Alfred B. Nobel Charter Middle

· Los Angeles County · Los Angeles Unified
Public Los Angeles County 🏛 Los Angeles Unified → CDS 1964733…
📄 Shareable scorecard →

Compare with peers

Most similar nearby schools

Chatsworth Charter High → James Monroe High School → John F. Kennedy High → Taft Charter High → Grover Cleveland Charter High → Compare all similar →

No UC admissions data on file for Alfred B. Nobel Charter Middle.

This school doesn't appear in UCOP's source-school records (it may send few or no applicants to UC). Its enrollment trend and similar-school comparison are still below.

Enrollment trend & projection

Total enrollment
2,409 (2018)1,793 (2026)
-25.6%

If this trend holds (-3.6%/yr, Total enrollment)

At per-pupil funding of $ / student:

Horizon Projected Total enrollment Change Funding impact / yr
1 yr (2027) ~1,728 -65 $0
3 yr (2029) ~1,605 -188 $0
5 yr (2031) ~1,491 -302 $0

Straight-line extrapolation of the recent annual rate — a what-if, not a forecast of intent. Default = California's LCFF base grant for grades 9–12 ($12,423/ADA). Edit the figure to match your school.

Enrollment stability & demand — 2024-25

Two complementary signals: retention (do students stay once enrolled?) and demand (are families choosing the school?). Read against the Los Angeles County baseline — the demographic tide is moving every CA HS, so a school's gap vs. county is the actionable signal.

Stability rate
95.6%
1,745 of 1,825 students

80 of 1,825 students who enrolled at Alfred B. Nobel Charter Middle this year didn't maintain continuous enrollment (4.4% non-stability). Mid-year transfers, dropouts, and other exits are all counted.

Los Angeles County median
89.1% · school is in the 88th percentile of 676 HS
Statewide median
88.7% · in the 89th percentile of 2,648 HS

Stability by student group

Socio. disadvantaged (1,056) 94.7%
Hispanic / Latino (862) 95.6%
White (418) 93.8%
Asian (242) 97.9%
Students w/ disabilities (158) 93.7%
Filipino (113) 98.2%

Nearest peer high schools

Chatsworth Charter High 84.2% James Monroe High School 80.9% John F. Kennedy High 88.9% Taft Charter High 87.8% Grover Cleveland Charter High 86.6%

Source: California Department of Education, Stability Rate 2024-25. Benchmarks limited to non-virtual public & charter HS with ≥100 cumulative enrollees so by-design-high-churn continuation schools don't dominate the bottom of the distribution. Cumulative enrollment counts every student on the rolls during the year, so it can exceed peak-day enrollment.

Chronic absenteeism — 2024-25

Share of students missing 10% or more of expected attendance — the leading indicator that often precedes the demand decline shown above. Families disengaging tend to raise absenteeism first, then formally leave. Basis: total enrollment.

Chronic absent
11.8%
213 of 1,809 students

Absenteeism is up 9.2 pp since 2016-17. A rising absenteeism trend often precedes formal departure — worth investigating which subgroups are driving it.

Los Angeles County median
22.7% · school is better than 86% of 669 HS
Statewide median
20.9%
Chronic absenteeism by year (raw %)

Source: California Department of Education, Chronic Absenteeism 2024-25. Benchmarks limited to non-virtual public & charter HS with ≥100 eligible students. CDE didn't publish a usable 2019-20 file (COVID).

District financial profile — Los Angeles Unified (FY2020)

From 4 years of NCES F-33 filings (the federally-mandated district finance survey). Public schools don't have their own books — the district does. These figures show the financial scale, revenue dependence, instruction-vs-overhead mix, and long-term debt that shape what a school can sustain.

Total revenue
$11112.5M
+8.9% since FY2017
Per-pupil revenue
$24,124
460,633 students enrolled
Revenue mix
State: 51.7%
Local: 29.8%
Federal: 18.5%
Instruction share
53.5%
of current spending · $10,061/pupil
Long-term debt
$11908.4M
+4.3% since FY2017
Total revenue by year ($M)
Total expenditure by year ($M)

Source: NCES F-33 Annual Survey of School System Finances (Urban Institute Education Data API). Latest year currently published: FY2020. F-33 is a district-level federal filing — it reflects the Los Angeles Unified as a whole, not this individual school's books. Revenue mix shows where the district's dollars come from (state aid dominates in CA via LCFF). Instruction share is current expenditure on instruction ÷ total current expenditure (national benchmark ~60%). Long-term debt is end-of-year outstanding (mostly facilities bonds).

Alfred B. Nobel Charter Middle — Enrollment & Outcomes Snapshot

Public · vs. 10 most similar nearby schools

  • At its recent rate (-3.6%/yr), enrollment projects to ~1605 by 2029 — about 188 fewer students than today.

Enrollment projection

1793 students (2026)
~1605 projected (2029)
at -3.6%/yr

That's about 188 fewer students. At per-student funding of $ per student, that's roughly $0 in annual state funding at risk.

Default = California's LCFF base grant for grades 9–12 ($12,423 per ADA) — adjust to your district's actual per-pupil figure. Projection extrapolates the recent annual rate — not a forecast of intent.

Your school vs. its 10 most similar nearby schools

School Type Size UC Reach Enroll. trend
Alfred B. Nobel Charter Middle Public 1793
Peer-group median 18.4% -9%
Chatsworth Charter High Public 1652 28.9% -15%
James Monroe High School Public 1732 14.4% +1%
John F. Kennedy High Public 2167 22.5% +12%
Taft Charter High Public 2157 -15%
Grover Cleveland Charter High Public 2633 +0%
Reseda Charter High Public 1322 -43%
Canoga Park High School Public 1284 10.8% +18%
Birmingham Community Charter High Public 3259 29.3% -9%
Chatsworth High School Public
Northridge Academy High School Public 767 10.5% -26%

UC Reach = top-6 UC admits ÷ senior class (can exceed 100% when students are admitted to multiple campuses). Enrollment trend = first-to-latest grade-12 change on file. Similar schools matched on proximity, size, type. Methodology →

Is your school winning the families it should?

An Enrollment Trend Audit benchmarks your enrollment against nearby schools, shows who's gaining and losing families, and lays out a plan to make families choose you — built around the outcomes your families value. Built for principals, heads of school, and district leaders.

Request an Enrollment Trend Audit →