At a glance
These measures follow the same rule on every school page, not a ranking of this school’s biggest changes. Each row names its evidence dates; trend rows do not describe every year in between.
Fall enrollment was 530 students in 2024-25 and 509 students in 2025-26 — 21 fewer students.
See enrollment evidence →The chronic-absence rate was 7.3% in 2016-17 and 14.4% in 2024-25 — 7.1 percentage points higher.
See attendance evidence →These are descriptive measures from statewide NJDOE datasets, not a quality rating or an explanation of cause. Proficiency, attendance, and graduation figures use All Students; subgroup patterns may differ.
In 2025-26 it enrolled 509 students. That is 280 fewer than in 1998-99 (789) — the school has shrunk.
Total students enrolled each fall. Source: NJDOE Fall Enrollment.
The largest group in both 1998-99 and 2025-26 was White students — 78% then, 56% now.
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 changed substantially.
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, 31.4% 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 elementary 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.
Growth measures how much students progressed over the year against peers who scored the same the year before — 50 is a typical year. In 2024-25, this school’s median growth percentile was 48.5 in English and 54 in math — NJ calls this “typical” growth.
English language arts: 44.9% met or exceeded expectations in 2024-25 (state 53%).
| School year | Met or exceeded | Valid scores | Test participation | NJ statewide |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-22 | Not reported — Fewer than 10 valid scores | Not reported — Fewer than 10 valid scores | Not reported — Fewer than 10 valid scores | 49.0% |
| 2022-23 | Not reported — Fewer than 10 valid scores | Not reported — Fewer than 10 valid scores | Not reported — Fewer than 10 valid scores | 51.3% |
| 2023-24 | Not reported — Fewer than 10 valid scores | Not reported — Fewer than 10 valid scores | Not reported — Fewer than 10 valid scores | 52.2% |
| 2024-25 | 44.9% | 276 | 99.3% | 53.0% |
Source: NJDOE 2024-25 school-detail workbook (330 MB). How this data works →
By grade, year to year
Each panel is one grade — watch its mix of levels shift across 2021–2024.
Math: 43.9% met or exceeded expectations in 2024-25 (state 42%).
| School year | Met or exceeded | Valid scores | Test participation | NJ statewide |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-22 | Not reported — Fewer than 10 valid scores | Not reported — Fewer than 10 valid scores | Not reported — Fewer than 10 valid scores | 36.0% |
| 2022-23 | Not reported — Fewer than 10 valid scores | Not reported — Fewer than 10 valid scores | Not reported — Fewer than 10 valid scores | 38.2% |
| 2023-24 | Not reported — Fewer than 10 valid scores | Not reported — Fewer than 10 valid scores | Not reported — Fewer than 10 valid scores | 40.2% |
| 2024-25 | 43.9% | 278 | 99.3% | 42.0% |
Source: NJDOE 2024-25 school-detail workbook (330 MB). How this data works →
By grade, year to year
Each panel is one grade — watch its mix of levels shift across 2021–2024.
In each panel the flat line is the proficiency boundary: levels 4–5 (met or exceeded) fill the area above it, levels 1–3 below — so a smaller reported share in levels 4–5 makes the area above the line shrink (it isn’t a misleading upward slope). Light = level 1 (did not yet meet expectations), dark = level 5 (exceeded); the % marks the proficient share at the first and last points. The first set of panels follows each grade across the years; the second lines up aggregate grade results one grade higher each year. It approximates a class cohort, not linked individual students. Growth is the median Student Growth Percentile (50 = a typical year), reported only through grade 8. The NJSLA was not given in spring 2020 and was disrupted the next year. Source: NJ School Performance Reports.
In 2024-25, 14.4% of students were chronically absent — missing at least 10% of school days — up from 7.3% in 2016-17.
† New Jersey says these years are not comparable with the ones beside them
The requirement to report status in meeting annual ESSA targets for 2020-2021 was waived. As a result, NJDOE will not report state averages and whether state averages were met for 2020-2021. Additionally, because the number of days students spent in in-person and remote learning environments during the school year differed, the NJDOE recommends caution in comparing 2020-2021 attendance data between schools and districts and to prior or future school years.NJDOE 2020-21 workbook notes sheet.
2019-20 is blank because New Jersey collected no attendance data that year, not because nobody was absent. The requirement to report on chronic absenteeism and related accountability measures for the 2019-2020 school year was waived. As a result, NJDOE will not report on chronic absenteeism and other attendance data for 2019-2020. Tables showing attendance data will be hidden in the 2019-2020 reports.
NJDOE 2019-20 workbook notes sheet.
Chronic absenteeism — the share of students who missed 10% or more of the days they were enrolled (roughly 18 days across a full school year). The lighter lines show the district overall and New Jersey, for comparison. The current workbook publishes four years of this measure; the years before them come from each earlier year’s own workbook, which publish the same figures wherever the two overlap. The statewide line starts in 2021-22, because that is the first edition in which NJDOE printed a statewide rate beside each school’s own. Points from 2018-19 and earlier are matched to this school by its state code; New Jersey’s organization record only reaches back to 2020-08-11, so for those years the code is verified and the identity behind it is not. Source: NJ School Performance Reports, 2015-16 through 2024-25.
2021-22 – 2024-25 · the ESSA record
New Jersey has published a summative rating for Land O’Pines Elementary School in one school year under ESSA. The rating is a percentile inside a group of schools NJDOE considers comparable — where the school placed among them, not a score and not a grade.
There is one rating here, for 2024-25. One rating is a reading, not a direction.
| School year | Percentile in group | Summative score | NJDOE’s group | Identification |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-25 | 38.54 | 43.23 | Elementary | Not an identification year |
| 2023-24 | Not ranked this year | — | Elementary | Not an identification year |
| 2022-23 | Not ranked this year | — | Elementary | No comprehensive or targeted status published for this school |
| 2021-22 | Not ranked this year | — | Elementary | No comprehensive or targeted status published for this school |
Inside 2024-25 · what produced the most recent rating
For 2024-25 New Jersey weighted six indicators to add to 100 and gave this school 43.23 of those 100 points. It then ranked that total against the 1,659 New Jersey schools it grouped as Elementary for the year, which puts this school above 38.54% of them. That ranking is a place in a line-up of similar schools, not a grade and not a status.
Each bar’s light track is the points that indicator was worth at this school; the filled part is the points it earned. NJDOE converts each result into a 0–100 indicator score — built from the standardised results of each student group large enough to report, not from the school-wide number alone — then multiplies that score by the weight. The tracks add to 100 and the filled bars add to the summative score, within the publisher’s own rounding.
| Indicator | Result | Indicator score | Weight | Points |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ELA proficiencystudents who met or exceeded expectations on the state ELA test | 44.9% | 32.62 | 15% | 4.89 |
| Math proficiencystudents who met or exceeded expectations on the state math test | 43.9% | 45.15 | 15% | 6.77 |
| ELA growththe school’s median student growth percentile in ELA | 48.5 | 49.24 | 20% | 9.85 |
| Math growththe school’s median student growth percentile in math | 54 | 56.16 | 20% | 11.23 |
| Progress toward English proficiencyNJDOE’s published Progress Toward ELP rate, for English learners | 34.1% | 41.13 | 20% | 8.23 |
| Students not chronically absentstudents who were not chronically absent — 100 minus the chronic-absenteeism rate, so a higher number is better | 85.6% | 22.58 | 10% | 2.26 |
Four-year graduation rate, Five-year graduation rate, Six-year graduation rate, High school persistence are not part of the calculation for a school NJDOE groups as Elementary.
NJDOE’s Targeted Summary published no student-group flag for this school for 2026-27.
These are policy-defined values: which indicators count, and how much each counts, is set by New Jersey’s ESSA plan, not by any measure of school quality. The weights are specific to this school — an indicator that drops out shifts weight onto the rest, so the same indicator is worth different points at different schools. The workbooks measure 2024-25 and were published on April 2, 2026; 2024-25 was not a year New Jersey identified schools for comprehensive or targeted support, so these files carry no CSI or ATSI status. These weights are 2024-25’s: the indicator set and the weighting have both moved across the eight editions above, and for some school types they moved in this one. Row 2024_25_Accountability_Workbook_File_Comprehensive_Support_and_Improvement.xlsx#Summative!1356:AU of the workbook, and the method in NJDOE’s accountability technical guide.
Everything below this line is a different instrument. Above, one weighted number and a rank inside a group of similar schools, under ESSA. Below, a pass-or-fail determination the state made about each student group, on tests that no longer exist, under a federal waiver that has since ended. The two regimes meet without a gap — 2015-16 is the last waiver year and 2016-17 the first ESSA one — and there is still no fair comparison between them, so this page does not draw one.
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.
2015 – 2016 · participation only, on PARCC
New Jersey set no performance target and published no performance determination in these two editions — not for this school, and not for any school in the state. The tests changed to PARCC and the profiles print five columns where the earlier ones print seven, so what the state judged here is test participation and, below it, graduation and attendance. These two years are comparable with each other. Nothing here is a performance verdict, and the missing column is the state’s decision, not a gap in this record. YES* means something else here than it did through 2014. With no performance column to sit in, it appears in the participation column and marks a group whose participation rate was met with participation averaging applied.
| Student group | English Language Arts | Mathematics | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Participation | % meeting standards | Participation | % meeting standards | |
| Schoolwide | Met, with participation averaging applied YES* | 63.1%195 scored | Met, with participation averaging applied YES* | 51.8%195 scored |
| American Indian | Too few students - | 0%0 scored | Too few students - | 0%0 scored |
| Asian | Too few students - | 70%10 scored | Too few students - | 70%10 scored |
| Black | Too few students - | 43.8%16 scored | Too few students - | 37.5%16 scored |
| Economically Disadvantaged | Missed NO | 34%44 scored | Missed NO | 27.3%44 scored |
| Hispanic | Too few students - | 40.7%27 scored | Too few students - | 25.9%27 scored |
| Limited English Proficiency | Too few students - | 0%1 scored | Too few students - | 0%1 scored |
| Students with Disabilities | Met, with participation averaging applied YES* | 28.8%45 scored | Met, with participation averaging applied YES* | 22.2%45 scored |
| Two or More Races | Too few students - | 100%1 scored | Too few students - | 0%1 scored |
| White | Met, with participation averaging applied YES* | 68.8%141 scored | Met, with participation averaging applied YES* | 57.4%141 scored |
Attendance, grades 3 through 8. New Jersey asked whether this school’s 2014 attendance rate reached 90%, once for the whole school and not by student group. It met it — the page prints YES, Met.
The regime changes here. Above this line the state judged participation alone; below it, participation and performance against an individually set target, on a different test. A determination on one side of this line cannot be compared with one on the other, so nothing on this page draws a line through it.
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 | 76.1%247 scored | Missed its target, credited within a 95% confidence interval YES*target 80.8 | Met YES | 87.1%247 scored | Missed its target, credited within a 95% confidence interval YES*target 90 |
| 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%13 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 100%13 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Black | Too few students - | 76.9%13 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 92.3%13 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Economically Disadvantaged | Met YES | 52.6%59 scored | Missed its target, credited within a 95% confidence interval YES*target 60 | Met YES | 67.8%59 scored | Missed its target NOtarget 80.7 |
| Hispanic | Too few students - | 46.4%28 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 60.7%28 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Limited English Proficiency | Too few students - | 0%3 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 0%3 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Students with Disabilities | Met YES | 46.3%54 scored | Missed its target NOtarget 64.8 | Met YES | 74.1%54 scored | Missed its target NOtarget 88.3 |
| 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 | 78.8%193 scored | Missed its target, credited within a 95% confidence interval YES*target 83.8 | Met YES | 89.6%193 scored | Missed its target, credited within a 95% confidence interval YES*target 90 |
Attendance, grades 3 through 8. New Jersey asked whether this school’s 2013 attendance rate reached 90%, once for the whole school and not by student group. It met it — the page prints YES, Met.
| Student group | English Language Arts | Mathematics | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Participation | % proficient | Performance | Participation | % proficient | Performance | |
| Schoolwide | Met YES | 80.5%261 scored | Met its target YEStarget 78.6 | Met YES | 90%260 scored | At or above the statewide 90% goal MET GOALtarget 90 |
| 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%11 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 100%11 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Black | Too few students - | 66.7%12 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 58.3%12 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Economically Disadvantaged | Met YES | 65.2%46 scored | Met its target YEStarget 55.5 | Met YES | 82.6%46 scored | Met its target YEStarget 78.6 |
| Hispanic | Too few students - | 48%25 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 80%25 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Limited English Proficiency | Too few students - | 33.3%3 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 33.3%3 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Students with Disabilities | Met YES | 53.1%49 scored | Missed its target, credited within a 95% confidence interval YES*target 60.9 | Met YES | 83.7%49 scored | Missed its target, credited within a 95% confidence interval YES*target 87 |
| 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%213 scored | Met its target YEStarget 82 | Met YES | 92.4%212 scored | At or above the statewide 90% goal MET GOALtarget 90 |
Attendance, grades 3 through 8. New Jersey asked whether this school’s 2012 attendance rate reached 90%, once for the whole school and not by student group. It met it — the page prints YES, Met.
| Student group | Language Arts Literacy | Mathematics | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Participation | % proficient | Performance | Participation | % proficient | Performance | |
| Schoolwide | Met YES | 74%277 scored | Missed its target, credited within a 95% confidence interval YES*target 76.4 | Met YES | 86.7%277 scored | Missed its target, credited within a 95% confidence interval YES*target 90 |
| 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 - | 89.5%19 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 100%19 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Black | Too few students - | 45.5%11 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 63.6%11 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Economically Disadvantaged | Met YES | 64%50 scored | Met its target YEStarget 51 | Met YES | 74%50 scored | Missed its target, credited within a 95% confidence interval YES*target 76.5 |
| Hispanic | Too few students - | 66.7%21 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 76.2%21 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Limited English Proficiency | Too few students - | 25%4 scored | Too few students to determine - | Too few students - | 75%4 scored | Too few students to determine - |
| Students with Disabilities | Met YES | 49.3%65 scored | Missed its target, credited within a 95% confidence interval YES*target 57 | Met YES | 67.7%65 scored | Missed its target NOtarget 85.7 |
| 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 | 74.8%226 scored | Missed its target, credited within a 95% confidence interval YES*target 80.2 | Met YES | 87.6%226 scored | Missed its target, credited within a 95% confidence interval YES*target 90 |
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.
How the ESSA record works → · How the 2012–2016 waiver record works →
Profile built from New Jersey Department of Education Fall Enrollment data, 1998-99 through 2025-26. How this data works →
