At a glance
This page does not have enough comparable recent data to summarize more than one measure. Start with enrollment evidence →
In 2025-26 it enrolled 285 students across grades 9–12. That is 87 more than in 1998-99 (198) — the school has grown. It peaked at 337 in 2004-05. Its biggest cohort is grade 9.
Students enrolled in each grade each fall, stacked to the total — so the top edge is total enrollment. Bands run from the lowest grade (light) to the highest (dark); a band that appears or disappears is a grade the school added or dropped. “Other” is students with no grade level (mostly special education), so the bands always sum to total. Source: NJDOE Fall Enrollment.
In 1998-99, 62% of students were White. By 2025-26 the largest group was Hispanic, at 46%.
Each group’s share of enrollment over time, or its head count — toggle above. New Jersey expanded race and ethnicity reporting from five to seven categories in 2006-07 (dashed line), so “two or more races” appears only after; Asian here includes Pacific Islander. Source: NJDOE Fall Enrollment.
Between 2021-22 and 2025-26 the makeup of this school shifted noticeably.
The index is half the sum of every group’s change in share, on a 0–100 scale (how it works). It is computed from the same counts as the makeup chart above — source: NJDOE Fall Enrollment. Compare any two years in the explorer →
In 2025-26, 36.8% of students were certified for free or reduced-price lunch.
Share of students certified for free or reduced-price meals, through a household application or an automatic match. The lighter lines show the district overall and the district high schools, for comparison. Some districts serve free meals to every student under the Community Eligibility Provision. Those districts often stop collecting household income forms, so their reported share can run below the number of low-income students they enroll. Source: NJDOE Fall Enrollment.
The waiver record. Annual editions between 2012 and 2016, most recent first. Read each band against itself and not against the others — the state changed what it measured, and how, twice inside those five years.
New Jersey’s ESEA Flexibility waiver ended after the 2016 edition, and the archive bundles for 2017 and 2018 return 404 on every build of the source release. That bounds the waiver record; it says nothing about the ESSA record above, which runs from 2016-17 without a break the state did not itself declare.
2012 – 2014 · progress targets, on NJASK and HSPA
Each group large enough to score was measured against a progress target set for it individually, on NJASK and HSPA. These three years are comparable with each other. Most cells are empty by design — a group below the state’s minimum size got no determination at all. YES* never means the target was met. In these editions it marks a group that missed the printed target and was credited inside a 95% confidence interval, and it appears in the performance column.
| Student group | English Language Arts | Mathematics | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Participation | % proficient | Performance | Participation | % proficient | Performance | |
| Schoolwide | Met YES | 86.1%72 scored | Met its target YEStarget 85.1 | Met YES | 59.7%72 scored | Missed its target NOtarget 71.1 |
| American Indian | Too few students - | 0%0 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 0%0 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Asian | Too few students - | 0%0 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 0%0 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Black | Too few students - | 80%10 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 40%10 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Economically Disadvantaged | Too few students - | 85.7%21 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 61.9%21 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Hispanic | Too few students - | 91.7%24 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 58.3%24 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Limited English Proficiency | Too few students - | 100%2 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 0%2 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Students with Disabilities | Met YES | 86.1%72 scored | Met its target YEStarget 85.1 | Met YES | 59.7%72 scored | Missed its target NOtarget 71.1 |
| Two or More Races | Too few students - | 0%0 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 0%0 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| White | Met YES | 84.2%38 scored | Missed its target, credited within a 95% confidence interval YES*target 90 | Met YES | 65.8%38 scored | Missed its target, credited within a 95% confidence interval YES*target 75.7 |
| Student group | 2013 four-year cohort, ≥78% | 2012 five-year cohort, ≥85% | Graduation-rate indicator |
|---|---|---|---|
| Schoolwide | Too few students - | — | — |
| Students with Disabilities | Too few students - | — | — |
| White | Too few students - | — | — |
| Student group | English Language Arts | Mathematics | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Participation | % proficient | Performance | Participation | % proficient | Performance | |
| Schoolwide | Met YES | 86.8%76 scored | Met its target YEStarget 83.4 | Met YES | 69.7%76 scored | Met its target YEStarget 67.9 |
| American Indian | Too few students - | 0%0 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 0%0 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Asian | Too few students - | 100%2 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 50%2 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Black | Too few students - | 66.7%9 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 66.7%9 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Economically Disadvantaged | Too few students - | 86.5%37 scored | Large enough to score, but no target was ever set -- | Too few students - | 67.6%37 scored | Large enough to score, but no target was ever set -- |
| Hispanic | Too few students - | 94.1%34 scored | At or above the statewide 90% goal MET GOAL | Too few students - | 70.6%34 scored | Large enough to score, but no target was ever set -- |
| Limited English Proficiency | Too few students - | 0%1 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 0%1 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Students with Disabilities | Met YES | 86.8%76 scored | Met its target YEStarget 83.4 | Met YES | 69.7%76 scored | Met its target YEStarget 67.9 |
| Two or More Races | Too few students - | 0%0 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 0%0 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| White | Too few students - | 83.9%31 scored | Missed its target, credited within a 95% confidence interval YES*target 90 | Too few students - | 71%31 scored | Missed its target, credited within a 95% confidence interval YES*target 73 |
| Student group | 2012 four-year cohort, ≥75% | 2011 five-year cohort, ≥85% | Graduation-rate indicator |
|---|---|---|---|
| Schoolwide | Too few students - | — | — |
| Economically Disadvantaged | Too few students - | — | — |
| Hispanic | Too few students - | — | — |
| Students with Disabilities | Too few students - | — | — |
| White | Too few students - | — | — |
On this page NJDOE printed a determination against no published target in one place; printed a determination token that appears in no legend it published in three places. Those cells are shown exactly as published and are corrected from nothing.
The waiver determinations are what New Jersey printed on this school’s annual ESEA accountability profile, kept exactly as printed and corrected from nothing. Each edition’s glyphs are read against that edition’s own legend, because the same asterisk means different things in different years. Editions this school does not appear in are simply absent here; no year is inferred from its neighbours. Source: NJDOE’s Title I accountability archive, 2012–2016.
Profile built from New Jersey Department of Education Fall Enrollment data, 1998-99 through 2025-26. How this data works →