Scores updated for 2026!

Hughes-Elizabeth Lakes Union Elementary

Los Angeles County school performance

Summary

Hughes-Elizabeth Lakes Union Elementary is underperforming.

Reading and math results average to the 58th percentile among California school districts.

Only 48.7% of students met California's reading standard, and it is trending down slightly.Trending down

Math is weaker: 35.0% of students met California's math standard, and it is trending down slightly.Trending down

Proficiency Stats
Current Reading Proficiency48.7%
Current Math Proficiency35.0%
District Reading Rank396 / 977 (60th percentile)
District Math Rank427 / 977 (56th percentile)
Other Stats
Student / Teacher Ratio22:1
Spend per Student$12,774
Schools in District1
Student Enrollment195
Low-Income Students81 (41.5%)
English Learners5 (2.6%)

Test score trends

2024 - 2026

Reading rose 2.7 points from last year and fell 2.4 points over the full period. Math rose 2.5 points from last year and fell 0.8 points over the full period.

Reading -2.4 percentage pointsTrend down•Math -0.8 percentage pointsTrend down
Changes shown: Reading 2024–2026; Math 2024–2026.

Board Members

nameelectedup for re-election

Stephanie Lewis

President

[email protected]
20222028

Jim Wall

Vice President

[email protected]
20202028

Raelyn Marshall

Clerk

[email protected]
20242026This year!

Lola Skelton

Trustee

[email protected]
20222026This year!

Terri Moss

Trustee

[email protected]
N/A2026This year!

Board website

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 27.8 points in reading. It widened over the period shown.

Low-Income
Non-Low-Income
Low-Income -9.9 percentage pointsTrend down•
Non-Low-Income -1.5 percentage pointsTrend down

English Learners vs English Native

Results for both language groups are unavailable, so a current reading gap cannot be calculated.

English Learners
English Native
English Learners N/A•
English Native -0.1 percentage pointsTrend down

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 23.6 points in math. It widened over the period shown.

Low-Income
Non-Low-Income
Low-Income -15.0 percentage pointsTrend down•
Non-Low-Income +5.3 percentage pointsTrend up

English Learners vs English Native

Results for both language groups are unavailable, so a current math gap cannot be calculated.

English Learners
English Native
English Learners N/A•
English Native -0.5 percentage pointsTrend down

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 Hughes-Elizabeth Lakes Union Elementary rank in California?

Hughes-Elizabeth Lakes Union Elementary ranks No. 396 of 977 in reading and No. 427 of 977 in math for 2026. These proficiency rankings compare districts across all district types.

How do low-income students in Hughes-Elizabeth Lakes Union Elementary compare with other districts?

Low-income reading proficiency is 29.7%, compared with 37.6% at a typical California elementary district. In math, it is 18.9%, compared with 28.2%.

See student-group results

Which districts should I compare with Hughes-Elizabeth Lakes Union Elementary?

Elementary districts in Los Angeles County. Peers have the closest enrollment sizes.

2026 proficiency
DistrictMathReading
Hughes-Elizabeth Lakes Union ElementaryThis district35.0%48.7%
Valle Lindo Elementary42.9%58.1%
Los Nietos36.8%45.2%
Compare these districts
How we compare low-income results

“Typical” is the median across 444 California elementary 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.