An equity score of 93/100 ranks Richgrove Elementary #8 of 1526 districts in California (state average 50). Derived live from how evenly resources are distributed across the district's schools.
At $23,579 per pupil, Richgrove Elementary ranks #216 of 1880 California districts by per-pupil spending (California districts). NCES F-33 finance data.
508
Total Enrollment
1
Schools
$23,579
Per-Pupil Spending
Elementary
School Types
District-Level NCES Analysis
Richgrove Elementary operates 1 public schools serving 508 students, placing it among the smallest districts in California. The school portfolio breaks down into 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 Tulare County.
Per-pupil expenditure runs $23,579 according to the NCES F-33 School District Finance Survey, in the upper half of 1880 California districts by per-pupil spending. See how California compares in our national per-pupil spending analysis. The funding mix is 7.1% local, 74.3% state, and 18.6% 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 93/100, ranked #8 of 1526 in California against a state average of 50, notably more even than the typical district in the state for how evenly funding reaches its schools.
a 477:1 student-counselor ratio, above both the ASCA benchmark and the roughly 408:1 national average, and 30.4% chronic absenteeism from the 2021-22 Civil Rights Data Collection. Demographically, the student body averages 98.5% Hispanic or Latino, 1.3% Asian across the district's schools.
Its largest campus is Richgrove Elementary, enrolling 477 students (100% of the district's total enrollment).
Richgrove Elementary accounts for 93.9% of all Richgrove Elementary student enrollment
That is an overwhelming concentration, leaving the rest of Richgrove Elementary a distant remainder — means Richgrove Elementary-wide averages can mask substantial variation outside the largest entity. Grade band: elementary. The share measures enrollment concentration only; it does not establish how the district allocates programs, capital, or staff. Because it contains a majority of the affected population, enrollment-weighted aggregates will sit closer to this entity's reported fields than to those of smaller peers; an unweighted entity count answers a different question.
The reported share is above 87.5%, so economic need is widespread across the measured student population. Title I operates under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA, 2015), but its statutory allocation uses additional LEA-level counts and rules not represented by this average. This percentage is an economic-need context measure; it does not establish a Title I award, show dollars received, or describe how funds are distributed among campuses.
Richgrove Elementary student-counselor ratio is 477:1 — high (typically associated with staffing constraints that limit per-student counselor time; CRDC data shows higher ratios cluster in larger urban systems)
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 Higher values may reflect larger urban scale or recent resource constraints that have widened the gap.
Richgrove Elementary chronic absenteeism rate is 30.4% — 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.