Every figure on PlainSchools is rendered directly from the source NCES, CRDC and F-33 federal
records, no number is typed in by an editor. District totals are aggregated directly from the schools reporting under this district in the source records. See our
editorial standards & corrections policy, the
methodology behind these numbers, or
report a data error. Data current as of June 2026.
Cashion, Oklahoma - 3 schools
An equity score of 43/100 ranks Cashion #168 of 439 districts in Oklahoma (state average 38). Derived live from how evenly resources are distributed across the district's schools.
At $12,978 per pupil, Cashion ranks #176 of 540 Oklahoma districts by per-pupil spending (Oklahoma districts). NCES F-33 finance data.
725
Total Enrollment
3
Schools
$12,978
Per-Pupil Spending
Combined, High
School Types
District-Level NCES Analysis
Cashion operates 3 public schools serving 725 students, placing it among the smallest districts in Oklahoma. The school portfolio breaks down into 1 combined, 1 high, 1 elementary schools, a small enough portfolio that most families will interact with nearly every campus in the district at some point. These enrollment and school figures come from the NCES Common Core of Data (CCD) 2024-25 release, and the district is based in Kingfisher County.
Per-pupil expenditure runs $12,978 according to the NCES F-33 School District Finance Survey, in the upper half of 540 Oklahoma districts by per-pupil spending. See how Oklahoma compares in our national per-pupil spending analysis. The funding mix is 54.5% local, 35.6% state, and 9.8% federal, a local-revenue-heavy mix that leaves the district more exposed to property-tax swings and local ballot measures than state-funded peers. The district's equity score is 43/100, ranked #168 of 439 in Oklahoma against a state average of 38, in line with the typical spread seen across the state for how evenly funding reaches its schools.
Academic infrastructure includes 1 of 3 schools offering Advanced Placement (2 AP courses district-wide), a 250.3:1 student-counselor ratio, somewhat above the 250:1 ASCA recommendation, and 11.5% chronic absenteeism from the 2021-22 Civil Rights Data Collection. Demographically, the student body averages 77.3% White, 7.1% Hispanic or Latino, 1.2% African American across the district's schools. Its most demographically mixed campus is Cashion Es, with a diversity index of 43.5/100.
Its largest campus is Cashion Es, enrolling 333 students (44% of the district's total enrollment).
Cashion Es accounts for 44.3% of all Cashion student enrollment
That dominant concentration means Cashion-wide averages can mask substantial variation outside the dominant entity. Grade band: combined. A single dominant campus often anchors a district's program offerings and staffing patterns; the share helps explain why district-wide averages may not reflect the typical neighbourhood-school experience. When one entity dominates a region's footprint, its programmatic and budget decisions effectively set policy for a majority of the affected population.
Cashion student-counselor ratio is 250:1 — near the typical range (US average ~408) — within the typical range for U.S. public districts
student-counselor ratio is the simplest comparative metric but it does not capture the full picture: the ratio counts FTE counselors against total enrollment, districts that contract intervention or social-emotional staff outside the counselor classification may be under-counted Variation between sub-units within Cashion is typically wider than the Cashion-aggregate figure suggests.
Cashion chronic absenteeism rate is 11.5% — low (typically associated with lower-than-average attendance disruption; districts in this range often have attendance interventions, robust transportation, or smaller catchments that reduce barriers)
chronic absenteeism rate is the simplest comparative metric but it does not capture the full picture: a student is chronically absent if they miss ≥10% of enrolled days for any reason, illness, family obligations, or disengagement Lower values often correlate with smaller scale and population characteristics rather than higher resource budgets per se.