Val Verde Unified School District
Overview · How to read this

What this dashboard is.

A read of every Val Verde student's attendance against their academic outcomes — built to show where showing up moves results, and where to act early. It covers roughly 18,897 students across the 2025–26 school year, de-identified. Correlation, not causation — but the pattern holds across every cut.

What we gathered

The records behind every figure.

Five sources, joined per student to one de-identified dataset. Nothing here is a single student — every number on every tab is an aggregate drawn from these.

Attendance

This year, last year, and the first month of school — per student.

Grades & GPA

Course marks, D/F flags, and cumulative GPA — including which courses carry the D/F marks, so failure can be read at the course level.

Discipline

Suspensions, joined to the same student record.

Programs & demographics

Special education, English-learner status, ethnicity, gender, grade, and site.

School directory

Every Val Verde school, by name and grade range.

Every record is keyed to a surrogate ID. There are no names, no student IDs, and no other identifying information anywhere in this dashboard — the link back to real students is held privately by the district.

The connections we're making

What we set out to learn.

1

Attendance moves outcomes.

GPA falls and failure climbs as attendance drops. The cliff is steep — from a 3.2 GPA in the top attendance band down to 2.3 at the bottom.

2

The risk isn't evenly spread.

It concentrates — by site and by subgroup. Some schools and some groups of students carry far more of the absence than a district average would suggest. Reading it by the average hides where to act.

3

The same data, read forward.

Last year's attendance and the first month of this year predict the year ahead — so we can name who needs help in the fall, not just in June.

These are correlations, not proof of cause — but the pattern holds across every cut.

How to use the tabs

Where each view takes you.

Key insights
The 90-second read — the headline findings, one card at a time.
Full report
The receipts. Every chart and table behind the findings, with a per-site filter so each principal can pull their own school.
Early warning
Catching it before it starts — the first-month and prior-year signals that name who needs help in the fall.
Courses
Where failure concentrates — the gateway courses and the 9th-grade cliff.
Board deck
The presentation version, formatted for the room.

Method & limits.

Source
Aeries SIS export, de-identified before this file was built — surrogate student IDs only.
n
~18,897 students, 2025–26.
Measures
Chronic = below 90% attendance. D/F is a secondary-grades measure — elementary marks aren't graded this way. Discipline is suspensions only.
Pending confirmation
English-learner coding is pending confirmation against the district Code Table.
What this is
Retrospective validation, and correlation — not causation.
Who to ask
Office of Educational Services, Val Verde Unified.
Key insights · Attendance & outcomes

Where attendance moves student outcomes — and where we intervene.

Every card traces to a section of the Full Report. 18,897 students · district ADA 91.5% · 2025–26. Correlation, not causation — but the read is consistent across every cut.

Site-level figures are in the Full Report — use the site filter there.

3.2 2.3 95–100 90–94 85–89 80–84 <80
01 · The cliff

Attendance and grades move together — and the drop is steep.

A student attending 95–100% of the time averages a 3.2 GPA; below 80%, that falls to 2.3 — nearly a full grade point across the attendance bands.

The cliffGPA × attendance
¼ CHRONIC
02 · One in four

One in four students is chronically absent.

24.9% missed 10% or more of enrolled days. 6.9% are severely chronic — attending less than 80% of the time.

Chronic absenceSevere at 6.9%
29.5% 17.6% CHRONIC PEERS
03 · Double the failures

Chronic absence nearly doubles the failure rate.

Chronically absent students post a 29.5% D/F rate versus 17.6% for peers — and a 2.5 GPA versus 3.1.

Failure rateNearly double
95–100 90–94 85–89 80–84 <80 35.8%
04 · Every band down

Failure climbs with every band of missed school.

D/F rate rises 15.7%20.6%24.7%32.7%35.8% as attendance falls. No flat stretch — every band of missed school costs.

Dose-responseD/F by band
90% LINE 93.2 92.0 88.9 ELEM MIDDLE HIGH
05 · Erosion by grade

Attendance erodes as students get older.

Average attendance slides from 93.2% in elementary to 92.0% in middle to 88.9% in high school — high schools sit, on average, below the 90% chronic line. Chronic rate climbs 21.7%29.1%.

By grade bandHigh school
ATTEND · 92.3% GPA · 2.5
06 · English Learners

English Learners show up — the gap is academic, not attendance.

EL students attend at 92.3% — above the district's 91.5% — yet carry the lowest GPA at 2.5 and a 23.1% D/F rate. The lever here is academic support, not attendance.

OpportunityAcademic lever
0% 20% 40% PEERS · 23.9 30.4%
07 · IEP absence

Students with IEPs are the most chronically absent.

30.4% of students with an IEP are chronically absent, versus 23.9% of peers — the widest chronic-absence gap of any subgroup in the data.

IEPHighest chronic
D/F RATE MALE 22.4% FEMALE 18.7% CHRONIC — NEARLY EVEN 24.7 · 25.2
08 · The gender gap

Boys fail more; girls miss as much.

Male students post a 22.4% D/F rate versus 18.7% for female students (GPA 2.8 versus 3.0), while chronic-absence rates are nearly identical — 24.7% versus 25.2%.

BoysAcademic, not absence
5.1% CHRONIC 1.8% ATTENDERS
09 · Suspension tracks absence

Suspension follows the same line as absence.

5.1% of chronically absent students were suspended this year, versus 1.8% of regular attenders — 492 students suspended district-wide.

SuspensionSame line
91.5% DISTRICT ADA 24.9%
10 · The average hides the problem

The headline number looks fine; the distribution is the story.

District attendance reads a healthy 91.5% — but that average masks 24.9% chronic absence and a 6.9% severely chronic tail. The headline number alone looks fine; the distribution is the story.

Read the tailNot just ADA
60.9% 24.9%
11 · Absence is concentrated, not uniform

A few sites carry most of it — the response should be targeted.

A few sites carry most of it — chronic absence reaches 60.9% at the highest-need site versus 24.9% district-wide. The response should be targeted, not spread evenly.

ConcentratedTarget the response
19.3% 27.8% RFEP · ATTENDS WELL, FAILS MORE
12 · Reclassified English Learners need a second look

Best attendance of any language group — but the highest failure rate.

RFEP students attend the best of any language group (19.3% chronic) yet post the highest D/F rate at 27.8%. Reclassification may be removing support before students are ready.

RFEPSupport cliff
15.6% EARLIEST FLAG
13 · Tardies are the cheapest early signal

Tardies precede absence — the earliest, lowest-cost flag a site can act on.

15.6% of students already have 10 or more tardies (district mean 6.3). Tardies precede absence — the earliest, lowest-cost flag a site can act on.

Early warningLow cost
THE ONE-SENTENCE READ-BACK
14 · The line a board member carries home

Attendance is the lever: a student who shows up nine-and-a-half days in ten carries nearly a full grade point and half the failure risk of a chronically absent peer — and the gap widens every year through high school.

Attendance is the leverBoard-shareable
Early warning · catching it before it starts

The students who struggle are knowable months early.

The other tabs read year-end data and name who's already behind. These signals fire in August–October — early enough to act. 62.1% of this year's chronically absent students were chronically absent last year too; the rest declare themselves in the first month of school.

Source · adds prior-year (2024–25) attendance and first-month attendance to the same de-identified dataset · surrogate IDs only · 2025–26.

64% LAST YEAR → THIS YEAR
01 · Last year already named them

Most of the risk is knowable before day one.

62.1% of this year's chronically absent students were chronically absent last year too. That group relapsed at 64.1% — versus a 23.7% base rate for everyone else.

Prior-year flagKnowable early
15% 66% 0 1 2 3–4 5+
02 · The first month is the tell

Two absences in the first month, and the odds flip.

Students with 2 absences in the first four weeks were chronically absent 47.4% of the time, versus 15.0% with perfect early attendance. At 5+ early absences it reaches 66.4%.

First four weeksEarliest signal
BASE · 24% 36% 49% D / F SUSPENDED
03 · Grades and behavior compound it

An early D or F — or a suspension — stacks the risk.

A first-quarter D or F tracks to a 2.4 GPA and 35.7% chronic (vs 3.2 / 22.1%). A suspension tracks to a 2.1 GPA and 49.0% chronic.

Course + behaviorCompounding
68% CAUGHT BY OCTOBER
04 · An October list catches two-thirds

A small early net lands most of the year's chronic students.

A flag from last year's attendance plus first-month absences watches 35.2% of students and catches 68.1% of everyone who becomes chronically absent. Add early D/F and suspensions and the catch reaches 76.6%.

ABC flagWatch vs catch
05 · The line a board member carries home

We don't have to wait for the failures to show up. Two-thirds of chronic absence is visible by October — the work is acting on the list, not finding it.

And the October list isn't only an attendance list — its students are the ones headed for the gateway-course failures: 49.1% of students failing three or more courses are chronically absent.

Act, don't waitBoard-shareable
The first-month curve

Two absences in the first month, and the odds flip.

Year-end chronic-absence rate, grouped by how many days a student missed in the first four weeks of school. The axis starts at zero — at two early absences the rate roughly doubles the baseline, and it keeps climbing.

Year-end chronic-absence rate by first-month absences · 2025–26 · all students
The catch-rate

A small early net catches most of the year's chronic students.

Two ways to build the October watch-list. Each casts a net of a certain size (watch) and lands a share of everyone who later becomes chronically absent (catch). Even the attendance-only flag — last-year plus first-month absences — watches roughly a third of students and catches two-thirds of the year's chronic cases.

Attendance-only flag
Prior-year + first-month absences
Watch · students flagged 35.2%
Catch · future chronic landed 68.1%

Smallest net. Flags about one student in three, lands two in three of the year's chronic cases.

Full ABC flag
Attendance + behavior + course marks
Watch · students flagged 48.3%
Catch · future chronic landed 76.6%

Wider net — adds early D/F and suspensions. Flags about half of students, lands three in four of the year's chronic cases.

Early-warning methodology and provenance.

New data pulls
Two measures joined to the same de-identified dataset on surrogate ID: prior-year (2024–25) attendance, and first-month attendance (absences in the first ~4 weeks of 2025–26). Both are aggregate-only here — this file renders zero student-level rows.
Framework
ABC = the Attendance / Behavior / Course-marks early-warning framework. The attendance-only flag uses prior-year + first-month attendance; the full ABC flag adds a first-quarter D or F and any suspension.
What this is
Retrospective validation. This year's full data shows the early signal would have worked — the way you test a flag before deploying it next fall. Watch% is the share of students the flag lists; catch% (recall) is the share of all students who became chronically absent that the flag landed.
On tardies
Tardies were a noisy signal and aren't used in the flag — a chronically absent student registers as absent, not late, so heavy-tardy and heavy-absence populations only partly overlap. The flag leans on prior-year and first-month attendance instead.
How to read it
Correlation, not causation. These are associations in one year of district data, surfaced early enough to act on — not causal estimates and not a prediction about any individual student.
Who to ask
Office of Educational Services, Val Verde Unified.
Courses · Where failure lives

Failure has an address — a handful of courses carry most of it.

7,265 D/F marks across 3,890 secondary students this marking period — concentrated in the gateway courses and in 9th grade. The attendance story and the course story turn out to be the same story.

Source · Aeries SIS grade export · de-identified · course titles and counts only — no student or teacher names · 2025–26.

Math
01 · Math is the gateway

Five of the seven highest-failure courses are math.

Math 7, Math 6, Algebra I, Algebra II, and Geometry all sit in the top seven. Together the top 15 courses carry over 50.8% of every D/F mark in the district.

Gateway coursesMath-heavy
9th 6 12
02 · The cliff year

Ninth grade carries more failure than any other grade.

1,451 D/F marks land in grade 9 — the single largest grade — echoing the national 9th-grade on-track research: a failed ninth-grade course is the strongest predictor of not graduating.

9th-grade cliffOn-track
913
03 · A struggling core

A core of students is in deep trouble — not spread thin.

23.5% of failing students carry 3 or more D/F marks — 913 students failing across their schedule, not just stumbling in one course.

Concentration3+ failures
FAILURE ABSENCE
04 · The attendance thread

The course story and the attendance story are one story.

Failing students are chronically absent at 35.6% versus the district's 24.9% — and students failing 3+ courses at 49.1%. Where failure concentrates, absence concentrates with it.

Same students49.1% of 3+ failers
The gateway list

Ten courses, and a fifth of all the failure.

The ten courses carrying the most D/F marks this marking period, longest bar first. The darker leading segment is the F share; the rest of the navy bar is D. The right-hand figure is each course's chronic-absence rate — courses flagged amber run above 40% chronic.

Top 10 courses by D/F marks · F (gold) vs D (navy) · with chronic-absence rate
F marks D marks Above 40% chronic
The grade-9 cliff

Failure peaks the year students enter high school.

D/F marks by grade level. The axis starts at zero. Sixth through eighth grade are a middle-school baseline; the count jumps the moment students reach ninth — the amber bar — and stays high through tenth before tapering.

D/F marks by grade level · 2025–26 · secondary students
Concentration

Most failing students fail once. A quarter fail everywhere.

How the 3,890 failing students split by how many D/F marks they carry. Half have a single mark — one rough course. But nearly a quarter are failing three or more, and that group is where the deeper risk sits.

51.2%
One D/F mark

1,991 students — a single rough course, often recoverable with one targeted nudge.

25.3%
Two D/F marks

986 students — a pattern starting to form across two courses.

23.5%
Three or more

913 students failing across their schedule — and chronically absent at 49.1%.

Course-failure methodology and provenance.

What this counts
Counts and shares of D/F marks, not failure rates — an all-marks denominator wasn't pulled, so "share" is a course's slice of all D/F marks, not the share of its students who failed. 7,265 marks across 3,890 secondary students in 256 distinct courses.
Grain
Course-level only. Period- and teacher-level fields are unpopulated in this Aeries instance, so the read stops at the course title. No section, period, or instructor is shown or inferred.
Provenance
The same de-identified join as the other tabs — surrogate student IDs only. Teacher numbers were pseudonymized in the source file and are not shown here. This file renders zero student-level and zero teacher-level rows.
The chronic figure
Each course's chronic-absence rate is the share of that course's enrolled students who are chronically absent — the connective stat that ties this tab to the attendance read. It is a course-roster overlap, not a causal claim.
What this is
A descriptive read of where failure concentrates this marking period — correlation, not causation. The 9th-grade framing draws on the national on-track-for-graduation research, applied here to Val Verde's own counts.
Who to ask
Office of Educational Services, Val Verde Unified.
Showing district totals

The site leaderboard and grade-band chart stay district-wide — they're cross-site by design.

Site profile

Attendance shape · where this site's students fall

Where this site's students fall on attendance.

Where to look first
Attendance & student outcomes · 2025–26

Where attendance moves student outcomes in Val Verde.

The receipts behind the read: how attendance connects to grades, failure, discipline, and which students carry the most risk — for cabinet and the Board of Education.

Source · Aeries SIS export · 2026-06-04 · de-identified · n = 18,897 students
The four numbers

Where the year landed.

Four numbers that frame the rest of the report. All figures are district-wide for 2025–26.

Average daily attendance
91.5%

Average daily attendance across 18,897 students. The headline number — but the spread underneath it is the story.

Chronically absent
24.9%

Missed 10% or more of enrolled days. 6.9% are severely chronic — under 80% attendance.

Carrying a D or F
20.6%

One or more D, F, or I marks — a secondary-grades measure. Roughly one in five secondary students.

Students suspended
492

Suspended at least once this year. Concentrated among chronically absent students — see the discipline read.

The cliff

As attendance falls, grades fall and failure climbs.

Mean GPA by attendance band, against the share of students carrying a D or F. The two lines move together — and the steepest drop sits right at the 90% chronic-absence line.

Mean GPA & D/F rate by attendance band · secondary students
The read
0.9

grade points separate the top attendance band (3.2) from the bottom (2.3) — nearly a full letter grade.

90%

is the cliff line — the chronic-absence threshold. Below it, the D/F rate jumps from 20.6% toward 35.8%.

The equity read

Who carries the most risk, by subgroup.

Attendance, chronic absence, D/F rate, and GPA across the district's reportable subgroups. Amber flags the worst cell in each column that matters — where to look first.

Subgroup × measure · 2025–26 · amber = highest chronic / highest D-F
Subgroup n ADA % Chronic % D/F % Mean GPA
Hispanic15,26191.525.520.92.9
Non-Hispanic3,63691.922.619.43.0
English Learner3,33892.323.723.12.5
RFEP3,41191.719.327.83.1
English Only11,09091.326.418.92.9
Students w/ IEP3,12390.830.422.02.6
No IEP15,77491.723.920.33.0
Female9,01091.425.218.73.0
Male9,88191.724.722.42.8
Highest chronic % Highest D/F % Higher attendance / GPA Lower attendance / GPA

Two stories sit side by side. Students with an IEP carry the highest chronic-absence rate (30.4%); English Learners attend well but carry the lowest GPA (2.5) — an academic gap, not an attendance one. The right intervention differs by subgroup.

Site by site

Chronic absence, ranked by site.

The ten sites with the highest chronic-absence rates. The two highest — Val Verde High School and Val Verde Academy — are the district's alternative settings; read them apart from the comprehensive sites.

Chronic-absence rate by site · top ten · 2025–26
1
Val Verde High School
60.9%n 220
2
Val Verde Academy
60.4%n 134
3
Special Ed Pre-School
49.0%n 100
4
Val Verde USD Preschool
44.0%n 234
5
Val Verde Elementary School (Sixth Grade)
31.5%n 184
6
Orange Vista High School
29.3%n 2,263
7
Columbia Elementary School
28.4%n 700
8
March Middle School
26.8%n 690
9
Rancho Verde High School
26.2%n 2,030
10
Rainbow Ridge Elementary School
25.5%n 733
Read these separately. Val Verde High School and Val Verde Academy are the district's alternative settings — high chronic absence is expected there; read them apart from the comprehensive sites.
Through the grades

Attendance erodes as students move up.

Chronic-absence rate (bars) and average attendance (line) across elementary, middle, and high school. The trend runs one way — chronic absence climbs and attendance slips every step toward graduation, with high school carrying the highest chronic rate in the district.

Chronic-absence rate & average attendance by grade band · 2025–26

Methodology and provenance.

Source
Aeries SIS export, 2026-06-04, de-identified before this file was built — surrogate student IDs only, no names and no PII in this artifact. This dashboard renders zero student-level rows; every figure is an aggregate.
n
18,897 students with attendance records; 10,243 with a GPA (secondary students).
Measures
Attendance rate = days present ÷ days enrolled. Chronic = below 90% attendance (missed 10% or more of enrolled days). D/F = one or more D, F, or I marks — a secondary-grades measure; elementary marks aren't graded this way.
What isn't here
(a) English-Learner status uses the standard Aeries language-fluency coding (LF=3) and should be confirmed against the district Code Table. (b) A detailed race breakdown is held pending the Code Table — race codes don't map cleanly yet, so ethnicity here is the clean Hispanic / non-Hispanic flag only. (c) Site names are the district's public school names. (d) Discipline is suspensions only; the referral extract wasn't clean enough to chart. (e) The course-marks extract was truncated, so grade outcomes lean on GPA plus the D/F watchlist. (f) These are correlations, not causal estimates.
How to read it
Every prose number is bound to the underlying data object, so the figures here match the figures in the cards above. Where a measure is a secondary-grades measure (D/F, GPA), elementary students are excluded by design.
Who to ask
Office of Educational Services, Val Verde Unified.