Wright Elementary runs schools through 6th grade. Its 3 public elementary schools run from the 4th to the 62nd percentile among the 5,726 California elementary schools we score (spring 2026 tests). Middle and high school are run by another district; confirm the school for your address with the district.
K6Elementary
712Middle and high
Wright Elementary · grades K–6
Another district · grades 7–12
Elementary · 3 schools
from 4th to 62nd · among 5,726 California elementary schools we score · spring 2026 tests
Robert L. Stevens Elementary: 62nd percentile, Solid
J. X. Wilson Elementary: 46th percentile, Developing
The average elementary school in the Wright Elementary district had 19 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 district
Where does Wright Elementary’s money go, and what does it plan?
The Wright Elementary district spent $25,826 per student in the 2024–25 school year.
The typical California district spent $20,491. About 58 cents of every Wright Elementary 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
Instruction58%
Instruction support7%
Student services19%
Administration8%
Buildings & maintenance7%
Other1%
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
$12.5 million
planned in its 2026–27 plan for 32 funded actions in 4 goals. That’s 48% of its $26.0 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, 153 pages), as posted to the California School Dashboard.
Where the money goes
Three actions take 65% of the money; their titles are below. The plan itself puts 74% of it toward staff.
Certificated teaching staff $4.6 million
Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELO-P) $2.4 million
Action 3 $1.2 million
29 other actions
Reading, math and catch-up help
7 of the plan’s 32 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 $0.5 million
Math $0.1 million
Catch-up help $1.2 million
English learners $0.2 million
Largest of these
High Quality Teachers to principally benefit English Learners, Foster Youth, and Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Youth through: • early release days for teacher planning time • professional development days • Tier 2 intervention small group flexible grouping within the school day$1.2 million
Reading Support$234,128
Bilingual Community Liaisons (BCLs)$221,966
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 $4.0 million in extra services for English learners, low-income students and foster youth. For 2025–26, it planned $4.2 million and estimates it spent $4.3 million, $0.1 million (2%) more than planned (our arithmetic).
$4.3 million spent (estimated)$4.2 million planned
What changed
The total is $59,505 higher than in the 2025–26 plan. The biggest change in dollars is Multilingual Learner Support: This action is increasing and/or improving the services for unduplicated students by providing Designated and Integrated English Language Development (ELD) implementation, which went from $58,593 to $529,207.
Largest cuts
Counselors−$132,431
Instructional Assistants (IAs)−$111,576
Certificated teaching staff−$104,969
Largest increases
Multilingual Learner Support: This action is increasing and/or improving the services for unduplicated students by providing Designated and Integrated English Language Development (ELD) implementation+$470,614
Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELO-P)+$343,723
Transportation+$184,021
New in the 2026–27 plan
Counselors$138,662
Amplify Math Adoption$136,833
Multilingual Learner Support: This action is increasing and/or improving the services for unduplicated students by providing Designated and Integrated English Language Development (ELD) implementation$47,109
Ask: What did Counselors pay for, and what changes now that the 2026–27 plan gives it $132,431 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 · Goal 1: All Students are Connected & Thriving
45%
44%
down 1 pt
Math, every tested grade: Proficient or Advanced in 2025–26, met or exceeded in 2024–25Goal 1 · Goal 1: All Students are Connected & Thriving
29%
35%
up 6 pts
Chronically absentCounted across all the district’s students, not averaged by schoolGoal 1 · Goal 1: All Students are Connected & Thriving
18 in 100
18 in 100
no change
Suspended at least onceGoal 1 · Goal 1: All Students are Connected & Thriving
1.5%
1.3%
down 0.2 pts
Goals 2, 3 and 4 aren’t shown because they track other measures.
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
Certificated teaching staff · $4,572,687
Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELO-P) · $2,446,927
High Quality Teachers to principally benefit English Learners, Foster Youth, and Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Youth through: • early release days for teacher planning time • professional development days • Tier 2 intervention small group flexible grouping within the school day · $1,155,964
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 ($12.5 million).
Where does the money go?
48% to Goal 1, Goal 1: All Students are Connected & Thriving. 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.
not compared: unconfirmed, or repeated across goals
Every goal, in the plan’s order
Goal 1Goal 1: All Students are Connected & Thriving$6.0 million48% of action budgets
19 funded actions · 2025–26 plan: $5.8 million (+$232,671) · p. 22 ↗
Largest funded actions
Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELO-P)$2.4 millionaction 1.7 · p. 109 ↗
Multilingual Learner Support: This action is increasing and/or improving the services for unduplicated students by providing Designated and Integrated English Language Development (ELD) implementation$0.5 millionaction 1.3 · p. 109 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services
Transportation$0.5 millionaction 1.15 · p. 110 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services
Counselors$0.3 millionaction 1.8 · p. 109 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services
Instructional Assistants (IAs)$0.3 millionaction 1.18 · p. 110 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services
14 more funded actions in this goal
Universal Transitional Kindergarten (UTK) Instructional Assistants · action 1.14 · p. 110 ↗$0.2 million
Reading Support · action 1.5 · p. 109 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$0.2 million
Behaviorist · action 1.17 · p. 110 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$0.2 million
Reading Support · action 1.20 · p. 110 ↗$0.2 million
Social Emotional Learning (SEL) & Behavior (LREBG Action) · action 1.2 · p. 109 ↗$0.2 million
Student Support Instructional Assistants (SSIAs) principally benefitting English Learners, Foster Youth, and Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Youth · action 1.12 · p. 110 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$0.2 million
P.E · action 1.9 · p. 110 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services$0.2 million
Student Support Instructional Assistants (SSIAs) to support Students with IEPs with achieving grade level standards · action 1.13 · p. 110 ↗$0.1 million
Amplify Math Adoption · action 1.23 · p. 111 ↗$0.1 million
Multilingual Learner Support: This action is increasing and/or improving the services for unduplicated students by providing Designated and Integrated English Language Development (ELD) implementation · action 1.19 · p. 110 ↗under $0.1 million
School Attendance Review Board (SARB) · action 1.11 · p. 110 ↗under $0.1 million
Youth Truth Survey · action 1.1 · p. 109 ↗under $0.1 million
Changes from last year’s plan, same title
Multilingual Learner Support: This action is increasing and/or improving the services for unduplicated students by providing Designated and Integrated English Language Development (ELD) implementation+$470,614$58,593 → $529,207 · p. 109 ↗
Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELO-P)+$0.3 million$2.1 million → $2.4 million · p. 109 ↗
Transportation+$184,021$279,734 → $463,755 · p. 110 ↗
Every other line in this goal, against last year’s plan
Counselors · $455,979 → $323,548 · p. 109 ↗−$132,431
Student Support Instructional Assistants (SSIAs) to support Students with IEPs with achieving grade level standards · $167,228 → $149,376 · p. 110 ↗−$17,852
Amplify Math Adoption · $136,833 · p. 111 ↗new or renamed
Multilingual Learner Support: This action is increasing and/or improving the services for unduplicated students by providing Designated and Integrated English Language Development (ELD) implementation · $47,109 · p. 110 ↗new or renamed
School Attendance Review Board (SARB) · $6,000 · p. 110 ↗new or renamed
Youth Truth Survey · $2,213 → $750 · p. 109 ↗−$1,463
A reworded title counts as new.
How the plan measures it · 21 measures · 1 quoted
4) Implementation of State Academic Standards (Dashboard Local Indicator- as measured by rubric)p. 23 ↗
Baseline
4) 2023-24: State Academic Standards are implemented.
Target for year 3
4) State Academic Standards continue to be implemented.
20 more measures in the plan’s table.
Goal 2Goal 2: All Staff are Connected & Thriving$5.8 million47% of action budgets
7 funded actions · 2025–26 plan: $6.0 million (−$178,697) · p. 55 ↗
Largest funded actions
Certificated teaching staff$4.6 millionaction 2.8 · p. 111 ↗
High Quality Teachers to principally benefit English Learners, Foster Youth, and Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Youth through: • early release days for teacher planning time • professional development days • Tier 2 intervention small group flexible grouping within the school day$1.2 millionaction 2.6 · p. 111 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services
English Language Arts Professional Development- (LREBG Action)under $0.1 millionaction 2.3 · p. 111 ↗
Student Code of Conduct (Family Handbook)under $0.1 millionaction 2.2 · p. 111 ↗
2 more funded actions in this goal
Math Professional Development- (LREBG Action) · action 2.4 · p. 111 ↗under $0.1 million
Release time for best practice observations · action 2.9 · p. 111 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need servicesunder $0.1 million
Changes from last year’s plan, same title
Certificated teaching staff−$0.1 million$4.7 million → $4.6 million · p. 111 ↗
Release time for best practice observations−$56,081$61,115 → $5,034 · p. 111 ↗
High Quality Teachers to principally benefit English Learners, Foster Youth, and Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Youth through: • early release days for teacher planning time • professional development days • Tier 2 intervention small group flexible grouping within the school day−$0.1 million$1.2 million → $1.2 million · p. 111 ↗
Every other line in this goal, against last year’s plan
Translation and Interpretation$7,000action 3.4 · p. 112 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services
Educational partners are engaged in their school and feel empowered to influence decision-making$1,000action 3.1 · p. 111 ↗ · marked as contributing to high-need services
Changes from last year’s plan, same title
Bilingual Community Liaisons (BCLs)−$25,607$247,573 → $221,966 · p. 112 ↗
Translation and Interpretation−$18,000$25,000 → $7,000 · p. 112 ↗
Every other line in this goal, against last year’s plan
Parent Square · $7,500 → $7,500 · p. 112 ↗unchanged
Educational partners are engaged in their school and feel empowered to influence decision-making · $1,000 · p. 111 ↗new or renamed
A reworded title counts as new.
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. 72 ↗.
Goal 4Goal 4: Wright Elementary School District implements sound Financial Planning & Decision-Making$367,9033% of action budgets
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, 1,214 students
1Hispanic or Latino65%
2White15%
3Asian8%
4Two or more races7%
5Black or African American3%
6American Indian or Alaska Native1%
7Filipino<1%
8Pacific Islander<1%
9Not reported0%
Shares use the district's own October enrollment counts from the CDE, including its charter schools.
Free or reduced-price meals
79%
Across California, 63% of students qualify.
2024–25 · 954 of 1,209 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?
Wright Elementary 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, 45% of the district’s English learners moved up at least one level on the state’s English test (ELPAC), or stayed at the top (131 of 288 students). California: 47%. It counts students moving up the test’s levels, so a student can count here before becoming fluent.
Which public schools in the Wright Elementary district rank highest?
Elementary: Robert L. Stevens Elementary, 62nd percentile (Solid). Each percentile is among the California elementary schools we score. A rank doesn’t decide fit or whether a child can enroll.
Does living in the Wright Elementary 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 the Wright Elementary district good?
Wright Elementary’s 3 public elementary schools run from the 4th to the 62nd percentile among the 5,726 California elementary schools we score (spring 2026 tests). By band: 1 Solid, 1 Developing and 1 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 the Wright Elementary district compare with California?
The average elementary school in the Wright Elementary district had 19 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. These are averages of school rates: each school counts once, whatever its size.
How much does the Wright Elementary district spend per student?
The Wright Elementary district spent $25,826 per student in the 2024–25 school year. The typical California district spent $20,491. About 58 cents of every Wright Elementary 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 the Wright Elementary district’s 2026–27 spending plan?
The district’s 2026–27 spending plan puts $12.5 million into 32 funded actions in 4 goals, 48% of its $26.0 million general fund budget. Its largest goal holds $6.0 million, 48% of the action budgets. The 2026–27 plan, goal by goal.
Where do these results come from?
California’s state tests (CAASPP) from spring 2026 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 the Wright Elementary district, with the district’s spending and state accountability records.
Data source: California Department of Education · CAASPP 2025–26
Percentiles, bands and Scope Scores are SchoolScope’s own calculations from these state files.