Home
›
High School Rankings
Shasta 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 Score of just 0.6 (6 ÷ 1,000). By contrast, a school where 250 of 1,000 seniors land a top-UC admit has a UC Reach Score of 25 — 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 a UC Reach Score of 100.
Top and bottom schools by UC Reach, split public/charter vs private (≥50 seniors).
Scoped to Shasta County — change the County filter above to rescope.
▲ Top 10 Public + Charter
Shasta County
| 1 |
Redding · Public
|
35 |
| 2 |
Redding · Public
|
8 |
| 3 |
· Public
|
7 |
| 4 |
Cottonwood · Public
|
6 |
| 5 |
Redding · Public
|
5 |
▲ Top 10 Private
Shasta County
Not enough schools in Shasta County for this list.
▼ Bottom 10 Public + Charter
Shasta County
| 1 |
Redding · Public
|
5 |
| 2 |
Cottonwood · Public
|
6 |
| 3 |
· Public
|
7 |
| 4 |
Redding · Public
|
8 |
| 5 |
Redding · Public
|
35 |
▼ Bottom 10 Private
Shasta County
Not enough schools in Shasta 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
Top 10 — UCSD Reach
UC San Diego
| 1 |
Redding · Public
|
8 |
| 2 |
Cottonwood · Public
|
2 |
| 3 |
Redding · Public
|
1 |
| 4 |
· Public
|
1 |
Top 10 — UCSB Reach
UC Santa Barbara
| 1 |
Redding · Public
|
8 |
| 2 |
Redding · Public
|
4 |
| 3 |
· Public
|
3 |
| 4 |
Cottonwood · Public
|
2 |
| 5 |
Redding · Public
|
2 |
Top 10 — UCI Reach
UC Irvine
| 1 |
Redding · Public
|
2 |
| 2 |
Cottonwood · Public
|
1 |
Top 10 — UCD Reach
UC Davis
| 1 |
Redding · Public
|
10 |
| 2 |
· Public
|
4 |
| 3 |
Redding · Public
|
4 |
| 4 |
Redding · Public
|
3 |
| 5 |
Cottonwood · Public
|
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 |
Redding · Public
|
86.9% |
| 2 |
Cottonwood · Public
|
64.8% |
| 3 |
· Public
|
52.9% |
| 4 |
Redding · Public
|
47.1% |
| 5 |
· Public
|
42.7% |
| 6 |
Mcarthur · Public
|
39.5% |
| 7 |
Redding · Public
|
39.1% |
| 8 |
· Public
|
38.0% |
| 9 |
· Public
|
28.9% |
| 10 |
· Public
|
21.2% |
Top 10 — UC 6-Yr Grad Rate
% of UC entrants who finished in 6 years · cohort N ≥ 20
| 1 |
Redding · Public
|
90.5% |
| 2 |
Redding · Public
|
70.0% |
Top 10 — Best Counselor Capacity
Lowest students-per-counselor (ASCA target 250:1) · public/charter, ≥500 students
| 1 |
· Public
|
255:1 |
| 2 |
Redding · Public
|
281:1 |
| 3 |
· Public
|
299:1 |
| 4 |
Redding · Public
|
317:1 |
| 5 |
Cottonwood · Public
|
371:1 |
| 6 |
· Public
|
407:1 |
Top 10 — Most Consistent
Lowest UC Reach std-dev across 5 years (above-CA-median mean)
| 1 |
avg 11.7 · σ 2.84
|
σ 2.84 |
| 2 |
avg 35.8 · σ 5.27
|
σ 5.27 |
| 3 |
avg 9.2 · σ 5.63
|
σ 5.63 |
Top 10 — SBAC ELA met/exceeded
% Met or Exceeded Standard · Grade 11 CAASPP · public/charter · tested ≥30
| 1 |
Redding · n=133 · 2025
|
85% |
| 2 |
· n=30 · 2025
|
80% |
| 3 |
· n=36 · 2025
|
78% |
| 4 |
· n=138 · 2025
|
71% |
| 5 |
· n=360 · 2025
|
70% |
| 6 |
· n=110 · 2025
|
68% |
| 7 |
Redding · n=306 · 2025
|
66% |
| 8 |
Redding · n=72 · 2025
|
64% |
| 9 |
· n=34 · 2025
|
56% |
| 10 |
Mcarthur · n=40 · 2025
|
55% |
Top 10 — SBAC Math met/exceeded
% Met or Exceeded Standard · Grade 11 CAASPP · public/charter · tested ≥30
| 1 |
Redding · n=133 · 2025
|
57% |
| 2 |
Redding · n=304 · 2025
|
51% |
| 3 |
· n=360 · 2025
|
51% |
| 4 |
· n=30 · 2025
|
50% |
| 5 |
· n=138 · 2025
|
45% |
| 6 |
· n=36 · 2025
|
44% |
| 7 |
Redding · n=72 · 2025
|
39% |
| 8 |
· n=152 · 2025
|
36% |
| 9 |
· n=110 · 2025
|
35% |
| 10 |
Redding · n=288 · 2025
|
32% |
Top 10 — Private Net Assets
Wealthiest CA private high schools · IRS Form 990 · latest fiscal year
No private-school 990 data for this filter.
≥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 |
|---|
|
Redding · Public
|
23 '18
→ 35 '25
|
+12.0pp |
|
Redding · Public
|
4 '18
→ 5 '25
|
+1.3pp |
|
· Public
|
6 '18
→ 7 '25
|
+1.0pp |
|
· Public
|
3 '21
→ 3 '24
|
+-0.5pp |
|
Cottonwood · Public
|
9 '18
→ 6 '25
|
+-3.3pp |
|
Redding · Public
|
18 '18
→ 8 '25
|
+-9.6pp |
▼ Biggest declines
| School | Then → Now | Δ |
|---|
|
Redding · Public
|
18 '18
→ 8 '25
|
-9.6pp |
|
Cottonwood · Public
|
9 '18
→ 6 '25
|
-3.3pp |
|
· Public
|
3 '21
→ 3 '24
|
-0.5pp |
|
· Public
|
6 '18
→ 7 '25
|
1.0pp |
|
Redding · Public
|
4 '18
→ 5 '25
|
1.3pp |
|
Redding · Public
|
23 '18
→ 35 '25
|
12.0pp |
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 |
|---|
|
· Shasta · Public Best in class
|
+25.9% vs +12.3%
|
+13.6pp |
|
Redding · Shasta · Public Best in class
|
+23.6% vs +12.3%
|
+11.3pp |
|
Redding · Shasta · Public Best in class
|
+22.7% vs +12.3%
|
+10.5pp |
|
Redding · Shasta · Public Holding share
|
+13.3% vs +12.3%
|
+1.0pp |
|
Cottonwood · Shasta · Public Weak at the gate
|
+5.3% vs +12.3%
|
-7.0pp |
▼ Underperforming the county the most
| School | School · County | Gap |
|---|
|
Cottonwood · Shasta · Public Weak at the gate
|
+5.3% vs +12.3%
|
-7.0pp |
|
Redding · Shasta · Public Holding share
|
+13.3% vs +12.3%
|
+1.0pp |
|
Redding · Shasta · Public Best in class
|
+22.7% vs +12.3%
|
+10.5pp |
|
Redding · Shasta · Public Best in class
|
+23.6% vs +12.3%
|
+11.3pp |
|
· Shasta · Public Best in class
|
+25.9% vs +12.3%
|
+13.6pp |
3 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. |
|
· Public
|
4.01 |
62.9% |
+33.6pp |
|
Redding · Public
|
4.08 |
35.5% |
+11.2pp |
|
Redding · Public
|
3.92 |
37.1% |
+8.6pp |
▼ Top 10 underperformers
| School |
GPA |
Actual |
Δ vs exp. |
|
Redding · Public
|
3.92 |
37.1% |
8.6pp |
|
Redding · Public
|
4.08 |
35.5% |
11.2pp |
|
· Public
|
4.01 |
62.9% |
33.6pp |
Sortable by any column. Click a column header to sort. Click any school row to open its profile.
| # |
School |
County |
Seniors
ⓘ
|
Total Enroll
ⓘ
|
UC Reach Score
ⓘ
|
App Reach Score
ⓘ
|
Admit Rate
ⓘ
|
Yield
ⓘ
|
Selective Reach
ⓘ
|
Elite Reach
ⓘ
|
Raw Apps
ⓘ
|
Raw Admits
ⓘ
|
| 1 |
Redding · Public Best in class
|
Shasta |
124 |
1,009 |
35
|
98 |
35.5% |
18.6% |
24.2 |
5.7 |
121 |
43 |
| 2 |
Redding · Public Holding share
|
Shasta |
281 |
1,268 |
8
|
37 |
22.3% |
30.4% |
4.6 |
— |
103 |
23 |
| 3 |
· Public Best in class
|
Shasta |
300 |
1,487 |
7
|
21 |
34.4% |
27.3% |
3.7 |
— |
64 |
22 |
| 4 |
Cottonwood · Public Weak at the gate
|
Shasta |
446 |
1,857 |
6
|
43 |
13.6% |
15.4% |
5.2 |
— |
191 |
26 |
| 5 |
Redding · Public Best in class
|
Shasta |
270 |
1,148 |
5
|
34 |
14.0% |
53.9% |
2.2 |
— |
93 |
13 |
| 6 |
Anderson · Public
|
Shasta |
— |
— |
—
|
— |
80.0% |
75.0% |
— |
— |
5 |
4 |
| 7 |
Redding · Public Sharp downturn
|
Shasta |
84 |
283 |
—
|
12 |
— |
— |
— |
— |
10 |
— |
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.
See methodology →