← All proof trees · KENSINGTON CAPA

PhiladelphiaOne number, traced

6-year cohort graduation rateKENSINGTON CAPA, 2017-18

The six-year cohort graduation rate (district file). This figure is for not economically disadvantaged.

Identifiers

school code 5520 · metric key graduation_rate_6yr · year 2017-18 · subgroup NOT_ECON_DISADV · population cut n/a

  1. 1
    What you seeWithheld by the publisher

    The publisher suppressed this cell (too few students to report). The site stores it as suppressed and never as zero.

    vs. peers
    vs. citywide
    unit
    percent
    direction
    higher is better
  2. 2
    How it was computedvalue = published 6-year cohort graduation rate, by cohort entry year
    1. Read the district's graduation CSV and store the 6-year rate by cohort year.

    Note: stored percentiles are computed by a batch script after loads; a difference from the live reconstruction means a newer load changed the comparison set and the batch has not been re-run.

    Evidence: metric tree: 6-year cohort graduation rate

  3. 3
    The stored cellThe stored cell
    table
    philly_school_year_metrics
    value
    null
    denominator
    17
    suppressed
    true
    citywide_percentile
    null
    comparison_group_percentile
    null
    source_load_id
    8ecdf1ea-7780-4200-bd21-8e8d089c99f1

    Evidence: data model overview

  4. 4
    The load that wrote itWritten on 2026-06-04 by sdp_graduation.ts
    source id
    sdp_graduation_school_2014-2025
    SHA-256 of the file read
    8ae3969118c3a9f01e4d8d04aa634855571ab71e914f3d2b689ad811d5639225
    bytes
    3,919,459
    year covered
    2010-11..2021-22
    year of this cell
    2017-18 — this measure is stored under a different year than the file's report year; see the metric page
    code commit
    f75e33137e8166eec3f8b5a4b39463d306ef710c

    To confirm you have the same file: download it from the URL above, then run shasum -a 256 <downloaded file> — the output should equal the hash above. If the publisher has since replaced the file, the hashes will differ, which is itself useful to know.

    Evidence: loader script · first-fetch findings for this file · source registry

  5. 5
    The publisher's fileGraduation rates by cohort, 4/5/6-year

    School District of Philadelphia (Performance Office). Four-, five-, and six-year cohort graduation rates by school and subgroup, indexed by the cohort's 9th-grade entry year.

    format
    CSV
    join key
    ULCS Code
    • Indexed by cohort start year, not graduation year; the state's Future Ready file indexes the same rate by report year.
  6. 6
    How it was checkedChecks: 0 passed, 1 not run
    • not runSame file and loader as graduation_rate_4yr (base case passed); not separately reconciled
  7. 7
    Assumptions & caveatsAssumptions and caveats

    Stored as published; no modeling assumptions.

    • District-run schools only.

    Algorithms involved: Citywide and peer-group percentiles, Peer groups: 40 nearest neighbors on demographics

The same metric for this school, every year and cut

YearSubgroupCutValue
2010-11All studentsno population cut82.6%
2010-11American Indian / Alaska Native studentsno population cutwithheld
2010-11Asian studentsno population cutwithheld
2010-11Black studentsno population cut85.7%
2010-11Hispanic studentsno population cut86.7%
2010-11White studentsno population cutwithheld
2010-11Economically disadvantaged studentsno population cut81.4%
2010-11Not economically disadvantagedno population cut87.0%
2010-11English learnersno population cutwithheld
2010-11Not English learnersno population cutwithheld
2010-11Students in special educationno population cut66.7%
2010-11Not in special educationno population cut86.4%
2010-11Female studentsno population cut78.0%
2010-11Male studentsno population cut86.4%
2011-12All studentsno population cut80.5%
2011-12Asian studentsno population cutwithheld
2011-12Black studentsno population cut86.1%
2011-12Hispanic studentsno population cut78.7%
2011-12White studentsno population cutwithheld
2011-12Students of two or more racesno population cutwithheld
2011-12Economically disadvantaged studentsno population cutwithheld
2011-12Not economically disadvantagedno population cutwithheld
2011-12English learnersno population cutwithheld
2011-12Not English learnersno population cutwithheld
2011-12Students in special educationno population cut71.9%
2011-12Not in special educationno population cut84.0%
2011-12Female studentsno population cut85.2%
2011-12Male studentsno population cut76.3%
2012-13All studentsno population cut79.7%
2012-13Asian studentsno population cutwithheld
2012-13Black studentsno population cut72.2%
2012-13Hispanic studentsno population cut80.8%
2012-13White studentsno population cutwithheld
2012-13Students of two or more racesno population cutwithheld
2012-13Economically disadvantaged studentsno population cut80.0%
2012-13Not economically disadvantagedno population cut78.6%
2012-13English learnersno population cut72.7%
2012-13Not English learnersno population cut81.1%
2012-13Students in special educationno population cut74.3%
2012-13Not in special educationno population cut81.7%
2012-13Female studentsno population cut84.6%
2012-13Male studentsno population cut74.6%
2013-14All studentsno population cut88.7%
2013-14Asian studentsno population cutwithheld
2013-14Black studentsno population cut92.3%
2013-14Hispanic studentsno population cut85.7%
2013-14White studentsno population cutwithheld
2013-14Economically disadvantaged studentsno population cut87.4%
2013-14Not economically disadvantagedno population cut95.2%
2013-14English learnersno population cutwithheld
2013-14Not English learnersno population cutwithheld
2013-14Students in special educationno population cut87.5%
2013-14Not in special educationno population cut89.1%
2013-14Female studentsno population cut87.0%
2013-14Male studentsno population cut89.7%
2014-15All studentsno population cut81.0%
2014-15Asian studentsno population cutwithheld
2014-15Black studentsno population cut80.0%
2014-15Hispanic studentsno population cut85.7%
2014-15White studentsno population cutwithheld
2014-15Economically disadvantaged studentsno population cut78.3%
2014-15Not economically disadvantagedno population cut91.7%
2014-15English learnersno population cut75.0%
2014-15Not English learnersno population cut82.2%
2014-15Students in special educationno population cut63.3%
2014-15Not in special educationno population cut86.8%
2014-15Female studentsno population cut88.9%
2014-15Male studentsno population cut72.4%
2015-16All studentsno population cut81.8%
2015-16Asian studentsno population cutwithheld
2015-16Black studentsno population cut73.8%
2015-16Hispanic studentsno population cut87.3%
2015-16White studentsno population cutwithheld
2015-16Students of two or more racesno population cutwithheld
2015-16Economically disadvantaged studentsno population cut90.7%
2015-16Not economically disadvantagedno population cut72.4%
2015-16English learnersno population cutwithheld
2015-16Not English learnersno population cutwithheld
2015-16Students in special educationno population cut73.3%
2015-16Not in special educationno population cut90.6%
2015-16Female studentsno population cut85.3%
2015-16Male studentsno population cut77.4%
2016-17All studentsno population cut85.0%
2016-17American Indian / Alaska Native studentsno population cutwithheld
2016-17Black studentsno population cut85.7%
2016-17Hispanic studentsno population cut84.4%
2016-17White studentsno population cutwithheld
2016-17Students of two or more racesno population cutwithheld
2016-17Economically disadvantaged studentsno population cut84.6%
2016-17Not economically disadvantagedno population cut87.0%
2016-17English learnersno population cut89.3%
2016-17Not English learnersno population cut83.8%
2016-17Students in special educationno population cut80.0%
2016-17Not in special educationno population cut87.0%
2016-17Female studentsno population cut89.8%
2016-17Male studentsno population cut80.9%
2017-18All studentsno population cut83.0%
2017-18Asian studentsno population cutwithheld
2017-18Black studentsno population cut83.3%
2017-18Hispanic studentsno population cut82.9%
2017-18White studentsno population cutwithheld
2017-18Students of two or more racesno population cutwithheld
2017-18Economically disadvantaged studentsno population cutwithheld
2017-18Not economically disadvantagedno population cutwithheld
2017-18English learnersno population cut80.8%
2017-18Not English learnersno population cut83.5%
2017-18Students in special educationno population cut87.1%
2017-18Not in special educationno population cut81.6%
2017-18Female studentsno population cut89.1%
2017-18Male studentsno population cut78.4%
2018-19All studentsno population cut78.7%
2018-19Black studentsno population cut75.6%
2018-19Hispanic studentsno population cut79.5%
2018-19White studentsno population cutwithheld
2018-19Students of two or more racesno population cutwithheld
2018-19Economically disadvantaged studentsno population cutwithheld
2018-19Not economically disadvantagedno population cutwithheld
2018-19English learnersno population cut75.0%
2018-19Not English learnersno population cut79.4%
2018-19Students in special educationno population cut68.8%
2018-19Not in special educationno population cut82.1%
2018-19Female studentsno population cut81.2%
2018-19Male studentsno population cut75.9%
2019-20All studentsno population cut77.1%
2019-20Asian studentsno population cutwithheld
2019-20Black studentsno population cut83.3%
2019-20Hispanic studentsno population cut75.4%
2019-20White studentsno population cutwithheld
2019-20Students of two or more racesno population cutwithheld
2019-20Economically disadvantaged studentsno population cutwithheld
2019-20Not economically disadvantagedno population cutwithheld
2019-20English learnersno population cutwithheld
2019-20Not English learnersno population cutwithheld
2019-20Students in special educationno population cut76.0%
2019-20Not in special educationno population cut77.5%
2019-20Female studentsno population cut80.4%
2019-20Male studentsno population cut73.5%