Is this your district? Email the board to prioritize reading!
Email BoardGolden Plains Unified
Fresno County school performance
Golden Plains Unified is badly underperforming.
Reading and math results average to the 20th percentile among California school districts.
Only 25.5% of students met California's reading standard, but it is trending up.
Math is weaker: 22.9% of students met California's math standard, but it is slowly trending up.
| Current Reading Proficiency | 25.5% |
| Current Math Proficiency | 22.9% |
| District Reading Rank | 869 / 977 (11th percentile) |
| District Math Rank | 692 / 977 (29th percentile) |
| Student / Teacher Ratio | 17:1 |
| Spend per Student | $26,180 |
| Schools in District | 5 |
| Student Enrollment | 1,351 |
| Low-Income Students | 1,294 (95.8%) |
| English Learners | 656 (48.6%) |
District Website
Great Schools
Niche
Ed-Data
CAASPPTest score trends
Reading fell 0.9 points from last year and rose 6.1 points over the full period. Math rose 6.6 points from last year and rose 3.7 points over the full period.
•Math +3.7 percentage pointsBoard Members
| name | elected | up for re-election |
|---|---|---|
Celina U. Rossetti President [email protected] | 2024 | 2028 |
Salvador Parra, Jr. Vice President [email protected] | 2024 | 2028 |
Betty Vallejo Clerk [email protected] | 2022 | 2026This year! |
Emily Parra Trustee [email protected] | 2024 | 2028 |
Kathy Chaffin Trustee [email protected] | N/A | 2028 |
Leticia Fernandez Trustee [email protected] | 2022 | 2026This year! |
Tom J. Fairless Trustee [email protected] | 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 17.7 points in reading. It widened over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
13.5% of English learners meet the reading standard, compared with 18.9% of English-only students. The gap narrowed as English-learner results rose and English-only results fell.
•
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 14.9 points in math. It widened over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
16.7% of English learners meet the math standard, compared with 21.5% of English-only students. The gap narrowed 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 Golden Plains Unified rank in California?
Golden Plains Unified ranks No. 869 of 977 in reading and No. 692 of 977 in math for 2026. These proficiency rankings compare districts across all district types.
How much do results vary between Golden Plains Unified’s schools?
Among the 4 schools serving K–8, proficiency ranges from 20.2% to 56.3% in reading and 16.1% to 30.3% in math.
See the district’s schoolsAre results improving across Golden Plains Unified’s schools?
Over 2024–2026, reading proficiency rose at 5 of 5 schools with results covering that full period; math rose at 4 of 5.
Compare school trendsHow do low-income students in Golden Plains Unified compare with other districts?
Low-income reading proficiency is 25.2%, compared with 35.1% at a typical California unified district. In math, it is 22.6%, compared with 23.6%.
See student-group resultsWhich districts should I compare with Golden Plains Unified?
Unified districts in Fresno County. Peers have the closest enrollment sizes.
| District | Math | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| Golden Plains UnifiedThis district | 22.9% | 25.5% |
| Riverdale Joint Unified | 24.9% | 39.5% |
| Sierra Unified | 35.4% | 49.7% |
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.
