Thermalito Union Elementary
Butte County school performance
Thermalito Union Elementary is badly underperforming.
Reading and math results average to the 32nd percentile among California school districts.
Only 34.4% of students met California's reading standard, but it is trending up.
Math is weaker: 26.9% of students met California's math standard, but it is trending up.
| Current Reading Proficiency | 34.4% |
| Current Math Proficiency | 26.9% |
| District Reading Rank | 721 / 977 (26th percentile) |
| District Math Rank | 600 / 977 (39th percentile) |
| Student / Teacher Ratio | 18:1 |
| Spend per Student | $19,956 |
| Schools in District | 5 |
| Student Enrollment | 1,515 |
| Low-Income Students | 1,320 (87.1%) |
| English Learners | 179 (11.8%) |
District Website
Great Schools
Niche
Ed-Data
CAASPPTest score trends
Reading fell 0.4 points from last year and rose 6.3 points over the full period. Math rose 2.4 points from last year and rose 5.2 points over the full period.
•Math +5.2 percentage pointsBoard Members
| name | elected | up for re-election |
|---|---|---|
Jaymes Lackey Board President | 2018 | 2026This year! |
Heather Walker Board Vice President | 2025 | 2026This year! |
Tracie Biddle-Lewis Board Clerk | 2020 | 2028 |
Darlene Fultz Board Member | 2010 | 2026This year! |
Richard Meyer Board Member | 2020 | 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 17.3 points in reading. It widened slightly over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
14.5% of English learners meet the reading standard, compared with 34.5% 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 16.0 points in math. It widened over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
13.7% of English learners meet the math standard, compared with 26.6% 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
-2.8%Understanding this district
How does Thermalito Union Elementary rank in California?
Thermalito Union Elementary ranks No. 721 of 977 in reading and No. 600 of 977 in math for 2026. These proficiency rankings compare districts across all district types.
How much do results vary between Thermalito Union Elementary’s schools?
Among the 3 schools serving K–5, proficiency ranges from 24.6% to 43.9% in reading and 16.4% to 32.9% in math.
See the district’s schoolsAre results improving across Thermalito Union Elementary’s schools?
Over 2024–2026, reading proficiency rose at 4 of 4 schools with results covering that full period; math rose at 3 of 4. 1 school has a different reporting period and is excluded.
Compare school trendsHow do low-income students in Thermalito Union Elementary compare with other districts?
Low-income reading proficiency is 31.3%, compared with 37.6% at a typical California elementary district. In math, it is 24.0%, compared with 28.2%.
See student-group resultsWhich districts should I compare with Thermalito Union Elementary?
Elementary districts in Butte County. Peers have the closest enrollment sizes.
| District | Math | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| Thermalito Union ElementaryThis district | 26.9% | 34.4% |
| Palermo Union Elementary | 20.7% | 34.9% |
| Oroville City Elementary | 19.3% | 26.9% |
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.
