Is this your district? Email the board to prioritize reading!
Email BoardPomona Unified
Los Angeles County school performance
Pomona Unified is badly underperforming.
Reading and math results average to the 36th percentile among California school districts.
Only 38.6% of students met California's reading standard, but it is trending up slightly.
Math is weaker: 25.1% of students met California's math standard, but it is trending up slightly.
| Current Reading Proficiency | 38.6% |
| Current Math Proficiency | 25.1% |
| District Reading Rank | 616 / 977 (37th percentile) |
| District Math Rank | 642 / 977 (34th percentile) |
| Student / Teacher Ratio | 21:1 |
| Spend per Student | $22,531 |
| Schools in District | 37 |
| Student Enrollment | 21,069 |
| Low-Income Students | 16,587 (87.7%) |
| English Learners | 4,518 (23.9%) |
District Website
Great Schools
Niche
Ed-Data
CAASPPTest score trends
Reading rose 1.3 points from last year and rose 2.9 points over the full period. Math rose 1.1 points from last year and rose 2.4 points over the full period.
•Math +2.4 percentage pointsBoard Members
| name | elected | up for re-election |
|---|---|---|
Arturo Jimenez Board Member [email protected] | 2024 | 2028 |
Dr. Lisa Nashua Board Member [email protected] | 2022 | 2026This year! |
Dr. Roberta A. Perlman Board Member [email protected] | 2022 | 2026This year! |
Patricia Tye Board Member [email protected] | 2022 | 2026This year! |
Tamara Gonzalez Board Member [email protected] | 2024 | 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 22.8 points in reading. It widened slightly over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
7.7% of English learners meet the reading standard, compared with 39.7% of English-only students. The gap widened 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 21.9 points in math. It widened slightly over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
7.2% of English learners meet the math standard, compared with 25.4% 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
-1.4%Understanding this district
How does Pomona Unified rank in California?
Pomona Unified ranks No. 616 of 977 in reading and No. 642 of 977 in math for 2026. These proficiency rankings compare districts across all district types.
How much do results vary between Pomona Unified’s schools?
Among the 17 schools serving K–6, proficiency ranges from 21.1% to 82.4% in reading and 14.1% to 80.9% in math.
See the district’s schoolsAre results improving across Pomona Unified’s schools?
Over 2024–2026, reading proficiency rose at 27 of 37 schools with results covering that full period; math rose at 21 of 37.
Compare school trendsHow do low-income students in Pomona Unified compare with other districts?
Low-income reading proficiency is 35.6%, compared with 35.1% at a typical California unified district. In math, it is 22.2%, compared with 23.6%.
See student-group resultsWhich districts should I compare with Pomona Unified?
Unified districts in Los Angeles County. Peers have the closest enrollment sizes.
| District | Math | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| Pomona UnifiedThis district | 25.1% | 38.6% |
| Torrance Unified | 61.3% | 67.9% |
| Downey Unified | 44.3% | 57.4% |
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.
