An equity score of 54/100 ranks Fremont Re-1 #59 of 142 districts in Colorado (state average 50). Derived live from how evenly resources are distributed across the district's schools.
At $14,112 per pupil, Fremont Re-1 ranks #127 of 180 Colorado districts by per-pupil spending (Colorado districts). NCES F-33 finance data.
3,305
Total Enrollment
8
Schools
$14,112
Per-Pupil Spending
Elementary, Combined
School Types
District-Level NCES Analysis
Fremont Re-1 operates 8 public schools serving 3,305 students, placing it among the smaller districts in Colorado. The school portfolio breaks down into 4 elementary, 2 combined, 1 high, 1 middle schools, a compact enough portfolio that families can compare every campus directly before they move, rent, or enrol. These enrollment and school figures come from the NCES Common Core of Data (CCD) 2024-25 release, and the district is based in Fremont County.
Per-pupil expenditure runs $14,112 according to the NCES F-33 School District Finance Survey, in the lower half of 180 Colorado districts by per-pupil spending. See how Colorado compares in our national per-pupil spending analysis. The funding mix is 30.7% local, 51.1% state, and 18.1% federal, a state-revenue-heavy mix that insulates the district somewhat from local property-tax volatility, though it ties funding to state budget cycles. The district's equity score is 54/100, ranked #59 of 142 in Colorado against a state average of 50, in line with the typical spread seen across the state for how evenly funding reaches its schools.
Academic infrastructure includes 1 of 8 schools offering Advanced Placement (6 AP courses district-wide), a 229.2:1 student-counselor ratio, that meets the ASCA-recommended benchmark, and 41.3% chronic absenteeism from the 2021-22 Civil Rights Data Collection. Demographically, the student body averages 77.2% White, 15.6% Hispanic or Latino, 0.9% African American across the district's schools. Its most demographically mixed campus is Mckinley Elementary School, with a diversity index of 42.2/100.
Canon City High School accounts for 28.3% of all Fremont Re-1 student enrollment
That dominant concentration means Fremont Re-1-wide averages can mask substantial variation outside the largest entity. Grade band: high. The share measures enrollment concentration only; it does not establish how the district allocates programs, capital, or staff. Enrollment-weighted aggregates give this entity more weight than any smaller peer, while an unweighted entity average treats every record equally.
Fremont Re-1 school enrollment varies 3.7× across entities
Fremont Re-1 school enrollment ranges from 250 students (lowest) to 936 students (highest), a spread of 686 students. That relatively narrow ratio reflects an unusually homogeneous campus portfolio, most districts have a wider mix of school sizes. Per-school staffing ratios, programme availability, and capital-renovation cycles often diverge inside the same district based on enrollment shape.
Fremont Re-1 student-counselor ratio is 229:1 — low (typically associated with meeting or exceeding the American School Counselor Association (ASCA) recommended 250:1 benchmark, which correlates with stronger college and career counseling capacity)
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 Lower values often correlate with smaller scale and population characteristics rather than higher resource budgets per se.
Fremont Re-1 chronic absenteeism rate is 41.3% — high (typically associated with higher-than-average disruption; recent CRDC data showed elevated rates persisting after pandemic-era schooling changes)
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 Higher values may reflect larger urban scale or recent resource constraints that have widened the gap.