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.
Blanchard, Oklahoma - 3 schools
An equity score of 22/100 ranks Dibble #389 of 439 districts in Oklahoma (state average 38). Derived live from how evenly resources are distributed across the district's schools.
At $9,901 per pupil, Dibble ranks #443 of 540 Oklahoma districts by per-pupil spending (Oklahoma districts). NCES F-33 finance data.
717
Total Enrollment
3
Schools
$9,901
Per-Pupil Spending
Combined, High
School Types
District-Level NCES Analysis
Dibble operates 3 public schools serving 717 students, placing it among the smallest districts in Oklahoma. The school portfolio breaks down into 1 combined, 1 high, 1 middle 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 Mcclain County.
Per-pupil expenditure runs $9,901 according to the NCES F-33 School District Finance Survey, in the lower half of 540 Oklahoma districts by per-pupil spending. See how Oklahoma compares in our national per-pupil spending analysis. The funding mix is 29.3% local, 49.8% state, and 20.9% federal, a balanced mix across local, state, and federal sources, spreading budget risk across funding cycles rather than concentrating it in one. The district's equity score is 22/100, ranked #389 of 439 in Oklahoma against a state average of 38, notably less even than the typical district in 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 275:1 student-counselor ratio, somewhat above the 250:1 ASCA recommendation, and 13.7% chronic absenteeism from the 2021-22 Civil Rights Data Collection. Demographically, the student body averages 66.3% White, 15.7% Hispanic or Latino, 2.3% African American across the district's schools. Its most demographically mixed campus is Dibble Hs, with a diversity index of 55.5/100.
Its largest campus is Dibble Es, enrolling 335 students (44% of the district's total enrollment).
Dibble Es accounts for 43.9% of all Dibble student enrollment
That dominant concentration means Dibble-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.
Dibble student-counselor ratio is 275:1 — 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 Dibble is typically wider than the Dibble-aggregate figure suggests.
Dibble chronic absenteeism rate is 13.7% — 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.