Home
›
High School Rankings
Fresno County · 2025 · ≥50 seniors
What is UC Reach? UC Reach = unique top-6 UC admits ÷ senior class size — the share of a school's
entire graduating class that reaches the six most selective UCs (
Berkeley,
UCLA, San Diego, Santa Barbara, Irvine, Davis). It's a better gauge of school-wide success than admit rate, which only reflects the handful of students who applied.
Why it beats admit rate: if 6 students apply to the top UCs and all get in, that's a 100% admit rate — but at a 1,000-senior school it's a UC Reach of just 0.6% (6 ÷ 1,000). By contrast, a school where 250 of 1,000 seniors land a top-UC admit has a 25% UC Reach — far stronger, even though its admit rate is lower.
Why some schools are over 100%? Out of every 100 seniors at these schools, the class is generating
more than 100 admissions to the six most selective UCs — meaning the typical strong student is getting in at multiple top campuses (
UCLA +
UCSD, or
Berkeley +
UCSB + Irvine, for example). It's a rare achievement: fewer than 1% of California high schools clear 100% UC Reach.
Top and bottom schools by UC Reach, split public/charter vs private (≥50 seniors).
Scoped to Fresno County — change the County filter above to rescope.
▲ Top 10 Public + Charter
Fresno County
| 1 |
Fresno · Public
|
106.6% |
| 2 |
Fresno · Public
|
46.0% |
| 3 |
Fowler · Public
|
25.6% |
| 4 |
Fresno · Public
|
22.0% |
| 5 |
· Public
|
19.4% |
| 6 |
Fresno · Public
|
17.7% |
| 7 |
Reedley · Public
|
16.8% |
| 8 |
Sanger · Public
|
14.9% |
| 9 |
Fresno · Public
|
14.6% |
| 10 |
Fresno · Public
|
14.2% |
▲ Top 10 Private
Fresno County
▼ Bottom 10 Public + Charter
Fresno County
| 1 |
Parlier · Public
|
3.2% |
| 2 |
Fresno · Public
|
5.1% |
| 3 |
Fresno · Public
|
6.1% |
| 4 |
Riverdale · Public
|
6.4% |
| 5 |
Coalinga · Public
|
7.0% |
| 6 |
Orange Cove · Public
|
7.1% |
| 7 |
Fresno · Public
|
7.3% |
| 8 |
Fresno · Public
|
7.5% |
| 9 |
Kerman · Public
|
7.7% |
| 10 |
Clovis · Public
|
8.7% |
▼ Bottom 10 Private
Fresno County
Top UC Reach for schools with senior classes of 25–99. These are typically magnet programs, specialized charters, and small Catholic preps — too small to compare cleanly against comprehensive public high schools, but the most UC-effective small schools in California are here.
▲ Top 10 Small Public + Charter
Fresno County
| 1 |
Reedley · Public
|
41.1% |
| 2 |
· Public
|
7.5% |
| 3 |
Tranquillity · Public
|
5.3% |
▲ Top 10 Small Private
Fresno County
Not enough schools in Fresno County for this list.
Where each UC campus lands its admits, as a share of each high school's senior class. Same 50-senior floor.
Top 10 — UCB Reach
UC Berkeley
| 1 |
Fresno · Public
|
7.4% |
| 2 |
Fresno · Private
|
5.4% |
| 3 |
Fresno · Public
|
4.1% |
| 4 |
Fowler · Public
|
3.5% |
| 5 |
Fresno · Public
|
3.3% |
| 6 |
Orange Cove · Public
|
1.9% |
| 7 |
· Public
|
1.7% |
| 8 |
Kingsburg · Public
|
1.6% |
| 9 |
Mendota · Public
|
1.5% |
| 10 |
Fresno · Public
|
1.4% |
| 1 |
Fresno · Public
|
13.9% |
| 2 |
Fresno · Private
|
4.5% |
| 3 |
Fresno · Public
|
3.4% |
| 4 |
Fowler · Public
|
3.0% |
| 5 |
· Public
|
1.4% |
| 6 |
Fresno · Public
|
1.2% |
| 7 |
Fresno · Public
|
1.2% |
| 8 |
Fresno · Public
|
1.2% |
| 9 |
Fresno · Public
|
1.0% |
| 10 |
Fresno · Public
|
0.9% |
Top 10 — UCSD Reach
UC San Diego
| 1 |
Fresno · Public
|
25.4% |
| 2 |
Fresno · Private
|
10.7% |
| 3 |
Fresno · Public
|
7.7% |
| 4 |
Fowler · Public
|
4.5% |
| 5 |
Fresno · Public
|
4.3% |
| 6 |
Reedley · Public
|
4.1% |
| 7 |
Fresno · Public
|
4.0% |
| 8 |
Fresno · Public
|
3.7% |
| 9 |
· Public
|
3.1% |
| 10 |
Mendota · Public
|
2.6% |
Top 10 — UCSB Reach
UC Santa Barbara
| 1 |
Fresno · Public
|
17.2% |
| 2 |
Fresno · Private
|
13.4% |
| 3 |
Fresno · Public
|
8.8% |
| 4 |
· Public
|
4.3% |
| 5 |
Fresno · Public
|
3.7% |
| 6 |
Fresno · Public
|
3.7% |
| 7 |
Sanger · Public
|
3.6% |
| 8 |
Reedley · Public
|
3.6% |
| 9 |
Fresno · Public
|
3.2% |
| 10 |
Kingsburg · Public
|
3.2% |
Top 10 — UCI Reach
UC Irvine
| 1 |
Fresno · Public
|
20.5% |
| 2 |
Fresno · Public
|
12.6% |
| 3 |
Fresno · Private
|
12.5% |
| 4 |
· Public
|
5.1% |
| 5 |
Fresno · Public
|
4.5% |
| 6 |
Fowler · Public
|
4.0% |
| 7 |
Reedley · Public
|
3.6% |
| 8 |
Caruthers · Public
|
3.5% |
| 9 |
Mendota · Public
|
3.4% |
| 10 |
Sanger · Public
|
3.3% |
Top 10 — UCD Reach
UC Davis
| 1 |
Fresno · Public
|
22.1% |
| 2 |
Fresno · Private
|
12.5% |
| 3 |
Fresno · Public
|
10.3% |
| 4 |
Fowler · Public
|
7.5% |
| 5 |
Caruthers · Public
|
7.0% |
| 6 |
Fresno · Public
|
6.4% |
| 7 |
Fresno · Public
|
5.5% |
| 8 |
Fresno · Public
|
5.2% |
| 9 |
Firebaugh · Public
|
4.3% |
| 10 |
Selma · Public
|
4.1% |
UC Reach measures who gets in. These lenses measure the upstream pipeline (A-G), the downstream outcome (UC graduation), the capacity that drives the pipeline (counselors), reliability over time (consistency), grade-11 academic preparation (CAASPP SBAC ELA & Math), and private-school financial strength. Click any school for its full profile.
Top 10 — A-G Completion
% of graduates meeting UC/CSU course requirements · 2024-25 cohort
| 1 |
Reedley · Public
|
100.0% |
| 2 |
Fresno · Public
|
98.3% |
| 3 |
· Public
|
98.1% |
| 4 |
· Public
|
95.7% |
| 5 |
Orange Cove · Public
|
87.4% |
| 6 |
Fowler · Public
|
76.2% |
| 7 |
Fresno · Public
|
75.3% |
| 8 |
Fresno · Public
|
75.3% |
| 9 |
Fresno · Public
|
69.7% |
| 10 |
· Public
|
64.7% |
Top 10 — UC 6-Yr Grad Rate
% of UC entrants who finished in 6 years · cohort N ≥ 20
| 1 |
Fresno · Private
|
95.2% |
| 2 |
Fresno · Public
|
95.0% |
| 3 |
Fresno · Public
|
93.8% |
| 4 |
Clovis · Public
|
92.0% |
| 5 |
Selma · Public
|
90.5% |
| 6 |
Fresno · Public
|
90.3% |
| 7 |
Fresno · Public
|
87.5% |
| 8 |
Clovis · Public
|
84.6% |
| 9 |
Fresno · Public
|
82.6% |
| 10 |
Fresno · Public
|
82.6% |
Top 10 — Best Counselor Capacity
Lowest students-per-counselor (ASCA target 250:1) · public/charter, ≥500 students
| 1 |
Fresno · Public
|
144:1 |
| 2 |
Parlier · Public
|
210:1 |
| 3 |
· Public
|
213:1 |
| 4 |
Fresno · Public
|
232:1 |
| 5 |
· Public
|
263:1 |
| 6 |
Fresno · Public
|
266:1 |
| 7 |
· Public
|
269:1 |
| 8 |
Fresno · Public
|
278:1 |
| 9 |
Fresno · Public
|
283:1 |
| 10 |
Fresno · Public
|
291:1 |
Top 10 — Most Consistent
Lowest UC Reach std-dev across 5 years (above-CA-median mean)
| 1 |
avg 16.1% · σ 1.24
|
σ 1.24 |
| 2 |
avg 15.2% · σ 1.31
|
σ 1.31 |
| 3 |
avg 10.3% · σ 1.43
|
σ 1.43 |
| 4 |
avg 24.9% · σ 2.85
|
σ 2.85 |
| 5 |
avg 12.1% · σ 2.87
|
σ 2.87 |
| 6 |
avg 14.1% · σ 3.58
|
σ 3.58 |
| 7 |
avg 16.9% · σ 3.58
|
σ 3.58 |
| 8 |
avg 10.2% · σ 6.06
|
σ 6.06 |
| 9 |
avg 19.4% · σ 7.82
|
σ 7.82 |
| 10 |
avg 31.8% · σ 9.25
|
σ 9.25 |
Top 10 — SBAC ELA met/exceeded
% Met or Exceeded Standard · Grade 11 CAASPP · public/charter · tested ≥30
| 1 |
Fresno · n=121 · 2025
|
98% |
| 2 |
Fresno · n=553 · 2025
|
91% |
| 3 |
Reedley · n=66 · 2025
|
89% |
| 4 |
Fresno · n=521 · 2025
|
83% |
| 5 |
· n=590 · 2025
|
82% |
| 6 |
Clovis · n=619 · 2025
|
79% |
| 7 |
· n=57 · 2025
|
77% |
| 8 |
· n=68 · 2025
|
76% |
| 9 |
Kingsburg · n=267 · 2025
|
75% |
| 10 |
Sanger · n=533 · 2025
|
75% |
Top 10 — SBAC Math met/exceeded
% Met or Exceeded Standard · Grade 11 CAASPP · public/charter · tested ≥30
| 1 |
Fresno · n=120 · 2025
|
76% |
| 2 |
Fresno · n=523 · 2025
|
67% |
| 3 |
· n=57 · 2025
|
61% |
| 4 |
· n=581 · 2025
|
57% |
| 5 |
Fresno · n=519 · 2025
|
54% |
| 6 |
Clovis · n=604 · 2025
|
46% |
| 7 |
· n=59 · 2025
|
41% |
| 8 |
· n=68 · 2025
|
40% |
| 9 |
Kingsburg · n=268 · 2025
|
39% |
| 10 |
Reedley · n=410 · 2025
|
39% |
Top 10 — Private Net Assets
Wealthiest CA private high schools · IRS Form 990 · latest fiscal year
| 1 |
Reedley · Other religious · FY 2012
|
$6.1M |
| 2 |
Fresno · Other religious · FY 2023
|
$3.6M |
≥50 seniors · earliest→latest year
Which schools are moving a growing — or shrinking — share of their graduating class into the six most selective UCs. Reflects the current county/type filter.
▲ Biggest gains
| School | Then → Now | Δ |
|---|
|
Fresno · Private
|
33% '20
→ 59% '25
|
+25.6pp |
|
Fresno · Public
|
25% '18
→ 46% '25
|
+21.1pp |
|
Fowler · Public
|
10% '18
→ 26% '25
|
+15.7pp |
|
Fresno · Public
|
3% '18
→ 14% '25
|
+11.5pp |
|
Reedley · Public
|
6% '18
→ 17% '25
|
+11.2pp |
|
Fresno · Public
|
8% '18
→ 18% '25
|
+9.3pp |
|
Kingsburg · Public
|
6% '18
→ 13% '25
|
+7.6pp |
|
· Public
|
13% '18
→ 19% '25
|
+6.4pp |
|
Sanger · Public
|
9% '18
→ 15% '25
|
+5.7pp |
|
Coalinga · Public
|
2% '18
→ 7% '25
|
+5.4pp |
▼ Biggest declines
| School | Then → Now | Δ |
|---|
|
Fresno · Public
|
117% '18
→ 107% '25
|
-10.4pp |
|
Riverdale · Public
|
13% '18
→ 6% '25
|
-6.2pp |
|
Fresno · Public
|
15% '18
→ 11% '25
|
-3.7pp |
|
Parlier · Public
|
5% '18
→ 3% '25
|
-2.1pp |
|
Selma · Public
|
14% '18
→ 12% '25
|
-1.5pp |
|
Orange Cove · Public
|
8% '18
→ 7% '25
|
-1.3pp |
|
Clovis · Public
|
10% '18
→ 9% '25
|
-1.2pp |
|
Fresno · Public
|
8% '18
→ 8% '25
|
-0.8pp |
|
Tranquillity · Public
|
2% '19
→ 3% '22
|
0.2pp |
|
Fresno · Public
|
5% '23
→ 6% '25
|
0.9pp |
grade-12 enrollment Δ vs. county · ≥80 students
The demographic tide is shrinking CA enrollment ~10% over 7 years statewide, so absolute decline alone is noise. The gap vs the county baseline is the actionable signal — schools losing share faster than their demographic floor are the ones to watch. Reflects the current county/type filter.
▲ Outperforming the county the most
| School | School · County | Gap |
|---|
|
Fresno · Fresno · Public Demand hides churn
|
+40.5% vs +6.7%
|
+33.9pp |
|
Fresno · Fresno · Public Best in class
|
+24.8% vs -3.8%
|
+28.6pp |
|
Clovis · Fresno · Public Best in class
|
+29.8% vs +6.7%
|
+23.1pp |
|
Caruthers · Fresno · Public Best in class
|
+28.6% vs +6.7%
|
+21.9pp |
|
Fresno · Fresno · Public Demand hides churn
|
+24.4% vs +6.7%
|
+17.7pp |
|
Coalinga · Fresno · Public Watch — engagement
|
+18.0% vs +6.7%
|
+11.4pp |
|
Fresno · Fresno · Public Watch — engagement
|
+12.2% vs +6.7%
|
+5.6pp |
|
Reedley · Fresno · Public Best in class
|
+11.2% vs +6.7%
|
+4.5pp |
|
Kerman · Fresno · Public Best in class
|
+9.6% vs +6.7%
|
+3.0pp |
|
Fowler · Fresno · Public Holding share
|
+8.2% vs +6.7%
|
+1.6pp |
▼ Underperforming the county the most
| School | School · County | Gap |
|---|
|
Fresno · Fresno · Public Compounding decline
|
-53.4% vs +6.7%
|
-60.0pp |
|
Fresno · Fresno · Public Compounding decline
|
-19.0% vs +6.7%
|
-25.7pp |
|
Orange Cove · Fresno · Public Sharp downturn
|
-16.8% vs +6.7%
|
-23.4pp |
|
Sanger · Fresno · Public Sharp downturn
|
-14.5% vs +6.7%
|
-21.2pp |
|
Riverdale · Fresno · Public Sharp downturn
|
-13.2% vs +6.7%
|
-19.9pp |
|
Fresno · Fresno · Public Material decline
|
-10.1% vs +6.7%
|
-16.7pp |
|
· Fresno · Public Sharp downturn
|
-7.3% vs +6.7%
|
-14.0pp |
|
Clovis · Fresno · Public Sharp downturn
|
-5.1% vs +6.7%
|
-11.7pp |
|
Parlier · Fresno · Public Weak at the gate
|
-3.1% vs +6.7%
|
-9.8pp |
|
Fresno · Fresno · Public Weak at the gate
|
-3.1% vs +6.7%
|
-9.7pp |
25 schools eligible · 2025
Each dot is one school. The diagonal is the per-campus GPA expectation — points above it admit students at higher rates than their GPA mix predicts; points below admit at lower rates. Schools need ≥30 top-6 UC applications and data across ≥3 campuses to appear.
▲ Top 10 outperformers
| School |
GPA |
Actual |
Δ vs exp. |
|
Caruthers · Public
|
3.86 |
56.1% |
+28.5pp |
|
Kingsburg · Public
|
4.00 |
50.0% |
+23.0pp |
|
Kerman · Public
|
4.05 |
47.4% |
+21.1pp |
|
Sanger · Public
|
4.02 |
42.2% |
+19.2pp |
|
Fresno · Public
|
3.85 |
40.5% |
+17.0pp |
|
Fowler · Public
|
3.92 |
35.2% |
+15.8pp |
|
Coalinga · Public
|
3.69 |
42.0% |
+14.4pp |
|
Fresno · Public
|
3.94 |
35.3% |
+13.9pp |
|
Fresno · Public
|
3.73 |
33.9% |
+12.5pp |
|
Fresno · Public
|
4.05 |
35.2% |
+12.2pp |
▼ Top 10 underperformers
| School |
GPA |
Actual |
Δ vs exp. |
|
Fresno · Public
|
3.85 |
23.6% |
-3.6pp |
|
Fresno · Public
|
3.81 |
21.6% |
0.4pp |
|
Fresno · Public
|
3.65 |
26.5% |
1.7pp |
|
Fresno · Public
|
3.88 |
25.5% |
4.0pp |
|
Fresno · Public
|
4.02 |
25.8% |
4.8pp |
|
Fresno · Public
|
3.70 |
26.6% |
5.1pp |
|
· Public
|
4.02 |
29.6% |
6.4pp |
|
Clovis · Public
|
3.97 |
30.0% |
7.8pp |
|
Fresno · Public
|
3.80 |
30.9% |
8.1pp |
|
Fresno · Public
|
3.80 |
29.0% |
8.2pp |
Sortable by any column. Click a column header to sort. Click any school row to open its profile.
30 schools · 2025 data
· 8 hidden (under 100 seniors)
| # |
School |
County |
Seniors
ⓘ
|
Total Enroll
ⓘ
|
UC Reach
ⓘ
|
App Reach
ⓘ
|
Admit Rate
ⓘ
|
Yield
ⓘ
|
Selective Reach
ⓘ
|
Elite Reach
ⓘ
|
Raw Apps
ⓘ
|
Raw Admits
ⓘ
|
| 1 |
Fresno · Public Weak at the gate
|
Fresno |
122 |
498 |
106.6%
|
412.3% |
25.8% |
27.7% |
84.4 |
21.3 |
503 |
130 |
| 2 |
Fresno · Private
|
Fresno |
112 |
438 |
58.9%
|
122.3% |
48.2% |
6.1% |
46.4 |
9.8 |
137 |
66 |
| 3 |
Fresno · Public Weak at the gate
|
Fresno |
613 |
2,360 |
46.0%
|
130.7% |
35.2% |
18.1% |
35.7 |
6.7 |
801 |
282 |
| 4 |
Fowler · Public Holding share
|
Fresno |
199 |
807 |
25.6%
|
72.9% |
35.2% |
17.6% |
18.1 |
6.5 |
145 |
51 |
| 5 |
Fresno · Public Demand problem
|
Fresno |
518 |
2,339 |
22.0%
|
62.4% |
35.3% |
23.7% |
15.6 |
5.2 |
323 |
114 |
| 6 |
· Public Sharp downturn
|
Fresno |
649 |
2,551 |
19.4%
|
65.5% |
29.6% |
23.0% |
15.6 |
3.1 |
425 |
126 |
| 7 |
Fresno · Public Watch — engagement
|
Fresno |
651 |
2,858 |
17.7%
|
60.8% |
29.0% |
18.3% |
12.1 |
2.0 |
396 |
115 |
| 8 |
Reedley · Public Best in class
|
Fresno |
393 |
1,804 |
16.8%
|
54.7% |
30.7% |
15.2% |
13.2 |
2.0 |
215 |
66 |
| 9 |
Sanger · Public Sharp downturn
|
Fresno |
631 |
2,426 |
14.9%
|
35.3% |
42.1% |
24.5% |
10.9 |
1.7 |
223 |
94 |
| 10 |
Fresno · Public Holding share
|
Fresno |
514 |
2,184 |
14.6%
|
67.7% |
21.6% |
20.0% |
12.7 |
2.3 |
348 |
75 |
| 11 |
Fresno · Public Demand hides churn
|
Fresno |
424 |
2,056 |
14.2%
|
67.2% |
21.1% |
16.7% |
9.0 |
1.4 |
285 |
60 |
| 12 |
Mendota · Public Holding share
|
Fresno |
266 |
1,065 |
13.5%
|
42.9% |
31.6% |
8.3% |
9.8 |
1.5 |
114 |
36 |
| 13 |
Caruthers · Public Best in class
|
Fresno |
171 |
682 |
13.4%
|
39.2% |
34.3% |
17.4% |
6.4 |
— |
67 |
23 |
| 14 |
Kingsburg · Public Weak at the gate
|
Fresno |
247 |
1,073 |
13.4%
|
32.4% |
41.2% |
9.1% |
9.7 |
1.6 |
80 |
33 |
| 15 |
Selma · Public Demand problem
|
Fresno |
391 |
1,721 |
12.5%
|
42.5% |
29.5% |
24.5% |
8.4 |
2.0 |
166 |
49 |
| 16 |
Fresno · Public Material decline
|
Fresno |
557 |
2,485 |
11.8%
|
46.5% |
25.5% |
24.2% |
8.8 |
1.4 |
259 |
66 |
| 17 |
Firebaugh · Public Weak at the gate
|
Fresno |
163 |
673 |
11.7%
|
47.9% |
24.4% |
42.1% |
7.4 |
— |
78 |
19 |
| 18 |
Fresno · Public Compounding decline
|
Fresno |
342 |
1,867 |
11.1%
|
32.8% |
33.9% |
7.9% |
8.5 |
2.0 |
112 |
38 |
| 19 |
Fresno · Public Demand problem
|
Fresno |
509 |
2,095 |
11.0%
|
35.6% |
30.9% |
17.9% |
8.1 |
1.4 |
181 |
56 |
| 20 |
Clovis · Public Best in class
|
Fresno |
723 |
3,113 |
10.9%
|
36.4% |
30.0% |
25.3% |
7.9 |
0.8 |
263 |
79 |
| 21 |
Clovis · Public Sharp downturn
|
Fresno |
751 |
2,779 |
8.7%
|
26.4% |
32.8% |
27.7% |
6.7 |
0.8 |
198 |
65 |
| 22 |
Kerman · Public Best in class
|
Fresno |
350 |
1,493 |
7.7%
|
20.6% |
37.5% |
11.1% |
5.1 |
0.9 |
72 |
27 |
| 23 |
Fresno · Public Compounding decline
|
Fresno |
398 |
1,741 |
7.5%
|
24.4% |
30.9% |
13.3% |
5.3 |
0.8 |
97 |
30 |
| 24 |
Fresno · Public Best in class
|
Fresno |
344 |
1,438 |
7.3%
|
46.8% |
15.5% |
— |
4.9 |
— |
161 |
25 |
| 25 |
Orange Cove · Public Sharp downturn
|
Fresno |
155 |
635 |
7.1%
|
18.1% |
39.3% |
— |
4.5 |
1.9 |
28 |
11 |
| 26 |
Coalinga · Public Watch — engagement
|
Fresno |
299 |
1,256 |
7.0%
|
32.8% |
21.4% |
— |
4.3 |
— |
98 |
21 |
| 27 |
Riverdale · Public Sharp downturn
|
Fresno |
125 |
496 |
6.4%
|
32.8% |
19.5% |
— |
3.2 |
— |
41 |
8 |
| 28 |
Fresno · Public Sharp downturn
|
Fresno |
131 |
625 |
6.1%
|
22.1% |
27.6% |
— |
3.0 |
— |
29 |
8 |
| 29 |
Fresno · Public Demand hides churn
|
Fresno |
412 |
2,040 |
5.1%
|
31.8% |
16.0% |
14.3% |
3.9 |
1.0 |
131 |
21 |
| 30 |
Parlier · Public Weak at the gate
|
Fresno |
190 |
901 |
3.2%
|
28.4% |
11.1% |
— |
— |
— |
54 |
6 |
UC Reach = top-6 UC admits ÷ senior class size. Where UCOP has not published unique-student totals,
campus admits are summed — students admitted to more than one of the 6 campuses are counted at each, so values
above 100% indicate strong students winning multiple competitive UC offers.
Schools with fewer than 100 seniors are excluded from the leaderboard by default — a small cohort
with one strong year can otherwise dominate.
See methodology →