Every Oregon public school's state report card, in one place: ranked, trended, and compared.
Median school's share of students meeting the state reading standard
Oregon publishes a lot of data about its schools, but it's scattered. Comparing a handful of schools means finding which ones serve your area on one site, opening each school's report card on another, downloading PDFs one at a time, and reconstructing trends yourself, since each report covers a single year.
I'm an Oregon parent with a daughter approaching kindergarten age, and I went through exactly that. So I pulled every school's report cards into one place where you can rank them, see how they've changed over time, and compare any schools you like.
This is an independent project, not affiliated with or endorsed by the Oregon Department of Education. Test scores and attendance capture only part of what makes a school good, so use this to narrow your list, then go visit. Check a school's official report card before making a decision.
Test scores are the percent of tested students meeting the state standard, across all tested grades at a school (reading and math in grades 3–8 and 11; science in grades 5, 8 and 11). A K‑5 school's score reflects grades 3–5; a K‑8 school's includes middle school. Reading & math combined is the simple average of the two. Science is left out of it because it's tested in only one grade per school level, wasn't reported for 2018–19, and changed tests after 2017–18.
The newest test year comes from ODE's assessment results, released each September ahead of the report cards. Where both exist, they agree with the report card figures to within half a point for the typical school. Until the report cards arrive, the Oregon comparison line for that year is an average across all schools of the same type rather than for each school's exact grades.
"86% tested" means fewer than 90% of eligible students took the test in at least one year shown; the tag gives the lowest rate and, for multi‑year views, the year it happened. Students who opt out may differ from those who test, so the score may not represent the whole school. Where fewer than 40% tested, the score isn't shown at all. Participation is tracked for all students only, not student groups, and for science only from 2024–25.
"±13" is a 95% margin from sample size alone. A school with 40 tested students carries roughly ±15 points of noise in a single year, so small differences between small schools mean little. The 3‑year average helps.
"few tested" appears in adjusted mode when a school averages fewer than 20 tested students a year; its adjusted score has been pulled toward zero (see below). "charter" marks charter schools, taken from ODE's list of charters it treats separately from their districts (federal records fill in for schools that have since closed). Many enroll by lottery or application, which tends to select for engaged families, so their results aren't directly comparable to neighborhood schools; use the checkbox to include or exclude them from the list and charts. "district charter" marks about two dozen charters that ODE counts as part of their district, mostly small‑town schools such as Alsea, Corbett and Joseph that converted to charters but remain their town's public school; this site does the same, so the charter checkbox leaves them in. "online" marks online and virtual schools: ODE's list of online charters, plus district‑run online programs identified by name (for example "Online Academy" or "Virtual School"); they also have their own checkbox.
Why the charts plot schools against poverty: not to point anyone toward low‑poverty schools, but to separate what a school adds from what its students bring with them. Raw test scores mostly track family income, since children from families with more resources arrive at school with more support. Comparing a school with others serving similar students shows which ones do more than expected with the children they have, which is closer to what a parent is choosing when they choose a school. A school well above the curve at 50% poverty may be doing more for its students than one with higher raw scores in a wealthier neighborhood.
This fits each measure against the share of students experiencing poverty and the share who are English learners, across every Oregon school of the same type that year, and ranks schools by how far above or below that prediction they sit. Poverty enters as a curve (a quadratic constrained never to rise with poverty; a straight line fit noticeably worse and flattered the lowest‑poverty schools); English learners as a straight line. English learners are included because students still learning English take reading and math tests in English, and because the poverty count, which relies on families enrolled in public benefits, misses many immigrant families. With poverty alone, schools with many English learners scored about nine points lower on average than schools with few, which made dual‑language and newcomer schools look worse than the students they serve would predict. Schools whose English‑learner share is suppressed because it is small count as 2.5%. Small schools are handled with a standard statistical adjustment (empirical Bayes shrinkage): each school's distance from the curve is pulled toward zero in proportion to how noisy it is, based on how many students tested. A school with 300 tested students keeps nearly all of its result; one with 15 keeps a fraction. The adjustment controls for poverty and English learners only, not for how students got there: schools that admit by application or lottery, such as early‑college and magnet schools, tend to look better than their true effect. It also means a school that serves its English learners poorly looks a little better than it would otherwise; the English learners student group shows their results directly.
Student groups show results for one group of students, such as those experiencing poverty, at every school. Comparing the same group across schools is one of the fairer ways to compare schools. Reading and math group results cover the latest three test years; attendance and on‑track cover 2022–23 to 2024–25; graduation covers the last three graduating classes. ODE hides results for groups of fewer than 10 students, and attendance for groups covers some grade bands only.
District figures follow ODE's definition of a district: its own schools, including district‑run online programs and small‑town district charters, but not the charter schools it sponsors, which ODE groups separately. This matters most for small districts that sponsor large statewide online charters, whose enrollment can be many times the district's own. District figures combine those schools, so they follow the grade filter: choose Kindergarten to compare districts' elementary schools only. Test scores are weighted by students tested, most other measures by enrollment, and enrollment counts are summed. Graduation, five‑year completion and on‑track rates use ODE's official district figures instead, since district cohorts include students in programs without their own school results; those don't change with the filters. Schools whose results ODE hides because they're very small drop out of the totals. The district map uses the Census Bureau's 2024 school district boundaries. Harney County Union High School District overlaps eight elementary districts, so it's drawn as a dashed outline; Malheur County SD 51 has no data because its students attend school in McDermitt, Nevada.
ODE's similar districts. Oregon's 2025 accountability law (SB 141) has ODE sort districts into six groups by enrollment and locale, from large city and suburban districts to very small rural ones, then split each group in two by statistical clustering on five measures: the share of students navigating poverty, the share who have ever been English learners, the share from racial and ethnic groups that have historically experienced academic disparities, the share who changed schools during the year, and the distance to the nearest public college. In district mode you can narrow the list to one of these clusters to compare a district with the peers the state itself assigned, and see the cluster's 2029–30 targets. ODE sets each target at about what the cluster's top few districts reach now (the 92nd to 99th percentile): the level every district would need to reach for Oregon to meet its statewide goals. Every district in a cluster is held to the same target. The clusters cover districts only; charter schools have their own, not shown here. ODE's poverty measure for clustering differs from the report card poverty rate used elsewhere on this site.
Graduation and five‑year completion are shown in the year students finished high school; college‑going in the year they graduated. Class size is the median size of core‑subject classes, based on the teachers ODE records as teaching those courses; it won't match enrollment divided by a school's teacher count, which includes specialists and part‑time staff. Suspensions, support staff and AP courses come from the federal Civil Rights Data Collection, gathered every other year (2017–18, 2021–22 and 2023–24 shown); suspensions are the share of students suspended out of school at least once, and support staff counts counselors, nurses, psychologists and social workers per 500 students. Some high schools offer International Baccalaureate instead of AP, which the AP count doesn't capture.
Enrollment change and kindergarten enrollment come from ODE's fall membership counts, taken each October, so they run a year ahead of the report cards; a shrinking school may face program cuts, consolidation or boundary changes.
This is ODE's per‑pupil expenditure for each school: what the school spends directly plus its share of district‑wide costs such as administration, facilities, transportation and benefits, divided by enrollment. It varies for reasons that have little to do with quality. Money follows need by design, so schools with more students in poverty, with disabilities or learning English receive more; small schools cost more per student because fixed costs are spread over fewer children; and some schools house district programs, such as special‑education centers, that raise their figure.
Charter and online schools aren't comparable. Oregon charters receive a set share of state funding from their sponsoring district, while the district keeps most local levy, facility and special‑education money and carries some costs for charter students on its own books. The typical charter's reported spending is less than half of a district school's, partly because they do operate on less and partly because those district‑borne costs never appear in their figures; a few small rural charters that are effectively their district's only school run the other way, far above average. They're marked in the ranking and left out of the spending chart.
A few district schools report figures more than three times, or less than a third of, what schools with similar students spend. These usually reflect how a district's books are split rather than what happens in the building: in a one‑school district the entire district budget lands on that school, and a district that sponsors large online charters can end up recording federal and district‑wide money against its one physical school. They're marked "unusual figure" in the ranking and left out of the spending chart and its comparison.
The spending chart compares each school with schools serving similar students. Across: how much more or less it spends than a school with the same poverty, special‑education and English‑learner shares and size typically spends statewide. Up: its reading and math results relative to what its poverty level and share of English learners predict. Dividing results by dollars would mostly reward cheap, affluent schools, since money flows toward need; comparing like with like avoids that. Statewide, an extra $1,000 per student goes with only a fraction of a point in results, so spending differences explain very little of the differences between schools.
There were no state tests in 2019–20 or 2020–21, and participation was low in 2021–22, especially in high schools. Oregon's science test changed after 2017–18. High school scores for 2019–20 through 2021–22 are largely missing. Values ODE caps at "below 5%" or "above 95%" are plotted at 2.5% and 97%.
Sources: Oregon Department of Education report card data files, assessment results, ESSA Accountability Details reports, fall membership reports and per‑pupil expenditure data; U.S. Department of Education Civil Rights Data Collection. All public data.