No UC admissions data on file for Vantage Point Charter.
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.
Vantage Point Charter
· Nevada County · Penn Valley Union Elementary · Public
📄 Shareable scorecard →Compare with peers
Most similar nearby schools
Silver Springs High (continuation) → Bitney Prep High → Victory High → Feather River Academy → Confluence Continuation High → Compare all similar →📋 At a glance
- 🎓 AP rigor: Bottom 6% of US high schools
Composed from federal CRDC offerings, EDFacts ACGR, and other public data. Full breakdowns below.
How Vantage Point Charter compares for families
What families should know about Vantage Point Charter.
- ▸ vs Similar SchoolsThe closest comparables nearby: Silver Springs High (continuation), Bitney Prep High, Victory High and 2 more. See the sidebar to compare side-by-side.
For Parents
Follow Vantage Point Charter
Get an email when Vantage Point Charter's numbers change — new admissions results, enrollment shifts, test scores. A few updates a year, no spam.
SAT / ACT participation
CRDC federal data · 2020-21Source: federal Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC 2020-21). Volume — not score — is what's reported here. A higher count means more students at this school are entering the college admissions pipeline. Note: 2020-21 was COVID-disrupted; some districts (especially those that stayed remote longer) report unusually low or zero takers.
🏛️ Federal Title I context
Title I Schoolwide eligible
≥40% FRPL — qualifies for Title I Schoolwide program
40-74% of students qualify for free/reduced lunch. The district can use Title I funds across the whole school under federal Schoolwide Program rules.
Source: NCES Common Core of Data, free/reduced-price lunch eligibility. The actual Title I designation is a district decision and may differ from eligibility — but the federal eligibility math is what we show here. We don't claim to assert whether the district formally chose to enroll this school in Title I.
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
Program subgroups
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.
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.
Absenteeism is up 33.3 pp since 2016-17. A rising absenteeism trend often precedes formal departure — worth investigating which subgroups are driving it.
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).
Enrollment trend & projection
If this trend holds (-2.1%/yr, Total enrollment)
At per-pupil funding of $ / student:
| Horizon | Projected Total enrollment | Change | Funding impact / yr |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 yr (2027) | ~36 | -1 | $0 |
| 3 yr (2029) | ~35 | -2 | $0 |
| 5 yr (2031) | ~33 | -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.
Vantage Point Charter — Enrollment & Outcomes Snapshot
Public · vs. 10 most similar nearby schools
- ▸Senior-class enrollment is down 36% (14→9 from 2018 to 2026), trailing the peer-group median of +17%.
- ▸In business terms, this is market-share growth during a market contraction. Nevada County's senior population shrank 41% over the same window — Vantage Point Charter only shrank 36%. So Vantage Point Charter picked up about 5 percentage points of relative share — families chose it over the alternatives even as the overall pool got smaller. That's overperforming the market in a shrinking market.
Enrollment projection
Your school vs. its 10 most similar nearby schools
| School | Type | Size | UC Reach | Enroll. trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vantage Point Charter | Public | 37 | — | -36% |
| Peer-group median | — | +17% | ||
| Silver Springs High (continuation) | Public | 94 | — | -29% |
| Bitney Prep High | Public | 93 | — | +35% |
| Victory High | Public | 43 | — | -47% |
| Feather River Academy | Public | 26 | — | -70% |
| Confluence Continuation High | Public | 75 | — | +104% |
| John Adams Academy | Public | 26 | — | +0% |
| William & Marian Ghidotti High | Public | 167 | — | +12% |
| Phoenix High (continuation) | Public | 95 | — | +21% |
| Ipakanni Early College Charter | Public | 66 | — | +50% |
| Valley Oak Continuation High | Public | 17 | — | +25% |
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 →
Enrollment stability & demand — 2024-25
Two complementary signals: retention (do students stay once enrolled?) and demand (are families choosing the school?). Read against the Nevada County baseline — the demographic tide is moving every CA HS, so a school's gap vs. county is the actionable signal.
Enrollment growth is beating Nevada County (-35.7% vs. -40.8%), but 18 of 33 students didn't maintain continuous enrollment. Why are families leaving once enrolled? Chronic absenteeism is also at 29.6% (up +29.6 pts from 2016-17) — engagement and demand are both signaling decline.
18 of 33 students who enrolled at Vantage Point Charter this year didn't maintain continuous enrollment (54.5% non-stability). Mid-year transfers, dropouts, and other exits are all counted.
Stability by student group
Nearest peer high schools
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.
District financial profile — Penn Valley Union Elementary (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.
Local: 63.9%
Federal: 12.3%
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 Penn Valley Union Elementary 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).
For School Admins
The full Reach Report for Vantage Point Charter
A board- and LCAP-ready intelligence brief: your enrollment retention and college outcomes, benchmarked against your closest competitors, with a 5-year forecast, concrete steps to act on, and the rigor + outcomes story you can share with your families. Built from primary public data — prepared for you, not auto-generated.
- ✓Your 5-year enrollment forecast (currently -2.1%/yr) with the revenue at stake
- ✓Student-retention benchmarking vs your county median — and the LCAP evidence to back your goals