School district · Fresno County

Fresno Unified schools

Fresno Unified has public schools at every stage: 73 of the 5,726 California elementary schools we score, 20 of 2,529 middle and 14 of 1,498 high. Every stage has schools in all four bands, Strong to Needs Support (spring 2026 tests; high schools, spring 2025).

Elementary · 73 schools

from bottom 1% to 92nd · among 5,726 California elementary schools we score · spring 2026 tests

27Needs Support
29Developing
13Solid
4Strong

Each column counts the schools in one five-percentile step; the number above it is that count.

Middle and high school pictures

Middle · 20 schools

from bottom 1% to 98th · among 2,529 California middle schools we score · spring 2026 tests

  • Edison Computech: 98th percentile, Strong
  • Baird Middle: 85th percentile, Strong
  • Endeavor Charter: 66th percentile, Solid
  • Farber School of Independent Studies and Online: 66th percentile, Solid
  • Bullard Talent: 50th percentile, Solid
  • Cooper Middle: 40th percentile, Developing
  • Wawona K-8: 25th percentile, Developing
  • Kings Canyon Middle: 25th percentile, Developing
  • Tioga Middle: 23rd percentile, Needs Support
  • Tenaya Middle: 22nd percentile, Needs Support
  • Sierra Charter: 21st percentile, Needs Support
  • Yosemite Middle: 19th percentile, Needs Support
  • Scandinavian Middle: 17th percentile, Needs Support
  • Sequoia Middle: 16th percentile, Needs Support
  • Elizabeth Terronez Middle: 13th percentile, Needs Support
  • Ahwahnee Middle: 8th percentile, Needs Support
  • Tehipite Middle: 8th percentile, Needs Support
  • Hamilton Elementary: 2nd percentile, Needs Support
  • Fort Miller Middle: 1st percentile, Needs Support
  • Rutherford B. Gaston Sr. Middle: bottom 1%, Needs Support
12Needs Support
3Developing
3Solid
2Strong

High · 14 schools

from 4th to 98th · among 1,498 California high schools we score · spring 2025 tests

  • University High: 98th percentile, Strong
  • Design Science Middle College High: 94th percentile, Strong
  • Phillip J Patino School of Entrepreneurship: 66th percentile, Solid
  • Edison High: 64th percentile, Solid
  • Erma Duncan Polytechnical High: 59th percentile, Solid
  • Endeavor Charter: 46th percentile, Developing
  • Bullard High: 35th percentile, Developing
  • Sunnyside High: 25th percentile, Developing
  • Herbert Hoover High: 19th percentile, Needs Support
  • McLane High: 19th percentile, Needs Support
  • Roosevelt High: 16th percentile, Needs Support
  • Sierra Charter: 11th percentile, Needs Support
  • Fresno High: 9th percentile, Needs Support
  • Farber School of Independent Studies and Online: 4th percentile, Needs Support
6Needs Support
3Developing
3Solid
2Strong

Each column counts the schools in one five-percentile step; the number above it is that count. One dot per school. Each stage is placed only among California schools at its own level. 6 of the 99 ranked schools teach more than one level, 2 of them all three, so they appear in more than one picture.

  • 99 ranked schools
  • 10 schools not ranked statewide

Schools around Fresno Unified

109 listed public schools with mapped locations.

Open full map →

Loading school locations…

Percentile among California schools at the same level

  • Strong75th+
  • Solid50–74th
  • Developing25–49th
  • Needs Supportbelow 25th
  • Not scored

The school lists on this page are also available without the map.

Elementary schools

Which elementary schools in Fresno Unified score highest?

Manchester Gate is highest, at the 92nd percentile.

That’s higher than 92 in 100 California elementary schools we score (spring 2026 tests).

Highest in Fresno Unified

Each percentile compares a school with California schools at its own level. What patterns mean

Show the other 70 elementary schools
Context

The average elementary school in Fresno Unified had 26 in 100 students chronically absent (missed 10% or more of school days) in 2025–26; the average California elementary school we score had 17 in 100. Both are averages of school rates, each school counted once.

2 elementary schools not ranked statewide

Special education centers and court and community schools enroll students differently from a regular school, so we don’t rank them.

Middle schools

Which middle schools in Fresno Unified score highest?

Edison Computech is highest, at the 98th percentile.

That’s higher than 98 in 100 California middle schools we score (spring 2026 tests).

Highest in Fresno Unified

Each percentile compares a school with California schools at its own level. What patterns mean

Show the other 17 middle schools
Context

The average middle school in Fresno Unified had 24 in 100 students chronically absent in 2025–26; the average California middle school we score had 18 in 100.

High schools

Which high schools in Fresno Unified score highest?

University High is highest, at the 98th percentile.

That’s higher than 98 in 100 California high schools we score (spring 2025 tests).

Highest in Fresno Unified

Each percentile compares a school with California schools at its own level. What patterns mean

Show the other 11 high schools
Context

The average high school in Fresno Unified had 23 in 100 students chronically absent in 2025–26; the average California high school we score had 22 in 100.

8 high schools not ranked statewide

Alternative schools, continuation schools, special education centers and court and community schools enroll students differently from a regular school, so each is compared only with its own kind or not ranked. The others have no statewide percentile this year.

The district

Where does Fresno Unified’s money go, and what does it plan?

Fresno Unified spent $24,938 per student in the 2024–25 school year.

The typical California district spent $20,491. About 55 cents of every Fresno Unified dollar went to classroom instruction.

Spending by function

Day-to-day spending per student in average daily attendance, from the district’s annual financial report (SACS) to the California Department of Education. District-wide: it includes central administration and costs never assigned to one campus.

Share by function, 2024–25

  • Instruction55%
  • Instruction support12%
  • Student services10%
  • Administration5%
  • Buildings & maintenance11%
  • Other7%

Shares of the same spending total, by the report’s spending categories, rounded so they add up to 100. Names are simplified from the report’s own categories.

What the district plans

$1.67 billion

planned in its 2026–27 plan for 58 funded actions in 4 goals. That’s all of its general fund budget. These are planned amounts; the district reports what it spent in a later plan.

The plan in short

Source: the district’s yearly spending plan (Local Control and Accountability Plan, or LCAP, 377 pages), as posted to the California School Dashboard.

Where the money goes

Three actions take 58% of the money. The plan itself puts 77% of it toward staff. Actions the plan labels “Base” aren’t part of its extra services for English learners, low-income students and foster youth.

  • Base Instruction $502.0 million
  • Base Special Education $262.2 million
  • Base Operational Services $204.4 million
  • 55 other actions
Reading, math and catch-up help

6 of the plan’s 58 funded actions name reading, math, catch-up help or English learners in their titles.

Actions whose titles name reading, math, catch-up help or English learners
  • Reading $19.2 million
  • Math $0.6 million
  • Catch-up help $22.0 million
  • English learners $22.1 million

An action naming two of these appears under both.

Largest of these

  • All teachers are teachers of English learner (EL) students$20.6 million
  • Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant – Literacy Initiative$18.9 million
  • Early Interventions$3.2 million
For high-need students (English learners, low-income students and foster youth), what changed and what its goals measure
For high-need students

It plans $291.2 million in extra services for English learners, low-income students and foster youth. For 2025–26, it planned $277.5 million and estimates it spent $281.7 million, $4.2 million (2%) more than planned (our arithmetic).

What changed

The total is $27.0 million (2%) lower than in the 2025–26 plan. The biggest change in dollars is Base Operational Services, which went from $190.9 million to $204.4 million.

Largest cuts

  • Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant – Literacy Initiative−⁠$10.7 million
  • Base Instruction−⁠$7.7 million

Largest increases

  • Base Operational Services+⁠$13.5 million
  • Instructional Supports and Instructional Coaches+⁠$13.0 million
  • Base Other Expenses+⁠$11.7 million

New in the 2026–27 plan

  • Base Expanded Learning Programs$109.8 million
  • Base Student and Family Services$25.5 million
  • School Site Allocations to be Prioritized by each School's Site Council to Support the Lowest-Performing Student Groups in Red on the California School Dashboard$7.9 million

Ask: What did Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant – Literacy Initiative pay for, and what changes now that the 2026–27 plan gives it $10.7 million less?

What its goals measure

Read these state results for the district’s own schools as context for the goals they measure; results alone can’t show what the plan caused.

What its goals measure: state results, 2024–25 and 2025–26
Measure2024–252025–26Change
English, every tested grade: Proficient or Advanced in 2025–26, met or exceeded in 2024–25Goal 1 · Academic Growth & Achievement37%40%up 3 pts
Math, every tested grade: Proficient or Advanced in 2025–26, met or exceeded in 2024–25Goal 1 · Academic Growth & Achievement27%29%up 2 pts
Chronically absentCounted across all the district’s students, not averaged by schoolGoal 2 · “The Whole Child” (Engagement and Social-Emotional Learning)32 in 10029 in 1003 fewer in 100
Suspended at least onceGoal 2 · “The Whole Child” (Engagement and Social-Emotional Learning)5.9%5.4%down 0.5 pts

Goal 4 tracks named schools and Goal 3 tracks other measures, so they aren’t shown here.

Figures from CDE’s state test, chronic absence and suspension files. Test figures cover every grade the district tests (California tests grades 3–8 and 11), so they differ from a profile’s rated grades. We combined the district’s schools ourselves, weighted by students and leaving out charter schools. Chronically absent means a student missed 10% or more of school days.

The plan’s own titles and amounts
  • Base Instruction · $502,030,375
  • Base Special Education · $262,198,920
  • Base Operational Services · $204,410,089
The full plan4 goals, 40 measures and where the money goes

We calculate each action’s share of the plan by dividing its planned amount by the total of the plan’s funded actions ($1.67 billion).

Where does the money go?

74% to Goal 1, Academic Growth & Achievement. Each box is one action, sized by its planned dollars and coloured by its change since last year’s plan. Tap a box to open its goal.

G1
G2
G3

Change since the 2025–26 plan, same title

  • fell 25% or more
  • fell 10–25%
  • fell 2–10%
  • within 2%
  • grew 2–10%
  • grew 10–25%
  • grew 25% or more
  • new or renamed title
  • not compared: unconfirmed, or repeated across goals

Every goal, in the plan’s order

Goal 1Academic Growth & Achievement$1.23 billion74% of action budgets

30 funded actions · reworded since the 2025–26 plan · p. 23 ↗

Largest funded actions

  1. Base Instruction$502.0 millionaction 1.17 · p. 302 ↗
  2. Base Special Education$262.2 millionaction 1.27 · p. 303 ↗
  3. Base Expanded Learning Programs$109.8 millionaction 1.15 · p. 302 ↗
  4. Base Professional Learning$50.7 millionaction 1.18 · p. 302 ↗
  5. Instructional Supports and Instructional Coaches$42.7 millionaction 1.05 · p. 301 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $19.5 million is state funding counted toward those services

25 more funded actions in this goal

  • Additional Teachers Above Base Staffing · action 1.06 · p. 301 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$37.8 million
  • Linked Learning, ROP, and CTE Pathway Development · action 1.28 · p. 303 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $11.6 million is state funding counted toward those services$28.4 million
  • Base Technology Access and Support · action 1.19 · p. 302 ↗$23.7 million
  • All teachers are teachers of English learner (EL) students · action 1.14 · p. 302 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $16.0 million is state funding counted toward those services$20.6 million
  • High Quality School Site Health Services · action 1.20 · p. 302 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $9.7 million is state funding counted toward those services$20.4 million
  • Middle & High School Redesign · action 1.03 · p. 301 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$18.9 million
  • Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant – Literacy Initiative · action 1.01 · p. 301 ↗$18.9 million
  • School Counselors & Resource Counseling Assistants · action 1.31 · p. 303 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$18.1 million
  • Additional School Site Administration Above Base · action 1.07 · p. 301 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $5.4 million is state funding counted toward those services$16.1 million
  • Student Technology Access and Annual Refresh · action 1.21 · p. 302 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$14.5 million
  • Eliminate Elementary Combination Classes · action 1.04 · p. 301 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$7.3 million
  • Historically Underserved Student Groups · action 1.08 · p. 301 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$6.6 million
  • Maintain Additional Services for Phoenix Community Day School · action 1.13 · p. 302 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$6.3 million
  • GATE (Gifted and Talented Education)/​AP (Advanced Placement)/​IB (International Baccalaureate) · action 1.11 · p. 302 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$4.8 million
  • Upgrading Access to Technology · action 1.22 · p. 302 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$4.3 million
  • Additional Teacher Supply Funds · action 1.02 · p. 301 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$3.9 million
  • Early Interventions · action 1.24 · p. 303 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$3.2 million
  • Program Specialists · action 1.23 · p. 302 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$2.4 million
  • Supports for Homeless Youth · action 1.26 · p. 303 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$2.1 million
  • Expand Alternative Education · action 1.12 · p. 302 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$1.9 million
  • Supports for Foster Youth / Project Access · action 1.25 · p. 303 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $201,684 is state funding counted toward those services$1.8 million
  • Expansion of Dual Language Immersion Programs · action 1.16 · p. 302 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$1.4 million
  • Additional Supports for Libraries · action 1.10 · p. 302 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$1.3 million
  • CTE STEM PK-6 Kids Invent! · action 1.29 · p. 303 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$1.2 million
  • Men's and Women's Alliance · action 1.30 · p. 303 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $917,163 is state funding counted toward those services$1.1 million

Changes from last year’s plan, same title

  1. Instructional Supports and Instructional Coaches+⁠$13.0 million$29.7 million → $42.7 million · p. 301 ↗
  2. Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant – Literacy Initiative−⁠$10.7 million$29.6 million → $18.9 million · p. 301 ↗
  3. Base Special Education+⁠$8.7 million$253.5 million → $262.2 million · p. 303 ↗

Every other line in this goal, against last year’s plan

  • Base Instruction · $509.7 million → $502.0 million · p. 302 ↗−⁠$7.7 million
  • Base Expanded Learning Programs · $109.8 million · p. 302 ↗new or renamed
  • Base Professional Learning · $50.5 million → $50.7 million · p. 302 ↗+⁠$0.2 million
  • Additional Teachers Above Base Staffing · $33.4 million → $37.8 million · p. 301 ↗+⁠$4.4 million
  • Linked Learning, ROP, and CTE Pathway Development · $27.9 million → $28.4 million · p. 303 ↗+⁠$0.4 million
  • Base Technology Access and Support · $24.7 million → $23.7 million · p. 302 ↗−⁠$1.0 million
  • All teachers are teachers of English learner (EL) students · $20.0 million → $20.6 million · p. 302 ↗+⁠$0.6 million
  • High Quality School Site Health Services · $20.8 million → $20.4 million · p. 302 ↗−⁠$0.4 million
  • Middle & High School Redesign · $18.2 million → $18.9 million · p. 301 ↗+⁠$0.8 million
  • School Counselors & Resource Counseling Assistants · $18.3 million → $18.1 million · p. 303 ↗−⁠$0.2 million
  • Additional School Site Administration Above Base · $13.6 million → $16.1 million · p. 301 ↗+⁠$2.5 million
  • Student Technology Access and Annual Refresh · $15.4 million → $14.5 million · p. 302 ↗−⁠$1.0 million
  • Eliminate Elementary Combination Classes · $10.6 million → $7.3 million · p. 301 ↗−⁠$3.4 million
  • Historically Underserved Student Groups · $5.3 million → $6.6 million · p. 301 ↗+⁠$1.4 million
  • Maintain Additional Services for Phoenix Community Day School · $6.2 million → $6.3 million · p. 302 ↗+⁠$0.2 million
  • GATE (Gifted and Talented Education)/​AP (Advanced Placement)/​IB (International Baccalaureate) · $6.2 million → $4.8 million · p. 302 ↗−⁠$1.4 million
  • Upgrading Access to Technology · $4.3 million → $4.3 million · p. 302 ↗unchanged
  • Additional Teacher Supply Funds · $4.2 million → $3.9 million · p. 301 ↗−⁠$0.3 million
  • Early Interventions · $3.6 million → $3.2 million · p. 303 ↗−⁠$0.4 million
  • Program Specialists · $2.4 million · p. 302 ↗new or renamed
  • Supports for Homeless Youth · $2.5 million → $2.1 million · p. 303 ↗−⁠$0.4 million
  • Expand Alternative Education · $2.4 million → $1.9 million · p. 302 ↗−⁠$0.4 million
  • Supports for Foster Youth / Project Access · $1.8 million · p. 303 ↗new or renamed
  • Expansion of Dual Language Immersion Programs · $1.4 million → $1.4 million · p. 302 ↗+⁠$23,008
  • Additional Supports for Libraries · $1.3 million → $1.3 million · p. 302 ↗unchanged
  • CTE STEM PK-6 Kids Invent! · $1.4 million → $1.2 million · p. 303 ↗−⁠$0.2 million
  • Men's and Women's Alliance · $1.5 million → $1.1 million · p. 303 ↗−⁠$0.4 million

A reworded title counts as new.

How the plan measures it · 25 measures

None of these has an all-students line we can quote; the plan’s table lists them from p. 23 ↗.

Goal 2“The Whole Child” (Engagement and Social-Emotional Learning)$128.9 million8% of action budgets

14 funded actions · reworded since the 2025–26 plan · p. 83 ↗

Largest funded actions

  1. Increased Funding for Music$28.0 millionaction 2.04 · p. 303 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $2.2 million is state funding counted toward those services
  2. Base Student and Family Services$25.5 millionaction 2.08 · p. 305 ↗
  3. Increase School Allocations for Athletics$20.5 millionaction 2.01 · p. 303 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $17.6 million is state funding counted toward those services
  4. Mental Health Supports$19.4 millionaction 2.11 · p. 306 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $16.0 million is state funding counted toward those services
  5. Campus Safety Assistants$10.7 millionaction 2.13 · p. 306 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services

9 more funded actions in this goal

  • School Climate and Culture Expansion · action 2.06 · p. 304 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$7.5 million
  • Family Engagement Hour Training · action 2.10 · p. 306 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$3.8 million
  • Restorative Practices / Relationship Centered Schools · action 2.07 · p. 304 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $246,483 is state funding counted toward those services$3.1 million
  • Department of Culture and Student Inclusion · action 2.14 · p. 306 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$2.9 million
  • Transportation Services · action 2.12 · p. 306 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $869,436 is state funding counted toward those services$2.6 million
  • District-Funded Educational Enrichment Trips · action 2.02 · p. 303 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$2.4 million
  • Campus Climate and Culture Teachers · action 2.09 · p. 306 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$1.8 million
  • Student Peer Mentor Program · action 2.05 · p. 303 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$0.7 million
  • District Arts Collaborative Project · action 2.03 · p. 303 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$0.1 million

Changes from last year’s plan, same title

  1. Mental Health Supports+⁠$6.6 million$12.8 million → $19.4 million · p. 306 ↗
  2. Increase School Allocations for Athletics+⁠$4.3 million$16.1 million → $20.5 million · p. 303 ↗
  3. Increased Funding for Music−⁠$3.5 million$31.4 million → $28.0 million · p. 303 ↗

Every other line in this goal, against last year’s plan

  • Base Student and Family Services · $25.5 million · p. 305 ↗new or renamed
  • Campus Safety Assistants · $7.7 million → $10.7 million · p. 306 ↗+⁠$3.0 million
  • School Climate and Culture Expansion · $9.3 million → $7.5 million · p. 304 ↗−⁠$1.8 million
  • Family Engagement Hour Training · $5.9 million → $3.8 million · p. 306 ↗−⁠$2.1 million
  • Restorative Practices / Relationship Centered Schools · $4.0 million → $3.1 million · p. 304 ↗−⁠$0.9 million
  • Department of Culture and Student Inclusion · $2.9 million · p. 306 ↗new or renamed
  • Transportation Services · $2.5 million → $2.6 million · p. 306 ↗+⁠$49,090
  • District-Funded Educational Enrichment Trips · $4.6 million → $2.4 million · p. 303 ↗−⁠$2.2 million
  • Campus Climate and Culture Teachers · $1.5 million → $1.8 million · p. 306 ↗+⁠$0.3 million
  • Student Peer Mentor Program · $681,641 → $672,770 · p. 303 ↗−⁠$8,871
  • District Arts Collaborative Project · $1.1 million → $0.1 million · p. 303 ↗−⁠$1.0 million

A reworded title counts as new.

How the plan measures it · 7 measures

None of these has an all-students line we can quote; the plan’s table lists them from p. 83 ↗.

Goal 3Operational Excellence$305.1 million18% of action budgets

9 funded actions · reworded since the 2025–26 plan · p. 102 ↗

Largest funded actions

  1. Base Operational Services$204.4 millionaction 3.07 · p. 306 ↗
  2. School Site Allocations to be Principally Directed Toward the Needs of Low-income, Foster Youth, and/​or English Learner Students$23.3 millionaction 3.04 · p. 306 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $21.2 million is state funding counted toward those services
  3. Base Other Expenses$22.8 millionaction 3.08 · p. 306 ↗
  4. Base Recruitment, Selection, and Retention of Human Capital$16.6 millionaction 3.01 · p. 306 ↗
  5. Base Business and Financial Services$16.1 millionaction 3.06 · p. 306 ↗

4 more funded actions in this goal

  • School Site Allocations to be Prioritized by each School's Site Council to Support the Lowest-Performing Student Groups in Red on the California School Dashboard · action 3.09 · p. 306 ↗$7.9 million
  • Base Central Office Administration · action 3.05 · p. 306 ↗$7.5 million
  • Parent Engagement Investments · action 3.02 · p. 306 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $1.6 million is state funding counted toward those services$3.4 million
  • Expanded Student, Parent, and Community Communication · action 3.03 · p. 306 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$3.1 million

Changes from last year’s plan, same title

  1. Base Operational Services+⁠$13.5 million$190.9 million → $204.4 million · p. 306 ↗
  2. Base Other Expenses+⁠$11.7 million$11.1 million → $22.8 million · p. 306 ↗
  3. Base Business and Financial Services−⁠$2.3 million$18.4 million → $16.1 million · p. 306 ↗

Every other line in this goal, against last year’s plan

  • School Site Allocations to be Principally Directed Toward the Needs of Low-income, Foster Youth, and/​or English Learner Students · $24.7 million → $23.3 million · p. 306 ↗−⁠$1.4 million
  • Base Recruitment, Selection, and Retention of Human Capital · $15.5 million → $16.6 million · p. 306 ↗+⁠$1.2 million
  • School Site Allocations to be Prioritized by each School's Site Council to Support the Lowest-Performing Student Groups in Red on the California School Dashboard · $7.9 million · p. 306 ↗new or renamed
  • Base Central Office Administration · $8.1 million → $7.5 million · p. 306 ↗−⁠$0.6 million
  • Parent Engagement Investments · $4.1 million → $3.4 million · p. 306 ↗−⁠$0.7 million
  • Expanded Student, Parent, and Community Communication · $2.5 million → $3.1 million · p. 306 ↗+⁠$0.6 million

A reworded title counts as new.

How the plan measures it · 3 measures

None of these has an all-students line we can quote; the plan’s table lists them from p. 102 ↗.

Goal 4 · Equity Multiplier Focus GoalEquity Multiplier$4.2 millionunder 1% of action budgets

“Use of LCFF Equity Multiplier Funds to implement evidence-based services and supports to address the academic, behavioral, and health needs of student groups that received the lowest performance levels on 2025 California School Dashboard indicators at eligible schools” p. 204 ↗

5 funded actions · reworded since the 2025–26 plan

Largest funded actions

  1. Chronic Absenteeism$1.6 millionaction 4.03 · p. 309 ↗
  2. Suspension$1.3 millionaction 4.04 · p. 309 ↗
  3. SBAC Math$0.6 millionaction 4.02 · p. 309 ↗
  4. SBAC ELA$0.3 millionaction 4.01 · p. 309 ↗
  5. College & Career$0.3 millionaction 4.05 · p. 310 ↗

Changes from last year’s plan, same title

  1. SBAC ELA−⁠$2.5 million$2.9 million → $0.3 million · p. 309 ↗
  2. College & Career+⁠$143,611$131,000 → $274,611 · p. 310 ↗
  3. SBAC Math−⁠$95,037$702,120 → $607,083 · p. 309 ↗

Every other line in this goal, against last year’s plan

  • Chronic Absenteeism · $1.7 million → $1.6 million · p. 309 ↗−⁠$0.1 million
  • Suspension · $1.3 million → $1.3 million · p. 309 ↗+⁠$32,679

How the plan measures it · 5 measures

None of these has an all-students line we can quote; the plan’s table lists them from p. 204 ↗.

All amounts are planned. We read them from the PDF and added up each goal’s actions ourselves. Page links open the plan at that page.

Who goes to the district’s schools
Who attends

Student mix

2024–25 · October enrollment count, 71,151 students
1. Hispanic or Latino: 70%2. Asian: 11%3. White: 8%4. Black or African American: 7%5. Two or more races: 3%6. American Indian or Alaska Native: <1%7. Pacific Islander: <1%8. Filipino: <1%9. Not reported: <1%Student mix2024–25
  1. Hispanic or Latino70%
  2. Asian11%
  3. White8%
  4. Black or African American7%
  5. Two or more races3%
  6. American Indian or Alaska Native<1%
  7. Pacific Islander<1%
  8. Filipino<1%
  9. Not reported<1%
Shares use the district's own October enrollment counts from the CDE, including its charter schools.

Free or reduced-price meals

86%

Across California, 63% of students qualify.

2024–25 · 60,845 of 70,893 students qualify, summed from the CDE’s meal counts for every school it lists under the district, charters included. It comes from a different CDE file than the student mix, so the two totals differ.

The district’s state records

Is the state giving the district extra help?

Fresno Unified isn’t getting extra state help in 2026, only the standard support every district gets.

How English learners moved up on the state’s English test

From spring 2025 to spring 2026, 47% of the district’s English learners moved up at least one level on the state’s English test (ELPAC), or stayed at the top (4,559 of 9,701 students). California: 47%. It counts students moving up the test’s levels, so a student can count here before becoming fluent.

27 schools getting state support, 2025–26

2 in most intensive support · 10 in extra targeted support · 15 in targeted support

This list covers the district’s own schools; each charter school’s page shows its record. Federal designation under the Every Student Succeeds Act, 2025–26.

Sources: District help (CDE) ↗ · English learner progress (CDE) ↗ · School support (CDE) ↗. State results from the 2026 California School Dashboard.

Which places nearby can you look at next?

Cities in the district

More places (4)

Districts nearby

Common questions

Which public schools in Fresno Unified rank highest?

Elementary: Manchester Gate, 92nd percentile (Strong). Middle: Edison Computech, 98th percentile (Strong). High: University High, 98th percentile (Strong). Each percentile is among the California schools at the same level we score. A rank doesn’t decide fit or whether a child can enroll.

Does living in the Fresno Unified district decide which school my child attends?

Not by itself. Attendance boundaries, programs, transfers and space all matter. Confirm the school for your address, grade and program with the district.
More questions (5)

Are the public schools in Fresno Unified good?

Fresno Unified’s 73 public elementary schools run from the bottom 1% to the 92nd percentile among the 5,726 California elementary schools we score (spring 2026 tests). By band: 4 Strong, 13 Solid, 29 Developing and 27 Needs Support. Fresno Unified’s 20 public middle schools run from the bottom 1% to the 98th percentile among the 2,529 California middle schools we score (spring 2026 tests). By band: 2 Strong, 3 Solid, 3 Developing and 12 Needs Support. Fresno Unified’s 14 public high schools run from the 4th to the 98th percentile among the 1,498 California high schools we score (spring 2025 tests). By band: 2 Strong, 3 Solid, 3 Developing and 6 Needs Support. A percentile compares a school with California public schools at the same level that we score. How we score schools.

How does chronic absence in Fresno Unified compare with California?

The average elementary school in Fresno Unified had 26 in 100 students chronically absent (missed 10% or more of school days) in 2025–26; the average California elementary school we score had 17 in 100. Both are averages of school rates, each school counted once. The average middle school in Fresno Unified had 24 in 100 students chronically absent in 2025–26; the average California middle school we score had 18 in 100. The average high school in Fresno Unified had 23 in 100 students chronically absent in 2025–26; the average California high school we score had 22 in 100. These are averages of school rates: each school counts once, whatever its size.

How much does Fresno Unified spend per student?

Fresno Unified spent $24,938 per student in the 2024–25 school year. The typical California district spent $20,491. About 55 cents of every Fresno Unified dollar went to classroom instruction. Day-to-day spending per student in average daily attendance, from its annual financial report to the California Department of Education. The district’s spending, by function.

What is in Fresno Unified’s 2026–27 spending plan?

The district’s 2026–27 spending plan puts $1.67 billion into 58 funded actions in 4 goals, all of its general fund budget. Its largest goal holds $1.23 billion, 74% of the action budgets. The 2026–27 plan, goal by goal.

Where do these results come from?

California’s state tests (CAASPP): spring 2026 for elementary and middle schools, spring 2025 for high schools, and chronic-absence rates for 2025–26, published by the California Department of Education. Percentiles, bands and Scope Scores are SchoolScope’s calculations. How we score schools.

Sources and methodology

This page lists the public schools governed and funded by Fresno Unified, with the district’s spending and state accountability records.

Data source: California Department of Education · CAASPP 2025–26 elementary and middle school; 2024–25 high school

Percentiles, bands and Scope Scores are SchoolScope’s own calculations from these state files.

View CDE data ↗ (opens in a new tab)How Scope Scores work →

Download these schools (CSV)Free to use under CC BY 4.0 with attribution.