Roots PCS vs Key ES

Roots PCS and Key ES sit just 5.3 miles apart in Washington, District of Columbia, yet their statewide positions differ meaningfully: Key ES ranks #4 of 240 schools in the District while Roots PCS ranks #6 of 240 — both elite, but Key ES holds a slight edge at the top. Their overall ratings reflect this: Key ES scores 9.4/10 against Roots PCS's 9.2/10, a 0.2-point gap that masks sharper divergence in how each school achieves its standing.

The academic and growth scores tell two distinct stories. Key ES earns a perfect 10.0/10 academic score, 1.3 points above Roots PCS's 8.7/10 — the largest measurable gap between these two schools. Roots PCS answers with a 10.0/10 growth score, a full point above Key ES's 9.0/10. In practical terms, Key ES students test at the highest proficiency levels in the District, while Roots PCS students show the strongest year-over-year learning gains. Families prioritizing demonstrated achievement benchmarks will find Key ES compelling; those who weight student progress regardless of entry point will find Roots PCS's trajectory hard to match.

The schools differ sharply in scale and classroom density. Roots PCS enrolls 80 students total, compared to Key ES's 347 — more than four times the headcount. That smaller enrollment at Roots PCS translates into a 10.0:1 student-teacher ratio versus Key ES's 12.4:1. Every classroom at Roots PCS carries roughly two fewer students per teacher, which matters for families who prioritize individualized attention at the elementary level. Key ES, as a regular public school, serves a larger and more typical neighborhood population; Roots PCS operates as a charter with a deliberately constrained enrollment model.

Both schools serve grades PK through 05, so the grade span creates no meaningful separation for families with elementary-age children. The structural difference is type: Roots PCS requires an active enrollment choice and may involve a lottery, while Key ES operates as a traditional District public school with neighborhood-based access. Neither school has a clear program distinction in the available data, so the decision rests squarely on the academic-versus-growth tradeoff, class size preference, and the practical realities of charter enrollment versus zoned access.