Cutler-Orosi Joint Unified
Tulare County school performance
Cutler-Orosi Joint Unified is underperforming.
Reading and math results average to the 51st percentile among California school districts.
Only 44.9% of students met California's reading standard, but it is slowly trending up.
Math is weaker: 32.9% of students met California's math standard, but it is trending up.
| Current Reading Proficiency | 44.9% |
| Current Math Proficiency | 32.9% |
| District Reading Rank | 490 / 977 (50th percentile) |
| District Math Rank | 463 / 977 (53rd percentile) |
| Student / Teacher Ratio | 19:1 |
| Spend per Student | $19,950 |
| Schools in District | 6 |
| Student Enrollment | 3,815 |
| Low-Income Students | 3,600 (94.4%) |
| English Learners | 1,438 (37.7%) |
District Website
Great Schools
Niche
Ed-Data
CAASPPTest score trends
Reading rose 0.3 points from last year and rose 4.1 points over the full period. Math rose 3.8 points from last year and rose 8.2 points over the full period.
•Math +8.2 percentage pointsBoard Members
| name | elected | up for re-election |
|---|---|---|
Sandra Williams Board President | 2022 | 2026This year! |
Marisol Rubalcaba Board Vice President | 2024 | 2028 |
Delia Martinez Board Clerk | 2024 | 2028 |
Javier Quevedo Board Trustee | 2022 | 2026This year! |
Joni Jordan Board Trustee | 2024 | 2028 |
Karen Gonzalez Board Trustee | 2025 | 2026This year! |
Mary Helen Espino Board Trustee | 2022 | 2026This year! |
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 14.9 points in reading. It narrowed over the period shown.
•
English Learners vs English Native
16.3% of English learners meet the reading standard, compared with 49.8% of English-only students. The gap narrowed as English-learner results rose 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 14.4 points in math. It narrowed over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
12.5% of English learners meet the math standard, compared with 37.4% 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 Cutler-Orosi Joint Unified rank in California?
Cutler-Orosi Joint Unified ranks No. 490 of 977 in reading and No. 463 of 977 in math for 2026. These proficiency rankings compare districts across all district types.
How much do results vary between Cutler-Orosi Joint Unified’s schools?
Among the 3 schools serving K–5, proficiency ranges from 39.9% to 48.7% in reading and 34.5% to 45.2% in math.
See the district’s schoolsAre results improving across Cutler-Orosi Joint Unified’s schools?
Over 2024–2026, reading proficiency rose at 4 of 6 schools with results covering that full period; math rose at 5 of 6.
Compare school trendsHow do low-income students in Cutler-Orosi Joint Unified compare with other districts?
Low-income reading proficiency is 44.2%, compared with 35.1% at a typical California unified district. In math, it is 32.2%, compared with 23.6%.
See student-group resultsWhich districts should I compare with Cutler-Orosi Joint Unified?
Unified districts in Tulare County. Peers have the closest enrollment sizes.
| District | Math | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| Cutler-Orosi Joint UnifiedThis district | 32.9% | 44.9% |
| Lindsay Unified | 34.5% | 44.0% |
| Exeter Unified | 36.9% | 53.6% |
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.
