Is this your district? Email the board to prioritize reading!
Email BoardTemecula Valley Unified
Riverside County school performance
Reading and math results average to the 83rd percentile among California school districts.
63.8% of students met California's reading standard, and it is trending up slightly.
51.6% of students met California's math standard, but it is trending up slightly.
| Current Reading Proficiency | 63.8% |
| Current Math Proficiency | 51.6% |
| District Reading Rank | 156 / 977 (84th percentile) |
| District Math Rank | 182 / 977 (82nd percentile) |
| Student / Teacher Ratio | 22:1 |
| Spend per Student | $16,016 |
| Schools in District | 32 |
| Student Enrollment | 27,956 |
| Low-Income Students | 9,461 (36.0%) |
| English Learners | 1,341 (5.1%) |
District Website
Great Schools
Niche
Ed-Data
CAASPPTest score trends
Reading was unchanged from last year and rose 1.9 points over the full period. Math rose 1.9 points from last year and rose 3.0 points over the full period.
•Math +3.0 percentage pointsBoard Members
| name | elected | up for re-election |
|---|---|---|
Dr. Joseph Komrosky Board President [email protected] | 2022 | 2026This year! |
Dr. Melinda Anderson Board Clerk [email protected] | 2024 | 2028 |
Jennifer Wiersma Board Vice Clerk [email protected] | 2022 | 2026This year! |
Emil Roger Barham Board Member [email protected] | 2022 | 2026This year! |
Steven Schwartz 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 17.5 points in reading. It widened slightly over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
13.9% of English learners meet the reading standard, compared with 64.7% 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 18.0 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 52.0% 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
-0.8%Understanding this district
How does Temecula Valley Unified rank in California?
Temecula Valley Unified ranks No. 156 of 977 in reading and No. 182 of 977 in math for 2026. These proficiency rankings compare districts across all district types.
How much do results vary between Temecula Valley Unified’s schools?
Among the 17 schools serving K–5, proficiency ranges from 43.6% to 75.8% in reading and 30.7% to 68.3% in math.
See the district’s schoolsAre results improving across Temecula Valley Unified’s schools?
Over 2024–2026, reading proficiency rose at 24 of 32 schools with results covering that full period; math rose at 24 of 32.
Compare school trendsHow do low-income students in Temecula Valley Unified compare with other districts?
Low-income reading proficiency is 53.5%, compared with 35.1% at a typical California unified district. In math, it is 41.0%, compared with 23.6%.
See student-group resultsWhich districts should I compare with Temecula Valley Unified?
Unified districts in Riverside County. Peers have the closest enrollment sizes.
| District | Math | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| Temecula Valley UnifiedThis district | 51.6% | 63.8% |
| Desert Sands Unified | 27.8% | 42.5% |
| Moreno Valley Unified | 19.9% | 35.4% |
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.
