Is this your district? Email the board to prioritize reading!
Email BoardCotati-Rohnert Park Unified
Sonoma County school performance
Cotati-Rohnert Park Unified is underperforming.
Reading and math results average to the 41st percentile among California school districts.
Only 42.2% of students met California's reading standard, but it is trending up slightly.
Math is weaker: 27.0% of students met California's math standard, but it is trending up slightly.
| Current Reading Proficiency | 42.2% |
| Current Math Proficiency | 27.0% |
| District Reading Rank | 547 / 977 (44th percentile) |
| District Math Rank | 598 / 977 (39th percentile) |
| Student / Teacher Ratio | 21:1 |
| Spend per Student | $17,315 |
| Schools in District | 13 |
| Student Enrollment | 6,737 |
| Low-Income Students | 3,327 (52.4%) |
| English Learners | 1,155 (18.2%) |
District Website
Great Schools
Niche
Ed-Data
CAASPPTest score trends
Reading rose 0.9 points from last year and rose 2.0 points over the full period. Math fell 0.9 points from last year and rose 2.3 points over the full period.
•Math +2.3 percentage pointsBoard Members
| name | elected | up for re-election |
|---|---|---|
Michelle Wing President (Trustee Area 5) [email protected] | N/A | 2028 |
Eric Martin Clerk (Trustee Area 4) [email protected] | N/A | 2026This year! |
Leffler Brown Trustee (Trustee Area 1) [email protected] | N/A | 2026This year! |
Mark Nelson Trustee (Trustee Area 3) [email protected] | N/A | 2028 |
Expand for details on low-income and english learner performance
Reading Proficiency Scores
Comparison of low-income and English learner groups using district-level CAASPP proficiency data.
Low-Income vs Non-Low-Income
Low-income students trail other students by 23.1 points in reading. It widened over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
8.5% of English learners meet the reading standard, compared with 47.5% of English-only students. The gap widened as English-learner results fell and English-only results rose.
•Math Proficiency Scores
Comparison of low-income and English learner groups using district-level CAASPP proficiency data.
Low-Income vs Non-Low-Income
Low-income students trail other students by 21.7 points in math. It widened over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
7.1% of English learners meet the math standard, compared with 31.9% of English-only students. The gap widened as English-learner results rose and English-only results rose.
•District School Map
Schools in this district, color-coded by reading proficiency.
Loading district map...
Hover over a school marker to see details
Schools
Understanding this district
How does Cotati-Rohnert Park Unified rank in California?
Cotati-Rohnert Park Unified ranks No. 547 of 977 in reading and No. 598 of 977 in math for 2026. These proficiency rankings compare districts across all district types.
How much do results vary between Cotati-Rohnert Park Unified’s schools?
Among the 6 schools serving K–5, proficiency ranges from 22.4% to 52.8% in reading and 14.0% to 39.1% in math.
See the district’s schoolsAre results improving across Cotati-Rohnert Park Unified’s schools?
Over 2024–2026, reading proficiency rose at 8 of 12 schools with results covering that full period; math rose at 6 of 12. 1 school has a different reporting period and is excluded.
Compare school trendsHow do low-income students in Cotati-Rohnert Park Unified compare with other districts?
Low-income reading proficiency is 31.3%, compared with 35.1% at a typical California unified district. In math, it is 16.7%, compared with 23.6%.
See student-group resultsWhich districts should I compare with Cotati-Rohnert Park Unified?
Unified districts in Sonoma County. Peers have the closest enrollment sizes.
| District | Math | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| Cotati-Rohnert Park UnifiedThis district | 27.0% | 42.2% |
| Windsor Unified | 26.1% | 39.3% |
| Sonoma Valley Unified | 19.8% | 33.6% |
How we compare low-income results
“Typical” is the median across 339 California unified districts with 2026 results, a reported low-income population, and at least 20 low-income tested students in each subject. Each district counts once. This compares proficiency for low-income students, rather than the gap between income groups.
