Creekside Junior High

· Merced County · Los Banos Unified
Public Merced County 🏛 Los Banos Unified → CDS 2465755…
📄 Shareable scorecard →

Compare with peers

Most similar nearby schools

Los Banos Junior High → Los Banos High School → Dos Palos High School → Pacheco High School → Yolo Junior High → Compare all similar →

No UC admissions data on file for Creekside Junior High.

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
809 (2018)802 (2026)
-0.9%

If this trend holds (-0.1%/yr, Total enrollment)

At per-pupil funding of $ / student:

Horizon Projected Total enrollment Change Funding impact / yr
1 yr (2027) ~801 -1 $0
3 yr (2029) ~799 -3 $0
5 yr (2031) ~798 -4 $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 Merced County baseline — the demographic tide is moving every CA HS, so a school's gap vs. county is the actionable signal.

Stability rate
88.5%
763 of 862 students

99 of 862 students who enrolled at Creekside Junior High this year didn't maintain continuous enrollment (11.5% non-stability). Mid-year transfers, dropouts, and other exits are all counted.

Merced County median
87.5% · school is in the 64th percentile of 22 HS
Statewide median
88.7% · in the 49th percentile of 2,648 HS

Stability by student group

Socio. disadvantaged (750) 87.7%
Hispanic / Latino (736) 88.3%
English learners (183) 79.2%
Students w/ disabilities (118) 84.7%
White (97) 87.6%

Nearest peer high schools

Los Banos Junior High 89.9% Los Banos High School 88.2% Dos Palos High School 86.7% Pacheco High School 87.5% Yolo Junior High 92.8%

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
22.4%
189 of 842 students

Absenteeism is up 9.6 pp since 2016-17. A rising absenteeism trend often precedes formal departure — worth investigating which subgroups are driving it.

Merced County median
24.6% · school is better than 64% of 22 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 Banos 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
$189.3M
+32.4% since FY2017
Per-pupil revenue
$17,431
10,858 students enrolled
Revenue mix
State: 69.9%
Local: 17.0%
Federal: 13.1%
Instruction share
58.4%
of current spending · $8,516/pupil
Long-term debt
$76.4M
+8.6% since FY2017
Total revenue by year ($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 Banos 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).

Creekside Junior High — Enrollment & Outcomes Snapshot

Public · vs. 10 most similar nearby schools

  • At its recent rate (-0.1%/yr), enrollment projects to ~799 by 2029 — about 3 fewer students than today.

Enrollment projection

802 students (2026)
~799 projected (2029)
at -0.1%/yr

That's about 3 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
Creekside Junior High Public 802
Peer-group median 9.0% +2%
Los Banos Junior High Public 906
Los Banos High School Public 1568 12.2% +12%
Dos Palos High School Public 632 8.6% -14%
Pacheco High School Public 1721 8.1% +2%
Yolo Junior High Public 710
Orestimba High School Public 902 15.2% +21%
Gustine High School Public 518 5.5% -18%
Hilmar High School Public 700 9.0% +21%
Delhi High School Public 716 25.3% -15%
Osborn Two-Way Immersion Academy Public 833

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 →