Westlake Charter

· Sacramento County · Natomas Unified
Public Sacramento County 🏛 Natomas Unified → ~113 seniors CDS 3475283…
📄 Shareable scorecard →

Compare with peers

Most similar nearby schools

Natomas Charter → Rio Linda Senior High School → Rio Linda High → Inderkum High School → Natomas High School → Compare all similar →

Enrollment trend & projection

Total enrollment (9–12)
919 (2018)1,492 (2026)
+62.4%
Grade 12 (graduating class)
113 (2025)94 (2026)
-16.8%

If this trend holds (+6.2%/yr, Total enrollment)

At per-pupil funding of $ / student:

Horizon Projected Total enrollment Change Funding impact / yr
1 yr (2027) ~1,585 +93 $0
3 yr (2029) ~1,789 +297 $0
5 yr (2031) ~2,020 +528 $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 Sacramento County baseline — the demographic tide is moving every CA HS, so a school's gap vs. county is the actionable signal.

Action needed
Strong inside, weak at the gate.

Families who enroll at Westlake Charter stay (92.3% stability — elite). But enrollment is dropping 2.3× the county rate (school -16.8% vs. county -7.4%). The audit question isn't why students leave — it's why fewer families are choosing to enroll in the first place.

-16.8%  school enrollment (2025–2026)
-7.4%  Sacramento County baseline
-9.4pp  gap vs. county
92.3%  retention (county median 80.8%)
Enrollment — indexed to 100 at 2025
Stability rate by year (raw %)
Stability rate
92.3%
470 of 509 students

39 of 509 students who enrolled at Westlake Charter this year didn't maintain continuous enrollment (7.7% non-stability). Mid-year transfers, dropouts, and other exits are all counted.

Sacramento County median
80.8% · school is in the 90th percentile of 77 HS
Statewide median
87.2% · in the 77th percentile of 1,688 HS

Stability by student group

Socio. disadvantaged (601) 95.0%
Hispanic / Latino (448) 95.3%
Asian (354) 95.5%
White (235) 97.0%
Black / African Am. (205) 93.7%
Students w/ disabilities (194) 94.3%

Nearest peer high schools

Natomas Charter 92.8% Rio Linda High 80.7% Inderkum High School 84.9% Natomas High School 79.7%

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: grades 9–12.

Chronic absent
20.5%
103 of 503 students

Absenteeism is in the typical CA HS range. Worth monitoring alongside the demand and retention signals above.

Sacramento County median
25.8% · school is better than 71% of 75 HS
Statewide median
22.9%
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).

SBAC academic outcomes — grade 11, 2025

Share of grade-11 students meeting or exceeding the California standard on Smarter Balanced ELA and Math. This is the academic-readiness signal that pairs with UC Reach (post-grad outcomes), stability (retention), and absenteeism (engagement). Note: statewide median Math is only ~20% — a school at 20% isn't an outlier; one at 45%+ genuinely is.

ELA — met or exceeded
n = 95
63.2%
incl. 29.5% exceeded
+17.1 pts above Sacramento County median (46.1%) · CA median 54.3% · Top 10% statewide ≥ 79.3%
Math — met or exceeded
n = 96
30.2%
incl. 12.5% exceeded
+12.5 pts above Sacramento County median (17.7%) · CA median 21.1% · Top 10% statewide ≥ 53.6%

Source: California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP) Smarter Balanced research files. Benchmarks limited to non-virtual public & charter HS with ≥30 tested students.

Student composition — 2025-26

HS grades 9–12 racial/ethnic composition and program subgroups, from CDE Census Day Enrollment. Two-year shift shown when ≥1 pt — surfaces how the community served has changed since 2023-24.

Race / ethnicity

Hispanic / Latino 31%
Asian 19% +2.1
White 16%
Black / African Am. 15% -1.6
Two or more 11%
Filipino 6%
Pacific Islander 1%

Program subgroups

Students w/ disabilities 36%
Socioeconomically disadv. 17%
English learners 6%

Source: California Department of Education, Census Day Enrollment 2025-26 (HS grades 9–12). Δ shown when shift is ≥1 pt since 2023-24. Categories below 0.5% omitted.

District financial profile — Natomas 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
$235.6M
+30.4% since FY2017
Per-pupil revenue
$17,133
13,748 students enrolled
Revenue mix
State: 58.1%
Local: 29.9%
Federal: 12.0%
Instruction share
60.4%
of current spending · $8,265/pupil
Long-term debt
$419.3M
+66.4% since FY2017
Total revenue by year ($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 Natomas 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).

University of California outcomes · Class of 2025
UC Reach
38%
43 admits / 113 seniors
+28.1 pp above peer median (10.0%) · Ranked #3 of 10 similar schools
Where this sits on the California curve
CA median
18.5%
Peer median
10.0%
Top 10%
53.3%
This school
38.1%
0%50%100%
CA median 18.5% Top 10% ≥ 53.3% This school 38.1%

Higher than 81% of California high schools (1105 ranked, ≥50 seniors)

📊 What this number means

Westlake Charter's UC Reach of 38.1% is in the top quartile statewide (median 18.5%; top 25% bar 32.0%) — but it's still below the top-10% bar of 53.3%.

Against similar schools, Westlake Charter stands out clearly — the peer-group median is 10.0%.

For context, the elite tier (top 1%) clears 102.7% — a gap of 65 pp from where this school sits.

Overall, Westlake Charter's UC Reach is higher than 81% of California high schools (1105 ranked).

UC Application Reach
144.2%
163 applications
Most seniors are applying to at least one of the six most selective UCs (applications counted at each campus).
In context: CA median 78.3% · Top 10% statewide ≥ 245.8% · Sacramento Co. Top 10% ≥ 143.7% · higher than 75% of CA HS.
UC Admit Rate
26.4%
43 / 163 applications
In context: CA median 26.0% · Top 10% statewide ≥ 40.5% · higher than 51% of CA HS.
UC Yield Rate
23.3%
10 enrolled of 43 admitted
Yield vs. Enrollment Reach: Yield answers "of UC admits, what % chose UC?" — denominator is just the admits. A small admitted cohort can post a low yield even when the school sends a healthy share of its class to UC.
UC Enrollment Reach
8.8%
10 enrollees / 113 seniors
Enrollment Reach vs. Yield: Reach answers "of the whole senior class, what % ended up at UC?" — denominator is everyone. High Yield with low Enrollment Reach is common at elite privates: most admits matriculate, but the school sends most of its class to non-UC selective colleges.
Student-Counselor Ratio
497:1
3.0 FTE counselors · 1,492 students
In context: CA median 338:1 · 159 more students per counselor · ASCA target 250:1.
A-G Completion
100%
111 of 111 graduates · 2024-25 cohort
In context: CA median 55.9% · +44.1 pp above · Sacramento Co. 50.9%.
Selective UC Reach (UCSD, UCSB, UCI, UCD)
22.1
per 100 seniors · campus-level total
In context: CA median 15.7 · Top 10% statewide ≥ 42.4 · higher than 66% of CA HS.
Elite UC Reach (UCB + UCLA)
6.2
per 100 seniors · campus-level total
In context: CA median 3.5 · Top 10% statewide ≥ 11.1 · higher than 71% of CA HS.
Senior Class Size
113
CDE grade 12 (exact)
Total School Enrollment
1,493
All grades · CDE Census Day

Westlake Charter — Enrollment & Outcomes Snapshot

Public · vs. 10 most similar nearby schools

  • On UC Reach, Westlake Charter sits in the middle of its similar-school group (ranked #3 of 10): 38% vs. a peer median of 10%.
  • Across the top-6 UC campuses, Westlake Charter is admitting at roughly +9 percentage points above what its average applicant GPA (4.007) alone would predict (30% actual vs. 22% expected). That's a meaningful signal — it can reflect UC's track record with this school's graduates, students presenting strongly in UC's holistic review (essays, EC's, context), or institutional familiarity helping at the margin. The data can't distinguish which, but the pattern itself is real and worth understanding.
  • Senior-class enrollment is down 17% (113→94 from 2025 to 2026), trailing the peer-group median of +2%.
  • Enrollment has been growing (+6.2%/yr); projects to ~1789 by 2029.

Enrollment projection

1492 students (2026)
~1789 projected (2029)
at +6.2%/yr

Your school vs. its 10 most similar nearby schools

School Type Size UC Reach Enroll. trend
Westlake Charter Public 1492 38.1% -17%
Peer-group median 10.0% +2%
Natomas Charter Public 1899 39.6% +17%
Rio Linda Senior High School Public 1641 9.4% +1%
Rio Linda High Public 1641 -1%
Inderkum High School Public 2169 28.5% -1%
Natomas High School Public 1094 10.0% +30%
Foothill High Public 1432 11.2% +34%
Mira Loma High School Public 1679 45.4% -5%
Center High School Public 1257 8.8% +3%
Del Campo High School Public 1531 7.7% -4%
Hiram W Johnson High School Public 1637 8.3% +18%

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 →

Avg. Applicant GPA · top-6 UCs
4.01
Avg. Admitted GPA · top-6 UCs
4.20

Admit rate vs. CA peer average, by campus

How does this school's admit rate at each UC compare to other CA schools whose applicant pool averages the same GPA?

Campus Applicant GPA (avg) Actual admit rate CA peer avg Δ Verdict
UC Berkeley 4.06 13.8% 13.7% +0.1pp On target
UCLA 4.01 10.3% 9.3% +1.0pp On target
UC San Diego 4.03 29.6% 19.4% +10.3pp Over
UC Santa Barbara 4.02 47.6% 33.9% +13.7pp Over
UC Davis 3.94 51.4% 32.4% +19.0pp Over
"Applicant GPA" is the average GPA of this school's UC applicant pool — not an individual student GPA. "CA peer avg" is the application-weighted statewide admit rate at this school-pool GPA, fit separately per campus. At any given pool GPA, real admit rates span widely (UCSD ranges 8% → 65% across CA schools) because UCs use comprehensive review — context-of-opportunity, geography, demographics, and applicant essays all weigh in beyond GPA. A large negative residual flags this school is admitted at a meaningfully lower rate than other CA schools at the same pool GPA — not that students here were "rejected at expected rate X." "Over" / "Under" use a ±5-point band. Campuses with fewer than 5 applicants are omitted.

Where Westlake Charter sits vs. all California schools

Overall, this school admits its UC applicants 9.0 points above what their GPAs predict (30.5% actual vs. 21.5% expected).

Campus Breakdown — 2025

Campus Applicants Admits Enrollees Admit Rate UC Reach Yield Avg GPA (App) Avg GPA (Adm)
UC Berkeley → Elite 29 4 13.8% 3.5% 4.06
UCLA → Elite 29 3 3 10.3% 2.7% 100.0% 4.01
UC San Diego → Selective 27 8 29.6% 7.1% 4.03 4.25
UC Santa Barbara → Selective 21 10 47.6% 8.8% 4.02 4.23
UC Irvine → Selective 22 4.03
UC Davis → 35 18 7 51.4% 15.9% 38.9% 3.94 4.17
⚠ Campus-level totals may count one student admitted to multiple UC campuses more than once. Admit Volume metrics are not the same as UC Reach, which requires unique-student counts. See methodology →

What This Means

A large share of the senior class applies to UC, indicating strong college-going culture and UC pipeline development.
A large share of the class applies to UC, so the admit rate runs lower than the application volume alone might suggest — expected when many students apply broadly, including to reach campuses. UC Reach (which credits every admit relative to the class) is the truer read of how the class fares: a strong Reach alongside a moderate admit rate is healthy, not a contradiction.
UC Reach is solid. A meaningful share of the senior class is achieving UC admission, and there is likely room to grow both application volume and admission outcomes.
Students are earning UC admission but enrolling elsewhere at a notable rate. This may reflect competition from private colleges, out-of-state flagships, cost considerations, or UC campus fit. Student outcome surveys can clarify.
The school generates broad UC access, but fewer students are reaching the most selective UC campuses (UCLA, Berkeley, UCSD, UCSB, UCI). Targeted academic enrichment and campus-fit advising may help.
Note: admit counts used here are campus-level totals. A student admitted to both UCLA and UCSD is counted twice. When UCOP unique-student data becomes available it will be loaded automatically and the labels will update.
Compare with other schools → See Sacramento County rankings →

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 →