Is this your district? Email the board to prioritize reading!
Email BoardSimi Valley Unified
Ventura County school performance
Simi Valley Unified is underperforming.
Reading and math results average to the 62nd percentile among California school districts.
50.3% of students met California's reading standard, and it is trending up slightly.
Math is weaker: 37.3% of students met California's math standard, but it is trending up slightly.
| Current Reading Proficiency | 50.3% |
| Current Math Proficiency | 37.3% |
| District Reading Rank | 363 / 977 (63rd percentile) |
| District Math Rank | 376 / 977 (62nd percentile) |
| Student / Teacher Ratio | 21:1 |
| Spend per Student | $17,225 |
| Schools in District | 26 |
| Student Enrollment | 15,418 |
| Low-Income Students | 7,051 (46.1%) |
| English Learners | 1,720 (11.2%) |
District Website
Great Schools
Niche
Ed-Data
CAASPPTest score trends
Reading rose 0.1 points from last year and rose 1.8 points over the full period. Math rose 0.6 points from last year and rose 1.9 points over the full period.
•Math +1.9 percentage pointsBoard Members
| name | elected | up for re-election |
|---|---|---|
Dawn Smollen President of the Board [email protected] | 2022 | 2026This year! |
Kareem Jubran Clerk of the Board [email protected] | 2024 | 2028 |
Dr. Ron Resnick Trustee [email protected] | 2024 | 2028 |
Dr. Stephen Pietrolungo Trustee [email protected] | N/A | N/A |
Mike James Trustee [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 22.1 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 54.2% of English-only students. The gap widened as English-learner results fell 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 19.9 points in math. It widened slightly over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
7.0% of English learners meet the math standard, compared with 40.5% of English-only students. The gap widened as English-learner results fell 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 Simi Valley Unified rank in California?
Simi Valley Unified ranks No. 363 of 977 in reading and No. 376 of 977 in math for 2026. These proficiency rankings compare districts across all district types.
How much do results vary between Simi Valley Unified’s schools?
Among the 18 schools serving K–5, proficiency ranges from 25.0% to 79.8% in reading and 18.7% to 75.5% in math.
See the district’s schoolsAre results improving across Simi Valley Unified’s schools?
Over 2024–2026, reading proficiency rose at 14 of 26 schools with results covering that full period; math rose at 13 of 26.
Compare school trendsHow do low-income students in Simi Valley Unified compare with other districts?
Low-income reading proficiency is 38.9%, compared with 35.1% at a typical California unified district. In math, it is 27.0%, compared with 23.6%.
See student-group resultsWhich districts should I compare with Simi Valley Unified?
Unified districts in Ventura County. Peers have the closest enrollment sizes.
| District | Math | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| Simi Valley UnifiedThis district | 37.3% | 50.3% |
| Conejo Valley Unified | 56.3% | 66.5% |
| Ventura Unified | 36.4% | 47.7% |
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.
