School district · Sacramento County

Twin Rivers Unified schools

Q: Which public schools in Twin Rivers Unified rank highest?

Elementary: Ridgepoint TK-8, 78th percentile (Strong). Middle: Pioneer TK-8, 75th percentile (Strong). High: Creative Connections Arts Academy, 71st percentile (Solid). 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.

Q: How does chronic absence in Twin Rivers Unified compare with California?

The average elementary school in Twin Rivers Unified had 39 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 Twin Rivers Unified had 35 in 100 students chronically absent in 2025–26; the average California middle school we score had 18 in 100. The average high school in Twin Rivers Unified had 39 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.

Q: What is in Twin Rivers Unified’s 2026–27 spending plan?

The district’s 2026–27 spending plan puts $119.4 million into 59 funded actions in 11 goals, 21% of its $574.0 million general fund budget. Its largest goal holds $50.5 million, 42% of the action budgets. The 2026–27 plan, goal by goal.

Q: Does living in the Twin Rivers 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.

Q: 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.

Twin Rivers Unified’s 33 public elementary schools run from the 1st to the 78th percentile among the 5,726 California elementary schools we score (spring 2026 tests). They sit in all four bands, from Strong to Needs Support.

Elementary · 33 schools

from 1st to 78th · among 5,726 California elementary schools we score · spring 2026 tests

21Needs Support

6Developing

4Solid

2Strong

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

Middle and high school pictures

Middle · 19 schools

from bottom 1% to 75th · among 2,529 California middle schools we score · spring 2026 tests

Pioneer TK-8: 75th percentile, Strong
Northlake TK-8: 65th percentile, Solid
Westside Preparatory Charter: 55th percentile, Solid
Heritage Peak Charter: 55th percentile, Solid
Ridgepoint TK-8: 53rd percentile, Solid
Creative Connections Arts Academy: 51st percentile, Solid
Community Outreach Academy: 47th percentile, Developing
Norwood Junior High: 45th percentile, Developing
Smythe Academy of Arts and Sciences: 33rd percentile, Developing
Rio Linda Preparatory Academy: 25th percentile, Developing
Higher Learning Academy: 19th percentile, Needs Support
Keema School for Independent Study: 15th percentile, Needs Support
Foothill Ranch Middle: 8th percentile, Needs Support
Village TK-8: 4th percentile, Needs Support
F. C. Joyce TK-8: 3rd percentile, Needs Support
Rio Tierra Junior High: 2nd percentile, Needs Support
Oakdale TK-8: 2nd percentile, Needs Support
Kohler TK-8: 1st percentile, Needs Support
Martin Luther King Jr. Technology Academy: bottom 1%, Needs Support

9Needs Support

4Developing

5Solid

1Strong

High · 8 schools

from 8th to 71st · among 1,498 California high schools we score · spring 2025 tests

Creative Connections Arts Academy: 71st percentile, Solid
Rio Linda High: 48th percentile, Developing
Heritage Peak Charter: 39th percentile, Developing
Futures High: 30th percentile, Developing
Grant Union High: 16th percentile, Needs Support
Highlands High: 12th percentile, Needs Support
Foothill High: 12th percentile, Needs Support
Keema School for Independent Study: 8th percentile, Needs Support

4Needs Support

3Developing

1Solid

0Strong

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. 13 of the 45 ranked schools teach more than one level, 2 of them all three, so they appear in more than one picture.

45 ranked schools
4 schools not ranked statewide

Schools around Twin Rivers Unified

49 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

Elementary schools

Which elementary schools in Twin Rivers Unified score highest?

Ridgepoint TK-8 is highest, at the 78th percentile.

That’s higher than 78 in 100 of the 5,726 California elementary schools we score (spring 2026 tests).

Highest in Twin Rivers Unified

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

Ridgepoint TK-8Sacramento · Grade-to-grade gains
78thStrongScope Score 52
Northlake TK-8Sacramento
76thStrongScope Score 50
Community Outreach AcademyMcClellan · Grade-to-grade gains · Charter school. Check how it admits students.
62ndSolidScope Score 41

Show the other 30 elementary schools

Heritage Peak CharterRio Linda · Charter school. Check how it admits students.
60thSolidScope Score 41
Regency Park ElementarySacramento
57thSolidScope Score 39
Creative Connections Arts AcademyNorth Highlands · Charter school. Check how it admits students.
50thSolidScope Score 35
Foothill Oaks ElementarySacramento
42ndDevelopingScope Score 32
Orchard ElementaryRio Linda
37thDevelopingScope Score 30
Frontier ElementarySacramento
37thDevelopingScope Score 30
Las Palmas ElementarySacramento
35thDevelopingScope Score 30
Pioneer TK-8Sacramento
35thDevelopingScope Score 29
Dry Creek ElementaryRio Linda
26thDevelopingScope Score 26
Sierra View ElementaryNorth Highlands
24thNeeds SupportScope Score 25
Hillsdale ElementaryNorth Highlands
22ndNeeds SupportScope Score 24
Smythe Academy of Arts and SciencesSacramento · Charter school. Check how it admits students.
20thNeeds SupportScope Score 23
Westside ElementaryRio Linda
17thNeeds SupportScope Score 22
F. C. Joyce TK-8North Highlands
16thNeeds SupportScope Score 22
Fairbanks ElementarySacramento
15thNeeds SupportScope Score 22
Woodridge ElementarySacramento
14thNeeds SupportScope Score 21
Hazel Strauch ElementarySacramento
11thNeeds SupportScope Score 19
Madison ElementaryNorth Highlands
9thNeeds SupportScope Score 18
Northwood ElementarySacramento
9thNeeds SupportScope Score 18
Higher Learning AcademySacramento · Charter school. Check how it admits students.
8thNeeds SupportScope Score 17
Oakdale TK-8North Highlands
8thNeeds SupportScope Score 17
Hagginwood ElementarySacramento
7thNeeds SupportScope Score 16
Del Paso Heights ElementarySacramento
5thNeeds SupportScope Score 15
Michael J. Castori ElementarySacramento
5thNeeds SupportScope Score 15
D. W. Babcock ElementarySacramento
4thNeeds SupportScope Score 14
Warren A. Allison ElementaryNorth Highlands
4thNeeds SupportScope Score 14
Kohler TK-8North Highlands
4thNeeds SupportScope Score 14
Garden Valley ElementarySacramento
1stNeeds SupportScope Score 11
Village TK-8North Highlands
1stNeeds SupportScope Score 10
Woodlake ElementarySacramento
1stNeeds SupportScope Score 10

Context

Middle schools

Which middle schools in Twin Rivers Unified score highest?

Pioneer TK-8 is highest, at the 75th percentile.

That’s higher than 75 in 100 of the 2,529 California middle schools we score (spring 2026 tests).

Highest in Twin Rivers Unified

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

Pioneer TK-8Sacramento
75thStrongScope Score 50
Northlake TK-8Sacramento
65thSolidScope Score 45
Westside Preparatory CharterRio Linda · Charter school. Check how it admits students.
55thSolidScope Score 40

Show the other 16 middle schools

Heritage Peak CharterRio Linda · Charter school. Check how it admits students.
55thSolidScope Score 40
Ridgepoint TK-8Sacramento
53rdSolidScope Score 39
Creative Connections Arts AcademyNorth Highlands · Charter school. Check how it admits students.
51stSolidScope Score 39
Community Outreach AcademyMcClellan · Charter school. Check how it admits students.
47thDevelopingScope Score 37
Norwood Junior HighSacramento
45thDevelopingScope Score 36
Smythe Academy of Arts and SciencesSacramento · Charter school. Check how it admits students.
33rdDevelopingScope Score 31
Rio Linda Preparatory AcademyRio Linda
25thDevelopingScope Score 28
Higher Learning AcademySacramento · Charter school. Check how it admits students.
19thNeeds SupportScope Score 26
Keema School for Independent StudySacramento · Check how it admits students.
15thNeeds SupportScope Score 24
Foothill Ranch MiddleSacramento
8thNeeds SupportScope Score 21
Village TK-8North Highlands
4thNeeds SupportScope Score 18
F. C. Joyce TK-8North Highlands
3rdNeeds SupportScope Score 18
Rio Tierra Junior HighSacramento
2ndNeeds SupportScope Score 17
Oakdale TK-8North Highlands
2ndNeeds SupportScope Score 16
Kohler TK-8North Highlands
1stNeeds SupportScope Score 15
Martin Luther King Jr. Technology AcademySacramento
bottom 1%Needs SupportScope Score 10

Context

The average middle school in Twin Rivers Unified had 35 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 Twin Rivers Unified score highest?

Creative Connections Arts Academy is highest, at the 71st percentile.

That’s higher than 71 in 100 of the 1,498 California high schools we score (spring 2025 tests).

Highest in Twin Rivers Unified

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

Creative Connections Arts AcademyNorth Highlands · Charter school. Check how it admits students.
71stSolidScope Score 64
Rio Linda HighRio Linda
48thDevelopingScope Score 55
Heritage Peak CharterRio Linda · On the rise · Charter school. Check how it admits students.
39thDevelopingScope Score 52

Show the other 5 high schools

Futures HighSacramento · Charter school. Check how it admits students.
30thDevelopingScope Score 49
Grant Union HighSacramento
16thNeeds SupportScope Score 44
Highlands HighNorth Highlands
12thNeeds SupportScope Score 43
Foothill HighSacramento
12thNeeds SupportScope Score 43
Keema School for Independent StudySacramento · Check how it admits students.
8thNeeds SupportScope Score 38

Context

The average high school in Twin Rivers Unified had 39 in 100 students chronically absent in 2025–26; the average California high school we score had 22 in 100.

4 high schools not ranked statewide

Continuation schools and alternative schools enroll students differently from a regular school, so each is compared only with schools of its kind.

Pacific Career and Technology HighContinuation high school: compared only with other continuation schools
Vista Nueva Career and Technology HighContinuation high school: compared only with other continuation schools
Community Collaborative CharterAlternative school: compared only with other alternative schools
SAVA - Sacramento Academic and Vocational AcademyAlternative school: compared only with other alternative schools

The district

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

Twin Rivers Unified spent $22,643 per student in the 2024–25 school year.

The typical California district spent $20,491. About 54 cents of every Twin Rivers 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

Instruction54%
Instruction support12%
Student services10%
Administration7%
Buildings & maintenance9%
Other8%

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

$119.4 million

planned in its 2026–27 plan for 59 funded actions in 11 goals. That’s 21% of its $574.0 million 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, 187 pages), as posted to the California School Dashboard.

Where the money goes

The money is spread out. No action gets more than 10%, and the three largest, Salary and Benefits Compensation Increase; Facilities; and Instructional Minutes and PD days, take 27% between them. The plan itself puts 83% of it toward staff.

Reading, math and catch-up help

8 of the plan’s 59 funded actions name reading, math, catch-up help or English learners in their titles.

Actions whose titles name reading, catch-up help or English learners

Reading $3.1 million
Catch-up help $2.5 million
English learners $11.7 million

An action naming two of these appears under both.

Largest of these

English Learner (EL) Services$5.6 million
ELA/ELD Lesson Design Implementation$3.1 million
Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS)$2.4 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 $103.7 million in extra services for English learners, low-income students and foster youth. For 2025–26, it planned $100.4 million and estimates it spent $99.3 million, $1.1 million (1%) less than planned (our arithmetic).

What changed

The total is $1.2 million (1%) higher than in the 2025–26 plan. The biggest change in dollars is Class Size Reduction, which went from $21.2 million to $7.7 million.

Largest cuts

Class Size Reduction−⁠$13.5 million
Facilities−⁠$2.3 million
Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS)−⁠$1.7 million

Largest increases

Full-Day Kindergarten Program+⁠$842,071
College Readiness+⁠$818,479
Vice Principals - Additional+⁠$527,960

New in the 2026–27 plan

Salary and Benefits Compensation Increase$11.9 million
Health and Wellness$5.6 million
IT Technicians for schools$2.9 million

Ask: What did Class Size Reduction pay for, and what changes now that the 2026–27 plan gives it $13.5 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
Measure	2024–25	2025–26	Change
English, every tested grade: Proficient or Advanced in 2025–26, met or exceeded in 2024–25Goal 1	36%	35%	down 1 pt
Math, every tested grade: Proficient or Advanced in 2025–26, met or exceeded in 2024–25Goal 1	25%	26%	up 1 pt
Chronically absentCounted across all the district’s students, not averaged by schoolGoal 3	31 in 100	46 in 100	15 more in 100
Suspended at least onceGoal 3	7.5%	7.2%	down 0.3 pts

Goals 7, 8, 9 and 10 track named schools and Goals 2, 4, 5, 6 and 11 track 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

Salary and Benefits Compensation Increase · $11,883,034
Facilities · $10,689,301
Instructional Minutes and PD days · $10,185,460

The full plan11 goals, 49 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 ($119.4 million).

Where does the money go?

42% to Goal 1. 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.

G11

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 1Increase Academic Achievement and Decrease Disproportionalities$50.5 million42% of action budgets

19 funded actions · 2025–26 plan: $67.5 million (−⁠$17.0 million) · p. 18 ↗

Largest funded actions

Instructional Minutes and PD days$10.2 millionaction 1.7 · p. 126 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services
Full-Day Kindergarten Program$9.8 millionaction 1.3 · p. 126 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services
Class Size Reduction$7.7 millionaction 1.6 · p. 126 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services
English Learner (EL) Services$5.6 millionaction 1.10 · p. 127 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services
ELA/ELD Lesson Design Implementation$3.1 millionaction 1.11 · p. 127 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $805,127 is state funding counted toward those services

14 more funded actions in this goal

Supplemental Concentration Allocated to Schools · action 1.17 · p. 127 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$2.9 million
IT Technicians for schools · action 1.16 · p. 127 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $2.6 million is state funding counted toward those services$2.9 million
Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS) · action 1.12 · p. 127 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $225,447 is state funding counted toward those services$2.4 million
Professional Development · action 1.1 · p. 126 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $1.8 million is state funding counted toward those services$2.0 million
World Language and Native Speaking Teachers · action 1.13 · p. 127 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$1.3 million
Central Office Support & Supplemental Services · action 1.15 · p. 127 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$0.4 million
LTEL & EL Courses · action 1.9 · p. 127 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$0.4 million
Foster Youth Support · action 1.8 · p. 126 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $186,317 is state funding counted toward those services$0.3 million
Recruiting High Quality Staff · action 1.21 · p. 128 ↗$0.3 million
Library Materials Technicians · action 1.22 · p. 128 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$0.3 million
New Teacher Support · action 1.14 · p. 127 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$0.3 million
Early Childhood Education (ECE) · action 1.2 · p. 126 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$0.2 million
Testing and Assessment Program · action 1.5 · p. 126 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$0.2 million
Short Term Independent Study · action 1.4 · p. 126 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$0.1 million

Changes from last year’s plan, same title

Class Size Reduction−⁠$13.5 million$21.2 million → $7.7 million · p. 126 ↗
Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS)−⁠$1.7 million$4.1 million → $2.4 million · p. 127 ↗
ELA/ELD Lesson Design Implementation−⁠$0.9 million$4.0 million → $3.1 million · p. 127 ↗

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

Instructional Minutes and PD days · $9.7 million → $10.2 million · p. 126 ↗+⁠$0.5 million
Full-Day Kindergarten Program · $8.9 million → $9.8 million · p. 126 ↗+⁠$0.8 million
English Learner (EL) Services · $5.3 million → $5.6 million · p. 127 ↗+⁠$0.4 million
Supplemental Concentration Allocated to Schools · $2.9 million → $2.9 million · p. 127 ↗+⁠$0.1 million
IT Technicians for schools · $2.9 million · p. 127 ↗new or renamed
Professional Development · $2.7 million → $2.0 million · p. 126 ↗−⁠$0.7 million
World Language and Native Speaking Teachers · $1.2 million → $1.3 million · p. 127 ↗+⁠$0.1 million
Central Office Support & Supplemental Services · $353,672 → $449,026 · p. 127 ↗+⁠$95,354
LTEL & EL Courses · $355,391 → $405,819 · p. 127 ↗+⁠$50,428
Foster Youth Support · $290,801 → $322,309 · p. 126 ↗+⁠$31,508
Recruiting High Quality Staff · $978,432 → $300,000 · p. 128 ↗−⁠$678,432
Library Materials Technicians · $297,001 · p. 128 ↗new or renamed
New Teacher Support · $376,259 → $270,000 · p. 127 ↗−⁠$106,259
Early Childhood Education (ECE) · $288,128 → $203,443 · p. 126 ↗−⁠$84,685
Testing and Assessment Program · $383,205 → $192,365 · p. 126 ↗−⁠$190,840
Short Term Independent Study · $110,074 → $110,228 · p. 126 ↗+⁠$154

A reworded title counts as new.

How the plan measures it · 9 measures · 1 quoted

Williams’ instructional materials reports p. 20 ↗
Baseline
2024: 100%
Target for year 3
2027: Maintain 100%

8 more measures in the plan’s table.

Goal 2Ensure all Students Graduate College and Career Ready$7.2 million6% of action budgets

4 funded actions · 2025–26 plan: $6.6 million (+⁠$614,912) · p. 35 ↗

Largest funded actions

Career Technical Education$4.7 millionaction 2.1 · p. 128 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $3.3 million is state funding counted toward those services
College Readiness$1.5 millionaction 2.3 · p. 128 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $487,825 is state funding counted toward those services
College Academy Mentoring Program$0.8 millionaction 2.4 · p. 128 ↗
College Exam Access$0.1 millionaction 2.2 · p. 128 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services

Changes from last year’s plan, same title

College Readiness+⁠$0.8 million$0.7 million → $1.5 million · p. 128 ↗
College Academy Mentoring Program−⁠$119,812$953,750 → $833,938 · p. 128 ↗
Career Technical Education−⁠$0.1 million$4.8 million → $4.7 million · p. 128 ↗

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

College Exam Access · $85,000 → $85,000 · p. 128 ↗unchanged

How the plan measures it · 9 measures · 3 quoted

Graduation Rate p. 35 ↗
Baseline
2023: 91.4%
Target for year 3
2027: 95%
The number of students completing a CTE Pathway p. 35 ↗
Baseline
2024: 504
Target for year 3
2027: 550
UCA–G completion rate p. 35 ↗
Baseline
2023: 35%
Target for year 3
2027: 40%

6 more measures in the plan’s table.

Goal 3Improving Culture and Climate through increased Student Engagement$30.9 million26% of action budgets

15 funded actions · 2025–26 plan: $23.5 million (+⁠$7.4 million) · p. 40 ↗

Largest funded actions

Health and Wellness$5.6 millionaction 3.16 · p. 130 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $3.6 million is state funding counted toward those services
Visual and Performing Arts$5.1 millionaction 3.6 · p. 129 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services
Counselors Elementary$4.3 millionaction 3.3 · p. 129 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services
Vice Principals - Additional$4.1 millionaction 3.5 · p. 129 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services
Counselors Secondary - Additional$3.0 millionaction 3.4 · p. 129 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services

10 more funded actions in this goal

Student Activities - Additional · action 3.10 · p. 129 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$2.6 million
Activities Directors · action 3.9 · p. 129 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$1.6 million
Duty Assistants · action 3.1 · p. 128 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$1.0 million
Psychologists - Additional · action 3.13 · p. 129 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$0.8 million
Transportation buses · action 3.14 · p. 130 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$0.8 million
Student Services - supplemental support · action 3.7 · p. 129 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$0.7 million
WIN Academy Saturday School · action 3.11 · p. 129 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$0.6 million
Central Counseling Services · action 3.2 · p. 129 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $421,622 is state funding counted toward those services$0.6 million
Attention 2 Attendance · action 3.15 · p. 130 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$0.2 million
Kelvin Social Emotional Screener · action 3.12 · p. 129 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need servicesunder $0.1 million

Changes from last year’s plan, same title

Vice Principals - Additional+⁠$0.5 million$3.5 million → $4.1 million · p. 129 ↗
Counselors Elementary+⁠$0.4 million$3.9 million → $4.3 million · p. 129 ↗
Counselors Secondary - Additional+⁠$0.3 million$2.7 million → $3.0 million · p. 129 ↗

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

Health and Wellness · $5.6 million · p. 130 ↗new or renamed
Visual and Performing Arts · $5.0 million → $5.1 million · p. 129 ↗+⁠$0.1 million
Student Activities - Additional · $2.7 million → $2.6 million · p. 129 ↗−⁠$0.1 million
Activities Directors · $1.4 million → $1.6 million · p. 129 ↗+⁠$0.2 million
Duty Assistants · $1.0 million → $1.0 million · p. 128 ↗+⁠$22,940
Psychologists - Additional · $692,166 → $762,972 · p. 129 ↗+⁠$70,806
Transportation buses · $1.0 million → $0.8 million · p. 130 ↗−⁠$0.2 million
Student Services - supplemental support · $665,709 · p. 129 ↗new or renamed
WIN Academy Saturday School · $502,836 → $638,500 · p. 129 ↗+⁠$135,664
Central Counseling Services · $581,629 · p. 129 ↗new or renamed
Attention 2 Attendance · $199,000 → $199,000 · p. 130 ↗unchanged
Kelvin Social Emotional Screener · $25,490 → $25,490 · p. 129 ↗unchanged

A reworded title counts as new.

How the plan measures it · 8 measures · 3 quoted

Chronic Absenteeism Rate p. 40 ↗
Baseline
2024: 29.4%
Target for year 3
2027 10% or Lower
Total Educational Partner Survey Participation p. 42 ↗
Baseline
2024: 7,887
Target for year 3
2027: 10,000
The cohort dropout rate p. 43 ↗
Baseline
2023 7.50%
Target for year 3
2027 5%

5 more measures in the plan’s table.

Goal 4Increase Parent Engagement$1.5 million1% of action budgets

3 funded actions · 2025–26 plan: $783,501 (+⁠$685,017) · p. 53 ↗

Largest funded actions

Communications$743,814action 4.3 · p. 130 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services
Parent Opportunities$516,489action 4.1 · p. 130 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services · of which $172,231 is state funding counted toward those services
Family and Community Engagement (FACE)$208,215action 4.2 · p. 130 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services

Changes from last year’s plan, same title

Parent Opportunities−⁠$34,088$550,577 → $516,489 · p. 130 ↗
Family and Community Engagement (FACE)−⁠$24,709$232,924 → $208,215 · p. 130 ↗

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

Communications · $743,814 · p. 130 ↗new or renamed

A reworded title counts as new.

How the plan measures it · 2 measures · 2 quoted

The number of parents engaged in DELAC and FACE events p. 53 ↗
Baseline
2024: 8,625 Total
Target for year 3
2027: 10,000 Total
Attendance at training and meetings designed to support our underserved groups p. 53 ↗
Baseline
2024 797
Target for year 3
2027: 1000

Goal 5Provide Facilities that are Clean, Safe, and Conducive to Learning$12.3 million10% of action budgets

3 funded actions · 2025–26 plan: $14.7 million (−⁠$2.4 million) · p. 56 ↗

Largest funded actions

Facilities$10.7 millionaction 5.1 · p. 130 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services
Campus Safety Specialists$1.5 millionaction 5.2 · p. 130 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services
Police Dispatcher-Additional$0.2 millionaction 5.3 · p. 130 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services

Changes from last year’s plan, same title

Facilities−⁠$2.3 million$13.0 million → $10.7 million · p. 130 ↗
Police Dispatcher-Additional−⁠$66,791$227,813 → $161,022 · p. 130 ↗
Campus Safety Specialists+⁠$0.1 million$1.4 million → $1.5 million · p. 130 ↗

How the plan measures it · 2 measures · 1 quoted

Percentage of students, families, and teachers responding favorably on surveys measuring school safety and connectedness p. 56 ↗
Baseline
2024 69.8%
Target for year 3
80%

1 more measure in the plan’s table.

Goal 6Increase ELA and Math Academic Achievement for Students with Disabilities$1.2 million1% of action budgets

3 funded actions · 2025–26 plan: $1.1 million (+⁠$65,331) · p. 60 ↗

Largest funded actions

Special Education Teacher on Special Assignment (TOSAs)$515,244action 6.1 · p. 130 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services
Additional RSP Teachers$452,173action 6.4 · p. 131 ↗
Vice Principal for Special Education$195,553action 6.2 · p. 131 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services

Changes from last year’s plan, same title

Special Education Teacher on Special Assignment (TOSAs)+⁠$69,931$445,313 → $515,244 · p. 130 ↗
Additional RSP Teachers+⁠$48,038$404,135 → $452,173 · p. 131 ↗
Vice Principal for Special Education+⁠$17,454$178,099 → $195,553 · p. 131 ↗

How the plan measures it · 4 measures · 1 quoted

Graduation Rate p. 61 ↗
Baseline
2023: 72.7%
Target for year 3
85%

3 more measures in the plan’s table.

Goal 7 · Equity Multiplier Focus GoalIncrease academic achievement in English Language Arts by 45 points from standard or greater by students…$2.3 million2% of action budgets

“Increase academic achievement in English Language Arts by 45 points from standard or greater by students classified as English Learners as measured by CAASPP by 2027” p. 64 ↗

2 funded actions · 2025–26 plan: $2.3 million (+⁠$13,208)

Largest funded actions

Student Support Teachers (EL Focus)$2.0 millionaction 7.1 · p. 131 ↗
Bilingual Paraeducators$0.3 millionaction 7.2 · p. 131 ↗

Changes from last year’s plan, same title

Bilingual Paraeducators+⁠$59,737$252,686 → $312,423 · p. 131 ↗
Student Support Teachers (EL Focus)−⁠$46,529$2.0 million → $2.0 million · p. 131 ↗

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. 64 ↗.

Goal 8 · Equity Multiplier Focus GoalIncrease academic achievement in ELA or Math by 45 points from standard or greater by students as measured by…$381,584under 1% of action budgets

“Increase academic achievement in ELA or Math by 45 points from standard or greater by students as measured by CAASPP by 2027” p. 73 ↗

3 funded actions · reworded since the 2025–26 plan

Largest funded actions

Student Support Teacher (SST)$183,713action 8.1 · p. 132 ↗
Academic Intervention Specialist Bilingual (AISB)$111,639action 8.4 · p. 132 ↗

Changes from last year’s plan, same title

Student Support Teacher (SST)+⁠$52,567$131,146 → $183,713 · p. 132 ↗

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

Academic Intervention Specialist Bilingual (AISB) · $111,639 · p. 132 ↗new or renamed
Title not confirmed · $86,232 · p. 132 ↗not compared

A reworded title counts as new.

How the plan measures it · 4 measures

None of these has an all-students line we can quote; the plan’s table lists them from p. 73 ↗.

Goal 9 · Equity Multiplier Focus GoalImprove College and Career readiness by 10% or greater for all student groups by 2027 as measured by the…$1.0 million1% of action budgets

“Improve College and Career readiness by 10% or greater for all student groups by 2027 as measured by the College and Career Indicator on the CA State Dashboard” p. 79 ↗

5 funded actions · 2025–26 plan: $607,029 (+⁠$420,561)

Largest funded actions

Extra duty$273,070action 9.4 · p. 132 ↗
Secondary Counselor$196,830action 9.3 · p. 132 ↗
Multi-Tiered System of Support Specialist$195,942action 9.2 · p. 132 ↗
Teacher on Special Assignment (TOSA)$189,240action 9.5 · p. 133 ↗
Academic and Instructional Support Bilingual$172,508action 9.1 · p. 132 ↗

Changes from last year’s plan, same title

Extra duty+⁠$210,475$62,595 → $273,070 · p. 132 ↗
Academic and Instructional Support Bilingual+⁠$54,235$118,273 → $172,508 · p. 132 ↗
Multi-Tiered System of Support Specialist−⁠$51,947$247,889 → $195,942 · p. 132 ↗

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

Secondary Counselor · $178,272 → $196,830 · p. 132 ↗+⁠$18,558
Teacher on Special Assignment (TOSA) · $189,240 · p. 133 ↗new or renamed

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. 79 ↗.

Goal 10 · Equity Multiplier Focus GoalDecrease suspension rate to 5% or less for all student groups by 2027 as measured by the CA State Dashboard$256,345under 1% of action budgets

1 funded action · 2025–26 plan: $606,801 (−⁠$350,456) · p. 86 ↗

Largest funded actions

Service agreements$256,345action 10.2 · p. 133 ↗

Changes from last year’s plan, same title

Service agreements−⁠$274,562$530,907 → $256,345 · p. 133 ↗

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. 86 ↗.

Goal 11Recruit, Hire, and Retain High Quality Staff$11.9 million10% of action budgets

1 funded action · no goal 11 in the 2025–26 plan · p. 96 ↗

Largest funded actions

Salary and Benefits Compensation Increase$11.9 millionaction 11.1 · p. 133 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services

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

Salary and Benefits Compensation Increase · $11.9 million · p. 133 ↗new or renamed

A reworded title counts as new.

How the plan measures it · 2 measures · 1 quoted

Staff Retention Rate p. 96 ↗
Baseline
2026: 94.67%
Target for year 3
95% or better

1 more measure in the plan’s table.

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, 43,274 students

Hispanic or Latino33%
White31%
Asian16%
Black or African American8%
Two or more races8%
Not reported2%
Pacific Islander1%
Filipino<1%
American Indian or Alaska Native<1%

Shares use the district's own October enrollment counts from the CDE, including its charter schools.

Free or reduced-price meals

85%

Across California, 63% of students qualify.

2024–25 · 25,308 of 29,674 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?

The state is giving Twin Rivers Unified extra help in 2026, the second year after it qualified on the 2025 Dashboard.

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

From spring 2025 to spring 2026, 43% of the district’s English learners moved up at least one level on the state’s English test (ELPAC), or stayed at the top (2,408 of 5,597 students). California: 47%. It counts students moving up the test’s levels, so a student can count here before becoming fluent.

19 schools getting state support, 2025–26

7 in extra targeted support · 12 in targeted support

D. W. Babcock ElementaryExtra targeted support: students of two or more races
F. C. Joyce TK-8Targeted support: students of two or more races
Foothill Oaks ElementaryExtra targeted support: homeless students
Foothill Ranch MiddleTargeted support: Black or African American students
Frontier ElementaryTargeted support: students of two or more races
Garden Valley ElementaryExtra targeted support: Black or African American students, homeless students and students of two or more races
Hagginwood ElementaryTargeted support: students of two or more races
Hazel Strauch ElementaryExtra targeted support: students of two or more races
Hillsdale ElementaryTargeted support: White students
Kohler TK-8Targeted support: Black or African American students and homeless students
Madison ElementaryExtra targeted support: Black or African American students and students of two or more races
Northwood ElementaryTargeted support: Black or African American students, English learners, students of two or more races and White students
Orchard ElementaryExtra targeted support: homeless students
Pioneer TK-8Extra targeted support: students of two or more races
Rio Tierra Junior HighTargeted support: Black or African American students and low-income students
Sierra View ElementaryTargeted support: homeless students and students with disabilities
Village TK-8Targeted support: homeless students
Warren A. Allison ElementaryTargeted support: Black or African American students and students of two or more races
Woodlake ElementaryTargeted support: students of two or more races

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 (6)

Districts nearby

Common questions

Which public schools in Twin Rivers Unified rank highest?

Elementary: Ridgepoint TK-8, 78th percentile (Strong). Middle: Pioneer TK-8, 75th percentile (Strong). High: Creative Connections Arts Academy, 71st percentile (Solid). 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 Twin Rivers 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.

Are the public schools in Twin Rivers Unified good?

Twin Rivers Unified’s 33 public elementary schools run from the 1st to the 78th percentile among the 5,726 California elementary schools we score (spring 2026 tests). By band: 2 Strong, 4 Solid, 6 Developing and 21 Needs Support. Twin Rivers Unified’s 19 public middle schools run from the bottom 1% to the 75th percentile among the 2,529 California middle schools we score (spring 2026 tests). By band: 1 Strong, 5 Solid, 4 Developing and 9 Needs Support. Twin Rivers Unified’s 8 public high schools run from the 8th to the 71st percentile among the 1,498 California high schools we score (spring 2025 tests). By band: 1 Solid, 3 Developing and 4 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 Twin Rivers Unified compare with California?

The average elementary school in Twin Rivers Unified had 39 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 Twin Rivers Unified had 35 in 100 students chronically absent in 2025–26; the average California middle school we score had 18 in 100. The average high school in Twin Rivers Unified had 39 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 Twin Rivers Unified spend per student?

Twin Rivers Unified spent $22,643 per student in the 2024–25 school year. The typical California district spent $20,491. About 54 cents of every Twin Rivers 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 Twin Rivers Unified’s 2026–27 spending plan?

The district’s 2026–27 spending plan puts $119.4 million into 59 funded actions in 11 goals, 21% of its $574.0 million general fund budget. Its largest goal holds $50.5 million, 42% 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 Twin Rivers 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 ↗How Scope Scores work →

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