The Charter Divide, Part 1: Comparing Apples to Lamborghinis

An analysis of state data shows SPCSA charter schools enroll significantly fewer Black, Hispanic, low-income and English Learner students than CCSD — demographic gaps that explain much of the performance difference.

Charter schools in Clark County post higher test scores, earn more five-star ratings and produce fewer accountability flags than traditional public schools. On paper, the case for charter expansion looks open and shut.

But a New Education analysis of Nevada Department of Education data reveals that the two sectors are educating fundamentally different student populations — and that much of the charter advantage can be traced to that difference.

SPCSA charter schools in the Las Vegas area enroll a student body that is 6.4 percentage points less Hispanic, 3.4 points less Black and 6.4 points more White than the Clark County School District, according to the state’s 2025–26 demographic enrollment report. Combined, CCSD serves a 65% Black and Hispanic student population; SPCSA schools serve 55.2%.

The gaps extend beyond race. Among traditional CCSD schools, 63.5% carry Title I designation, indicating high concentrations of poverty. Among charter schools, just 51.6% do — an 11.9-point difference.

The numbers behind the stars

The aggregate performance differences are real. Charter schools in Clark County earn a mean star rating of 3.82 out of 5, compared with 2.74 for traditional schools. In ELA, charters average 55.1% proficiency versus 45.2% for traditional schools. In math, it’s 39.3% to 34.4%.

But those headline numbers obscure a more complicated story.

When the comparison is limited to Title I schools — a rough control for poverty — the charter ELA advantage shrinks from 9.9 points to 8.9. In math, it narrows to 2.5 points. And at the high school level, non-Title I traditional schools actually outperform charter schools in both ELA and math.

What’s missing from the dashboard

The analysis also reveals a structural limitation in Nevada’s public data that hampers the public’s ability to evaluate charter claims. The state publishes school-level ELA and math proficiency only as aggregate, whole-school figures. Breakdowns by race and special population are published for science, chronic absenteeism and credit-based metrics — but not for the academic indicators that dominate the public debate over school quality.

The most recent year for which ELA and math proficiency was published with subgroup disaggregation is 2022–23 — and even then, the data is buried in a 373-column spreadsheet that requires substantial technical capacity to analyze.

The practical consequence: the comparison most relevant to parents, lawmakers and taxpayers — how do Black students, English Learners or students with disabilities perform in reading and math at charter schools versus traditional schools? — cannot be conducted with current-year data.

“The Charter Divide” is a six-part series examining what Nevada’s accountability data reveals — and conceals — about charter school performance. Subsequent installments examine data suppression, English Learner outcomes, high school attrition patterns, the state’s reporting gap and the accountability system’s structural blind spots.

Data sources: NSPF SchoolRatings 2024–25; NSPF Disaggregated Data 2022–23; Nevada Group Summary Report 2025–26. All published by the Nevada Department of Education.