Find a district › Upper Sandusky Exempted Village
Upper Sandusky Exempted Village
What its pupils achieve, and how little of it the funding side explains.
Against districts with comparable poverty
This district
93.6
A district's tested students distributed across Ohio's achievement levels, weighted so higher levels count for more. It tracks the economically disadvantaged share at −0.85, so most of what it appears to say about a district is poverty. Performance Index →, 2024-25
Median of its poverty fifth
88.8
121 districts in the middle fifth,
42%–52%
economically disadvantaged
Difference
+4.8
points, against like-composed districts
Upper Sandusky Exempted Village scores 4.8 points above the median of its poverty fifth: 93.6 against 88.8. Every district in that fifth, by Performance Index — the shaded box is its middle half, and the rule marked Upper Sandusky Exempted Village is this district. The gap in the third tile is worth what the width of this box says it is worth.
Performance Index
93.6
77th percentile of its fifth
The values
- Huber Heights City: Performance Index 74.4, 48% economically disadvantaged
- Ridgemont Local: Performance Index 77.5, 48% economically disadvantaged
- Union Local: Performance Index 78.3, 46% economically disadvantaged
- Eastern Local: Performance Index 78.4, 50% economically disadvantaged
- Cory-Rawson Local: Performance Index 79.4, 44% economically disadvantaged
- Clermont Northeastern Local: Performance Index 79.4, 46% economically disadvantaged
- Twin Valley Community Local: Performance Index 79.5, 48% economically disadvantaged
- Frontier Local: Performance Index 80.3, 47% economically disadvantaged
- Wellington Exempted Village: Performance Index 80.7, 47% economically disadvantaged
- London City: Performance Index 81.3, 52% economically disadvantaged
- Amanda-Clearcreek Local: Performance Index 81.4, 42% economically disadvantaged
- Rossford Exempted Village: Performance Index 81.7, 49% economically disadvantaged
- Fayette Local: Performance Index 81.9, 51% economically disadvantaged
- North Fork Local: Performance Index 82.0, 47% economically disadvantaged
- East Knox Local: Performance Index 82.1, 48% economically disadvantaged
- East Guernsey Local: Performance Index 82.8, 51% economically disadvantaged
- Willoughby-Eastlake City: Performance Index 83.5, 50% economically disadvantaged
- Wynford Local: Performance Index 83.6, 50% economically disadvantaged
- Vanlue Local: Performance Index 83.8, 50% economically disadvantaged
- Northwestern Local: Performance Index 83.9, 46% economically disadvantaged
- Westfall Local: Performance Index 84.0, 48% economically disadvantaged
- Zane Trace Local: Performance Index 84.0, 49% economically disadvantaged
- Northeastern Local: Performance Index 84.2, 45% economically disadvantaged
- Milton-Union Exempted Village: Performance Index 84.3, 51% economically disadvantaged
- Woodridge Local: Performance Index 84.6, 49% economically disadvantaged
- Riverdale Local: Performance Index 84.8, 42% economically disadvantaged
- Gibsonburg Exempted Village: Performance Index 84.8, 42% economically disadvantaged
- Sheffield-Sheffield Lake City: Performance Index 85.1, 48% economically disadvantaged
- Lakota Local: Performance Index 85.5, 46% economically disadvantaged
- McComb Local: Performance Index 85.6, 43% economically disadvantaged
- Berea City: Performance Index 85.6, 45% economically disadvantaged
- Tri-County North Local: Performance Index 85.6, 48% economically disadvantaged
- Jefferson Local: Performance Index 85.6, 49% economically disadvantaged
- Carlisle Local: Performance Index 85.7, 43% economically disadvantaged
- Carey Exempted Village Schools: Performance Index 85.8, 46% economically disadvantaged
- Fairless Local: Performance Index 86.0, 48% economically disadvantaged
- Batavia Local: Performance Index 86.0, 49% economically disadvantaged
- Noble Local: Performance Index 86.2, 48% economically disadvantaged
- Wooster City: Performance Index 86.2, 49% economically disadvantaged
- West Clermont Local: Performance Index 86.3, 46% economically disadvantaged
- Hubbard Exempted Village: Performance Index 86.4, 49% economically disadvantaged
- Lake Local: Performance Index 86.5, 44% economically disadvantaged
- Findlay City: Performance Index 86.5, 47% economically disadvantaged
- Alexander Local: Performance Index 86.5, 47% economically disadvantaged
- Hardin Northern Local: Performance Index 86.6, 42% economically disadvantaged
- St Marys City: Performance Index 86.8, 48% economically disadvantaged
- Chesapeake Union Exempted Village: Performance Index 86.9, 48% economically disadvantaged
- North Union Local School District: Performance Index 87.0, 46% economically disadvantaged
- Logan Elm Local: Performance Index 87.2, 48% economically disadvantaged
- River Valley Local: Performance Index 87.4, 47% economically disadvantaged
- Minerva Local: Performance Index 87.5, 51% economically disadvantaged
- Southington Local: Performance Index 87.6, 52% economically disadvantaged
- Crestview Local: Performance Index 87.9, 49% economically disadvantaged
- Madison-Plains Local: Performance Index 88.0, 50% economically disadvantaged
- Mapleton Local: Performance Index 88.1, 46% economically disadvantaged
- Mathews Local: Performance Index 88.2, 43% economically disadvantaged
- Madison Local: Performance Index 88.3, 49% economically disadvantaged
- Vermilion Local: Performance Index 88.6, 46% economically disadvantaged
- Black River Local: Performance Index 88.7, 47% economically disadvantaged
- Orrville City: Performance Index 88.7, 50% economically disadvantaged
- Marlington Local: Performance Index 88.8, 45% economically disadvantaged
- Celina City: Performance Index 88.8, 51% economically disadvantaged
- Athens City: Performance Index 88.9, 47% economically disadvantaged
- Valley Local: Performance Index 88.9, 48% economically disadvantaged
- Loudonville-Perrysville Exempted Village: Performance Index 89.1, 45% economically disadvantaged
- Canal Winchester Local: Performance Index 89.1, 49% economically disadvantaged
- United Local: Performance Index 89.2, 42% economically disadvantaged
- Kent City: Performance Index 89.2, 48% economically disadvantaged
- Graham Local: Performance Index 89.3, 48% economically disadvantaged
- Fairfield Union Local: Performance Index 89.5, 45% economically disadvantaged
- Westerville City: Performance Index 89.7, 44% economically disadvantaged
- Midview Local: Performance Index 89.8, 46% economically disadvantaged
- Clyde-Green Springs Exempted Village: Performance Index 89.8, 47% economically disadvantaged
- Lynchburg-Clay Local: Performance Index 89.8, 50% economically disadvantaged
- Rittman Exempted Village: Performance Index 89.9, 50% economically disadvantaged
- Covington Exempted Village: Performance Index 90.0, 42% economically disadvantaged
- Fairland Local: Performance Index 90.0, 46% economically disadvantaged
- Oregon City: Performance Index 90.0, 49% economically disadvantaged
- Maumee City: Performance Index 90.3, 43% economically disadvantaged
- Dover City: Performance Index 90.3, 48% economically disadvantaged
- Northmont City: Performance Index 90.5, 50% economically disadvantaged
- Bowling Green City School District: Performance Index 90.6, 45% economically disadvantaged
- Eaton Community City: Performance Index 90.7, 50% economically disadvantaged
- Margaretta Local: Performance Index 90.8, 42% economically disadvantaged
- Danville Local: Performance Index 91.2, 45% economically disadvantaged
- Plain Local: Performance Index 91.6, 51% economically disadvantaged
- Three Rivers Local: Performance Index 91.7, 43% economically disadvantaged
- Wayne Trace Local: Performance Index 92.2, 46% economically disadvantaged
- Delphos City: Performance Index 92.2, 50% economically disadvantaged
- Beaver Local: Performance Index 92.2, 51% economically disadvantaged
- Wheelersburg Local: Performance Index 92.4, 42% economically disadvantaged
- Kettering City School District: Performance Index 92.9, 49% economically disadvantaged
- Howland Local: Performance Index 93.1, 44% economically disadvantaged
- Firelands Local: Performance Index 93.6, 43% economically disadvantaged
- Upper Sandusky Exempted Village: Performance Index 93.6, 45% economically disadvantaged
- Lakewood City: Performance Index 93.6, 49% economically disadvantaged
- Troy City: Performance Index 93.7, 45% economically disadvantaged
- Leipsic Local: Performance Index 93.7, 50% economically disadvantaged
- Bellevue City: Performance Index 93.8, 47% economically disadvantaged
- Napoleon Area City: Performance Index 93.9, 42% economically disadvantaged
- Perry Local: Performance Index 93.9, 46% economically disadvantaged
- Mount Vernon City: Performance Index 94.0, 47% economically disadvantaged
- Buckeye Central Local: Performance Index 94.0, 48% economically disadvantaged
- Heath City: Performance Index 94.2, 46% economically disadvantaged
- McDonald Local: Performance Index 94.3, 43% economically disadvantaged
- Ada Exempted Village: Performance Index 94.3, 50% economically disadvantaged
- Indian Valley Local: Performance Index 94.4, 47% economically disadvantaged
- Edgerton Local: Performance Index 95.1, 45% economically disadvantaged
- Jackson-Milton Local: Performance Index 95.1, 51% economically disadvantaged
- Norton City: Performance Index 95.2, 42% economically disadvantaged
- Oak Hills Local: Performance Index 95.2, 42% economically disadvantaged
- Arcadia Local: Performance Index 95.9, 42% economically disadvantaged
- Williamsburg Local: Performance Index 96.0, 43% economically disadvantaged
- West Branch Local: Performance Index 96.0, 46% economically disadvantaged
- Spencerville Local: Performance Index 96.7, 42% economically disadvantaged
- Springfield Local: Performance Index 97.3, 42% economically disadvantaged
- Champion Local: Performance Index 97.8, 42% economically disadvantaged
- Bath Local: Performance Index 98.5, 48% economically disadvantaged
- Tri-Village Local: Performance Index 100.0, 48% economically disadvantaged
- Weathersfield Local: Performance Index 100.7, 51% economically disadvantaged
- Maplewood Local: Performance Index 101.6, 44% economically disadvantaged
Ohio's attainment measure tracks economic disadvantage at −0.846 statewide, so comparing this district to the state median would mostly be comparing its poverty rate to the state's. The middle tile is the comparison worth making, and the difference between them is what is left after one crude control.
It is not an effect of anything. Districts are not assigned to a poverty fifth at random, the fifths are wide, and a single year of a measure that barely moves cannot separate a school's contribution from its intake. See what this data can and cannot say.
Outcomes
| Performance Index, 2022-23 | 89.6 |
|---|---|
| Performance Index, 2023-24 | 91.1 |
| Performance Index, 2024-25 | 93.6 |
| Progress, three-year average The department's headline growth
measure, and the one every correlation on this site uses. |
0.00 |
| Progress, one year The same measure without the smoothing, also
published. |
0.00 |
| Operating spending per enrolled pupil | $16,282 |
| Operating spending per need-weighted pupil | $12,597 |
| Economically disadvantaged (report card) | 46.2% |
| English learners | 2.6% |
| Students with disabilities | 18.7% |
The Performance Index is close to a fixed district trait across these three years, which is why a change in funding is unlikely to show up in it. Progress is the measure that moves. Both are 2024-25; the spending figures are FY2025.
One of the two growth measures prints 0.00 over three years, which at two decimals covers anything within half a hundredth of zero and has no direction to read. Statewide the two correlate at 0.90, and of the 534 districts printing a non-zero value on both, 44 point opposite ways — none of them with both magnitudes above 0.05.
The two economically-disadvantaged shares on this page differ: the report card's is top-coded by community eligibility, the profile report's (45.4%) is not.
Two mistakes this page is built to prevent
| Reading a correlation with poverty as a correlation with something else | Economic disadvantage explains Ohio's attainment measure at −0.846. Most other district-level variables are that one in disguise — including, sharply, guarantee status. Every association statewide, with its controlled figure beside it. |
|---|---|
| Quoting a per-pupil number without its denominator | The two spending figures above share a numerator. The department's divides by a need-weighted count; the other divides by headcount. Against an outcome that is itself composition-driven, the first is substantially a composition proxy — statewide the same numerator gives −0.004 one way and −0.355 the other. |
Nothing on this page is causal, and nothing on it is a judgment about this district's schools. What it funds is on the dashboard; what it actually collected and spent is in its finances.