,793 per pupil
2017$13,247 per pupil
2016$13,549 per pupil
Source: NCES F-33 · Full district breakdown →
The neighborhood · ACS 2024
Nearly all 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), 12% 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 Latino93.3% · district 73.2% · CA 56.1%
White0.6% · district 9.9% · CA 19.9%
Black5.6% · district 7.2% · CA 4.8%
Other0.5% · district 6.3% · CA 9.0%
Free or reduced lunch98.4% · CA 64%
Median income$35K · CA $85K
Median home value$862K · CA $659K
Bachelor's degree+29% · CA 35%
ZIP population38,715
Median age25 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 · middle 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| William Jefferson Clinton Middle | Public | Developing | 8% | 25% | School being viewed | |
| Libertas College Preparatory Charter | Charter | Solid | 15% | 40% | 2.5 mi | |
| John Adams Middle | Public | Solid | 16% | 39% | 0.3 mi | |
| Alliance Kory Hunter Middle | Charter | Solid | 11% | 35% | 2.7 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 Los Angeles Unified.
District information →School website →Schools across the K–12 journey
Elementary · K–5
Ricardo Lizarraga ElementaryPublished boundary overlapScope Score 35/100
Trinity Street ElementaryPublished boundary overlapScope Score 25/100
West Vernon Avenue ElementaryPublished boundary overlapScope Score 50/100
Quincy Jones ElementaryAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 35/100
Dolores Huerta ElementaryAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 34/100
Wadsworth Avenue ElementaryAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 27/100
Dr. Theodore T. Alexander Jr. Science CenterAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 40/100
Middle · 6–8
High school · 9–12
Thomas Jefferson Senior HighPublished boundary overlapScope Score 47/100
Santee Education ComplexPublished boundary overlapScope Score 48/100
Dr. Maya Angelou Community HighPublished boundary overlapScope Score 41/100
Nava College Preparatory AcademyPublished boundary overlapScope Score 53/100
Early College Academy-LA Trade Tech CollegeAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 65/100
The road from this school ends at Middle College High, which sent 5 graduates to UC campuses last fall and teaches 11 AP subjects. Those numbers describe past cohorts — a child starting here today would reach Middle College High around 2031, and 6 years is a long time for a school to hold still, and by the state's 2023 count 87% of Middle College High's graduates enrolled in college somewhere, UC or not.
5 UC enrollees (fall 2025) · 11 AP subjects taught → full record on Middle College High's page
Source: UC & College Board
Source: sabs_2016. 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 the school is working on next. Strong numbers tell you where a school is, not where it's going.
- Ask how the school follows up when a student starts missing days — chronic absence often starts outside the classroom, not inside it.
- 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 William Jefferson Clinton Middle a good middle school?
William Jefferson Clinton Middle has a Scope Score of 28 out of 100, placing it in the 32nd percentile of California middle schools and ranked #1,483 statewide. 7.9% of students exceeded the state standard on the 2025 CAASPP assessment, which is 9.2 percentage points below the California average of 17.2%. The Scope Score weights 6 dimensions for middle schools: exceeded standard (42%), met or exceeded (proficient) (23%), grade 6-to-8 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 William Jefferson Clinton Middle's CAASPP test scores?
On the 2025 CAASPP Smarter Balanced Assessment, 25.0% of students at William Jefferson Clinton Middle met or exceeded the state standard in ELA and Math combined, and 7.9% exceeded it. The gap between those numbers matters: 17.1% of students are at the proficiency floor, while 7.9% 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. 1,181 student-subject combinations were assessed.
How does William Jefferson Clinton Middle rank in California?
William Jefferson Clinton Middle ranks #1,483 among California middle schools by Scope Score, placing it in the 32nd percentile. This ranking is based on a weighted composite of 2025 CAASPP test performance (exceeded and met rates), same-cohort growth (2023 G6 → 2025 G8), 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 William Jefferson Clinton Middle getting better or worse?
SchoolScope follows the same cohort of students across grades rather than comparing two different grades in the same year. At William Jefferson Clinton Middle that cohort is 2023 G6 → 2025 G8, measured in SBAC scale-score points. Its gain ranks average among California middle schools — roughly the 51st 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 middle 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 William Jefferson Clinton Middle?
32.3% of students at William Jefferson Clinton Middle are chronically absent (missing 10% or more of school days), compared to the California average of 18.1%. The suspension rate is 2.4%. 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 William Jefferson Clinton Middle compare to other schools in Los Angeles?
William Jefferson Clinton Middle scores 28/100 (32nd percentile) among California middle 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 622 students. Use the schools in Los Angeles page or the map view to compare all middle schools nearby.
How does William Jefferson Clinton Middle serve low-income and underrepresented students?
At William Jefferson Clinton Middle in Los Angeles, 24.7% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 40.9% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. William Jefferson Clinton Middle trails its district average for low-income students by 16.2 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (26.2% Math proficient); Hispanic students (25.3% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 23.8 percentage points for english learner students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 574 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.
What high school does William Jefferson Clinton Middle feed into?
By attendance boundary, William Jefferson Clinton Middle is zoned to Thomas Jefferson Senior High, Santee Education Complex, and Dr. Maya Angelou Community High. Scope Scores: Thomas Jefferson Senior High 47, Santee Education Complex 48, Dr. Maya Angelou Community High 41 out of 100. Boundaries come from the U.S. Department of Education's School Attendance Boundary Survey, a 2015-16 collection and the most recent national one — they are approximate and may since have changed. A boundary is also not a placement guarantee: magnet, charter, open-enrollment and inter-district transfer options mean students from one school often continue to several different ones. Confirm your address with the district before making an enrollment or housing decision. Data source: NCES School Attendance Boundary Survey, analyzed by SchoolScope.
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 6 things our score weighs
The school's returning cohort — mostly, not exactly, the same kids two years on — gained 46 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 | 7.9% | 17.2% | 42% |
| Met or exceeded | 25.0% | 40.0% | 23% |
| Growth (2023 G6 → 2025 G8) | Average | average | 20% |
| Chronic absenteeism | 32.3% | 18.1% | 5% |
| Suspension rate | 2.4% | 3.6% | 5% |
| EL proficiency (ELPAC) | 27.4% | 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
William Jefferson Clinton Middle: reading the evidence
William Jefferson Clinton posts 25% meeting the standard and 7.9% exceeding it, against 40% and 17.2% statewide. The gaps and the bright spots below are the real read.
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.
William Jefferson Clinton Middle is ranked #1,483 statewide · #157 of 225 in Los Angeles Unified.
01Score factorsWeighted composite · 2024–25
| Factor | School | State | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exceeded standard | 7.9% | 17.2% | 42% |
| Met or exceeded | 25.0% | 40.0% | 23% |
| Growth (2023 G6 → 2025 G8) | Average | average | 20% |
| Chronic absenteeism | 32.3% | 18.1% | 5% |
| Suspension rate | 2.4% | 3.6% | 5% |
| EL proficiency (ELPAC) | 27.4% | 18.0% | 5% |
- Exceeded standard
- ↓ vs CA 17.2% · index 40 · 50 = CA middle-school midpoint
- Met or exceeded
- ↓ vs CA 40.0% · index 38 · 50 = CA middle-school midpoint
- Growth (2023 G6 → 2025 G8)
- ↑ vs CA average · 51st pctile
- Chronic absenteeism
- ↓ vs CA 18.1% · index 31 · 50 = CA middle-school midpoint · ▲ 2.0pp higher vs 2024
- Suspension rate
- ↑ vs CA 3.6% · index 55 · 50 = CA middle-school midpoint · ▲ 0.2pp higher vs 2024
- EL proficiency (ELPAC)
- ↑ vs CA 18.0% · index 58 · 50 = CA middle-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 6 | 183 | 7% | 15% | 31% | 48% | 21% | −25 |
| Grade 7 | 209 | 6% | 22% | 20% | 53% | 27% | −20 |
| Grade 8 | 197 | 6% | 19% | 24% | 51% | 25% | −21 |
| Math | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 6 | 187 | 9% | 14% | 24% | 53% | 23% | −11 |
| Grade 7 | 209 | 11% | 17% | 25% | 47% | 28% | −6 |
| Grade 8 | 196 | 10% | 16% | 24% | 49% | 26% | −6 |
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 | 199 | 1% | 11% | 59% | 29% |
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 | 574 | 24.7% | −16 | −13 |
| Hispanic/Latino | 553 | 25.3% | −16 | −14 |
| English Learners | 128 | 0.8% | −6 | −10 |
03Nearest middle 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| William Jefferson Clinton Middle ← | — | 28 | 7.9% | 25.0% | +3.3pp | +46 pts | 2.4% |
| Libertas College Preparatory Charter | 2.5 mi | 43 | 14.8% | 40.4% | +4.6pp | — | 0.2% |
| John Adams Middle | 0.3 mi | 42 | 15.8% | 39.2% | +1.3pp | — | 3.1% |
| Alliance Kory Hunter Middle | 2.7 mi | 41 | 11.1% | 35.5% | +5.7pp | — | 2.9% |
| California average | — | 39 | 17.2% | 40.0% | +1.5pp | — | 3.6% |
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 | 19 | 10 | #1749 | 3.7% | 18.8% | 18.7% | 0.6% | -1.9pp |
| 2022 | 21 | 24 | #1612 | 3.8% | 21.6% | 30.5% | 0.1% | +1.8pp |
| 2023 | 21 | 26 | #1581 | 5.7% | 19.9% | 31.5% | 0.3% | -2.1pp |
| 2024 | 36 | 52 | #1029 | 9.6% | 25.4% | 30.2% | 2.2% | +2.7pp |
| 2025 | 28 | 32 | #1483 | 7.9% | 25.0% | 32.3% | 2.4% | +3.3pp |
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
What we can't show
- — Low-income students here trail the state average for their group by 13 points in ELA — worth asking how the school is closing that gap.
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 | 20.2% | 32.1% | +11.9pp |
| Male | 17.3% | 32.9% | +15.6pp |
| Black/African American | 52.6% | 42.5% | -10.1pp |
| Hispanic/Latino | 15.2% | 31.6% | +16.4pp |
| Students with Disabilities | 25.0% | 38.5% | +13.5pp |
| English Learners | 16.8% | 33.0% | +16.2pp |
| Foster Youth | 35.0% | — | — |
| Homeless | 40.0% | 51.4% | +11.4pp |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | 18.7% | 32.9% | +14.2pp |
| All Students | 18.8% | 32.6% | +13.8pp |
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 | −15 | 539 | Moderate | +13 | 531 | Accelerated |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | −14 | 535 | Moderate | +13 | 527 | Accelerated |
| Hispanic or Latino | −15 | 517 | Moderate | +13 | 510 | Accelerated |
| English Learner | −20 | 275 | Moderate | +12 | 272 | Accelerated |
| Recently Reclassified Fluent-English Proficient Only | −16 | 185 | not categorised | +16 | 183 | not categorised |
| English Only | −8 | 143 | not categorised | +12 | 139 | not categorised |
| Long-Term English Learner (grades 6-8 only) | −21 | 95 | Minimal | +4 | 94 | Average |
| English Learners Only | −31 | 90 | not categorised | +4 | 89 | not categorised |
| Students with Disabilities | −22 | 84 | Minimal | +12 | 83 | Accelerated |
| Black or African American | −17 | 19 | Moderate | +20 | 19 | Exceptional |
| Homeless Youth | −28 | 17 | Minimal | +11 | 18 | 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. 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.
Embed this scorecard
<iframe
src="https://schoolscope.co/embed/school/william-jefferson-clinton-middle-2011"
width="100%" height="210" loading="lazy"
style="border:0;border-radius:12px"
title="William Jefferson Clinton Middle — 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=2,177 middle 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