Is this your district? Email the board to prioritize reading!
Email BoardLawndale Elementary
Los Angeles County school performance
Lawndale Elementary is underperforming.
Reading and math results average to the 65th percentile among California school districts.
50.8% of students met California's reading standard, and it is trending up slightly.
Math is weaker: 39.6% of students met California's math standard, but it is slowly trending up.
| Current Reading Proficiency | 50.8% |
| Current Math Proficiency | 39.6% |
| District Reading Rank | 351 / 977 (64th percentile) |
| District Math Rank | 340 / 977 (65th percentile) |
| Student / Teacher Ratio | 20:1 |
| Spend per Student | $27,305 |
| Schools in District | 9 |
| Student Enrollment | 4,802 |
| Low-Income Students | 3,603 (83.3%) |
| English Learners | 1,175 (27.2%) |
District Website
Great Schools
Niche
Ed-Data
CAASPPTest score trends
Reading rose 0.7 points from last year and rose 2.2 points over the full period. Math rose 1.7 points from last year and rose 4.0 points over the full period.
•Math +4.0 percentage pointsBoard Members
| name | elected | up for re-election |
|---|---|---|
Cathy Burris Board President [email protected] | N/A | 2028 |
Ann M. Phillips Board Clerk [email protected] | N/A | 2026This year! |
Adim Morales Trustee [email protected] | N/A | 2028 |
Bonnie J. Coronado Trustee [email protected] | N/A | 2026This year! |
Shirley Rudolph 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 18.3 points in reading. It widened over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
19.6% of English learners meet the reading standard, compared with 51.6% 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 20.0 points in math. It widened over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
18.9% of English learners meet the math standard, compared with 40.5% 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
-9.3%Understanding this district
How does Lawndale Elementary rank in California?
Lawndale Elementary ranks No. 351 of 977 in reading and No. 340 of 977 in math for 2026. These proficiency rankings compare districts across all district types.
How much do results vary between Lawndale Elementary’s schools?
Among the 6 schools serving K–5, proficiency ranges from 29.9% to 62.0% in reading and 21.7% to 60.2% in math.
See the district’s schoolsAre results improving across Lawndale Elementary’s schools?
Over 2024–2026, reading proficiency rose at 6 of 9 schools with results covering that full period; math rose at 5 of 9.
Compare school trendsHow do low-income students in Lawndale Elementary compare with other districts?
Low-income reading proficiency is 48.5%, compared with 37.6% at a typical California elementary district. In math, it is 37.1%, compared with 28.2%.
See student-group resultsWhich districts should I compare with Lawndale Elementary?
Elementary districts in Los Angeles County. Peers have the closest enrollment sizes.
| District | Math | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| Lawndale ElementaryThis district | 39.6% | 50.8% |
| Sulphur Springs Union | 42.4% | 50.2% |
| Mountain View Elementary | 19.8% | 31.2% |
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.
