Arleta Elementary School vs Grout Elementary School

Grout Elementary School ranks #14 of 1,226 Oregon elementary schools, while Arleta Elementary School sits at #61 of 1,226 — both well inside the top 5% statewide, but Grout holds a meaningful edge of 47 positions. The overall rating gap is 0.5 points, with Grout scoring 9.4/10 against Arleta's 8.9/10. For parents drawn to either school by proximity — they sit just 1.8 miles apart in Portland — that gap is real but not dramatic; both schools outperform the vast majority of Oregon elementaries.

Academically, Grout Elementary School scores 9.3/10 versus Arleta Elementary School's 8.6/10, a difference of 0.7 points on a 10-point scale. The growth gap is narrower but still favors Grout: 9.8/10 against Arleta's 9.2/10, a 0.6-point delta. Growth scores measure how much students advance relative to academic peers year over year, so Grout's 9.8 signals that students there are making particularly strong gains regardless of where they start — a meaningful signal for families assessing long-term trajectory rather than just current proficiency.

On demographics and classroom structure, the two schools are strikingly similar. Both Arleta Elementary School and Grout Elementary School serve 65% of students on free or reduced-price lunch, indicating comparable socioeconomic profiles across their neighborhoods. Enrollment is close — 274 students at Arleta versus 302 at Grout — and student-teacher ratios nearly identical at 17.1:1 and 16.8:1 respectively. Neither school has a meaningful class-size advantage, and both appear to serve economically similar communities despite Grout's higher academic and growth scores.

Both schools cover kindergarten through fifth grade, making the program structure equivalent for families with children across the elementary years. The consistent equity profile — matching free/reduced lunch rates at 65% at both schools — means Grout's score advantage cannot be attributed to serving a wealthier student body. That makes Grout's lead on academic and growth scores more substantive: it appears to deliver stronger outcomes for a demographically comparable population.